Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Discussion : Paul Williams' 'Thomas Cutbush : His Crimes & Kin'

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Discussion : Paul Williams' 'Thomas Cutbush : His Crimes & Kin'

    Folks interested in discussing Paul Williams' article in Ripperologist Magazine , Issue 154.....Thomas Cutbush - His Crimes & Kin
    To Join JTR Forums, Contact :
    Howard@jtrforums.com

  • #2
    A very well researched piece by Mr. Williams.

    Anyone else have a chance to read it yet ?
    To Join JTR Forums, Contact :
    Howard@jtrforums.com

    Comment


    • #3
      Not yet, How.

      Comment


      • #4
        Bob:

        I sent a copy of the issue to A.P.
        Hope he gets a chance to read it.
        To Join JTR Forums, Contact :
        Howard@jtrforums.com

        Comment


        • #5
          Good thinking, How. Do you have his new email?

          Comment


          • #6
            While Mr. Williams' article is a fine accumulation of T. H. Cutbush-related facts, which I, as someone with only a marginal knowledge of Cutbush family history or other geneaological information , sincerely appreciated seeing in one spot...... all of the major facts of the story had been posted here on JTRForums or Casebook by Natalie Severn, Debra Arif, Chris Scott, A.P. Wolf, and Robert Linford. If I've left anyone off, I apologize.

            Pays to peruse The Forums and even better...it's only righteous to designate attribution where it ought to go. That's not meant as a slight to the author but a reminder that there are a lot of things which appear on these boards and CB which deserve recognition and often go unnoticed.

            We do a lot more on this site than just conduct Caption Contests.

            Howard Brown
            To Join JTR Forums, Contact :
            Howard@jtrforums.com

            Comment


            • #7
              Thanks How. As you say, several people collaborated on building up a picture of the Cutbushes, at a time when new resources were coming online all the time, so it was a work in progress.

              Comment


              • #8
                I have not yet had a chance to read the article in depth, but will do so over the next couple of days. As How sort of suggests it does appear to be a compendium of the material and knowledge that was painstakingly garnered by a small group of avid researchers way back when Thomas was still bashing about in the china shop trying not to knock a bull out. Maybe I missed it? But on a cursory read I saw no mention of the good people, and their shared resources and research on this site, in this article, and that miffed me, because folks like Debs and Robert sweated blood to produce the wonderful material they did many years ago, and still do today, and to glide over that without a mention or even a murmur is I think a dreadful sin.
                For my own part, I do not see much that is new in this article, the incestuous hesitation to link Thomas Cutbush in a relationship with Charles Henry Cutbush is still there, along with a glaring failure to explain the Macnaghten memo in this regard.
                There is much that the writer has missed, and this just baffles me!
                Anyways the dear chap can just thank his lucky stars that I don't drink whisky anymore!
                But it is nice to see some of these characters out on the stage again!
                More later!

                Comment


                • #9
                  In regard to what the writer has missed, he says that: 'no known ancestor of Cutbush’s is known to have been diagnosed as insane'.
                  Well I'm very very sorry but there is a bun munching ancestor of Thomas Cutbush who was diagnosed as insane when he began to chop up women with an axe. And it is enormously relevant to the Thomas Cutbush story.
                  I'm hoping that Robert can remember the little mad chap's name! It is a very enlightening read.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Hi AP


                    I managed to find it. Debs was dubious about his being a blood relative .


                    http://www.casebook.org/forum/messages/4922/14059.html

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      oh thank you Robert! Debs hesitated a bit here though:
                      'Hi AP
                      I downloaded John Trapp, sugar baker's will today, all 14 pages of scrawl! but i can definitely see Luke Flood's name appear a couple of times and children Elizabeth, Sophia and John ( the bun muncher ) Trapp and wife Elizabeth. There is a two page codicil devoted to John his son, but it will be after Christmas before I can sort it out and see if any 'poor' relations are mentioned.'

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by AP Wolf View Post
                        oh thank you Robert! Debs hesitated a bit here though:
                        'Hi AP
                        I downloaded John Trapp, sugar baker's will today, all 14 pages of scrawl! but i can definitely see Luke Flood's name appear a couple of times and children Elizabeth, Sophia and John ( the bun muncher ) Trapp and wife Elizabeth. There is a two page codicil devoted to John his son, but it will be after Christmas before I can sort it out and see if any 'poor' relations are mentioned.'
                        I wonder if we ever did sort it out!
                        ...And I thought I had a good memory for who said what, where and when. No wonder there are those among us that seem to have completely forgotten all this research went on! Was it really 13 years ago when I started joining in? And Robert and AP had most of it sussed by then too!

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          On the contrary, Debs, you were a vital part of the project. You'll notice that you were still unregistered then and sometimes your posts didn't show up till a day or two later, which was inconvenient. "HERE IS THE PROOF THAT THOMAS CUTBUSH WAS JACK THE RIPPER!" Next post : "Sorry Debs, only just seen your post where you prove it too."

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            I liked that, Robert!
                            But I always liked to think, and still do, that we all shared a common bond, and that common bond was to try and prove that Thomas Cutbush was not the Whitechapel Murderer. I'm afraid we failed dismally!

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X