Thomas Fogarty

[Edward Stow]

I don't think its a case of the coroner not having sufficient authority, more that it was just to impress on Poll the seriousness of the situation. I don't see it as that big a deal.

Regarding the soldiers - guess what? I think they came and went without offering any violence. Reid evidently agreed with me. Tabram was seemingly murdered several hours later. Poll finished her business within fifteen minutes or so and I have no doubt Tabram did the same.
So potentially Foggy could have 'found' Tabram later on - if, that is, Lechmere didn't get to her first.

Tom had Poll as a liar to facilitate his elaborate Lords of Spitalfields theory.

[Gary Barnett]

The next bit was going to be to ask for some clarification of your point about Poll not having to have had any experience of arrest or court procedures to be familiar with the form of the police caution. The form, but not the meaning, because you imply she thought it meant ‘tell the truth’ when in fact it meant ‘don’t tell the truth if you don’t want to’.

Perhaps she had been watching old episodes of The Bill, but not paying too much attention?

[Gary Barnett]

I don't think its a case of the coroner not having sufficient authority, more that it was just to impress on Poll the seriousness of the situation. I don't see it as that big a deal.

Regarding the soldiers - guess what? I think they came and went without offering any violence. Reid evidently agreed with me. Tabram was seemingly murdered several hours later. Poll finished her business within fifteen minutes or so and I have no doubt Tabram did the same.
So potentially Foggy could have 'found' Tabram later on - if, that is, Lechmere didn't get to her first.

Tom had Poll as a liar to facilitate his elaborate Lords of Spitalfields theory.

So Reid had no opportunity to impress Poll with the seriousness of the situation before? Personally. He thought it would make more of an impression if he asked the coroner, whose request for Poll to tell the truth she might not take seriously, to give the inappropriate police caution on his behalf?

[Gary Barnett]

I don't think its a case of the coroner not having sufficient authority, more that it was just to impress on Poll the seriousness of the situation. I don't see it as that big a deal.

Regarding the soldiers - guess what? I think they came and went without offering any violence. Reid evidently agreed with me. Tabram was seemingly murdered several hours later. Poll finished her business within fifteen minutes or so and I have no doubt Tabram did the same.
So potentially Foggy could have 'found' Tabram later on - if, that is, Lechmere didn't get to her first.

Tom had Poll as a liar to facilitate his elaborate Lords of Spitalfields theory.

Reid agreed with you?

Would this be the Reid who hunted out Poll and dragged her to the Tower and Birdcage walk to try to ID the soldiers? Or the Reid who claimed that none of the victims were seen with men on the night of their murder?

[Gary Barnett]

I seem to remember that the police considered taking Poll/Barratt to Chelsea barracks, but in the end decided against it. Bearing in mind that Poll wasn’t even sure which regiment her soldiers were from and that she and Barratt, having picked out innocent men, would have been of no use in any future court case, there wasn’t much point.

Tom says that after they had lost interest in the soldiers, the police turned their attention to George Street. He cites a particular press report to support that, but the press report doesn’t seem to bear him out.

[Edward Stow]

I think you're overthinking the business of the caution.
I don't see it as such a complex issue.

The Reid who agrees with me is the Reid who thinks Poll and Tabram were with soldiers earlier on but doesn't think the soldiers murdered Tabram.
Initially it would only have been prudent to try and identify the soldiers.

Again - I don't think this is a very complex matter.

I'm not familiar with suggestions that the police were going to take Poll or Barratt to a third barracks.

[Gary Barnett]

The Chelsea Barracks mention is here;

https://www.casebook.org/press_reports/eastern_post/easternpost880818.html

This is also Tom’s source for his contention that after giving up on the squaddies the police turned their attention specifically to George Street in search of her killer.

[Edward Stow]

Ah yes I'm familiar with the details apart from the Chelsea Barracks bit.
I would attach considerably less reliance on a press report based on an off the record briefing, than internal police reports from Swanson and Reid, Reid's conduct at the inquest. the Macnaugten Memorandum and Dew's memoirs.

[Gary Barnett]

Ah yes I'm familiar with the details apart from the Chelsea Barracks bit.
I would attach considerably less reliance on a press report based on an off the record briefing, than internal police reports from Swanson and Reid, Reid's conduct at the inquest. the Macnaugten Memorandum and Dew's memoirs.

Dew’s memoirs???

I suspect that somewhere in them he opines that the killer was a carman��.

But to get back to that caution...

I can think of an occasion when the police were keen for an inquest witness to stick to the script - Pizer. Was he cautioned?

[Edward Stow]

I presume Pizer swore an oath. He wasn't a witness as such to the death of Chapman. He was allowed to go to the inquest to clear his name.
I don't recall any report that he was cautioned on the manner of Pearly Poll. That would have been superfluous as he was at the inquest for his own benefit.

[Gary Barnett]

I presume Pizer swore an oath. He wasn't a witness as such to the death of Chapman. He was allowed to go to the inquest to clear his name.
I don't recall any report that he was cautioned on the manner of Pearly Poll. That would have been superfluous as he was at the inquest for his own benefit.

Pizer was there to diffuse the ‘Leather Apron’ hysteria, but not solely for his own benefit. It also suited the authorities to draw a line under that unfortunate episode. He could have persisted with his claim that he had never been known as LA, but he didn’t push it. I imagine Thick and co had a quiet word with him before he gave evidence to ensure he stuck to the script. Why didn’t it occur to them to caution him in the same way they had PP?

Are there other examples of confused and therefore unreliable inquest witnesses being cautioned to frighten them into telling the truth?

If I find any, I’ll share them.

[Gary Barnett]

I’ve just noticed the note in BHM where Tom tells us that Neil Bell believes that Reid may have asked for Poll to be cautioned because he was considering charging her with wasting police time. There’s also something in the note about a witness being cautioned so their evidence could subsequently be used against another person. I don’t really get that.

However, Neil (an ex police officer who has written about the history of the force) is making the same point I made a few posts back, although I had in mind a more serious charge than wasting police time.

Of course, Neil knows no more about Reid’s motivation than anyone else, but his opinion of why an inquest witness might have been cautioned is presumably based on his experience as a police officer.

[Edward Stow]

If that was what it was about half the witnesses would have been cautioned.

[Gary Barnett]

I hadn’t found a possible GRO record for Fogarty’s birth until I came across this on FMP at the weekend:



The GRO, Ancestry and FreeBMD all have the name transcribed as Forgetey, a name that doesn’t seem to exist other than as a misspelling of Fogerty. As such, everything pretty much matches the Virginia Street chapel baptism with the exception of the mother’s maiden name of Welsh, which the baptism record gives as Driscoll.

I’ve sent for a copy of the cert.

[Pat Marshall]

Did you see this one Gary on GRO ?

Birth

Fogarty Thomas ..1856 Sept Qtr ... Whitechapel...

Mum maiden name Brian Vol 01C Page 352


Pat......