Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Frederick Wildbore- Whitehall Torso Witness

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

  • Pipeman
    replied
    Originally posted by Jerry Dunlop View Post
    Regarding the Pinchin torso, and this is what I was thinking of in my previous comment, Debs posted this article a few years ago:

    "Up until a late hour last evening no further arrests had been made and the police were absolutely without a clue of any kind. A circumstantial story to the effect that a suspicious looking man was seen on Monday night carrying a sack near where the body was found proved on investigation to be entirely valueless. As a matter of fact no sack was found under the arch or elsewhere, and that it was quite as likely as not that the murderer carried the corpse in a portmanteau or a brown paper parcel."

    Birmingham Daily Post (Birmingham, England), Wednesday, September 11, 1889



    Regarding the statement from the man from Wales in the Whitehall case, it was stated in the St James Gazette that the result of the story was a workman in the vicinity was subsequently interviewed (after this story broke) who admits having been on the spot on the day in question, though his business there was not very clear.
    Right jerry thanks I remember this and this is one of the reason I suspected a worker was the killer. Was it Frederick Wildbore? Why would a man be at the site if he wasn't working that day?

    Leave a comment:


  • Jerry Dunlop
    replied
    Originally posted by Pipeman View Post
    That's interesting if the pinchin torso was dumped with a sack. how do we know the story wasn't true?
    Regarding the Pinchin torso, and this is what I was thinking of in my previous comment, Debs posted this article a few years ago:

    "Up until a late hour last evening no further arrests had been made and the police were absolutely without a clue of any kind. A circumstantial story to the effect that a suspicious looking man was seen on Monday night carrying a sack near where the body was found proved on investigation to be entirely valueless. As a matter of fact no sack was found under the arch or elsewhere, and that it was quite as likely as not that the murderer carried the corpse in a portmanteau or a brown paper parcel."

    Birmingham Daily Post (Birmingham, England), Wednesday, September 11, 1889



    Regarding the statement from the man from Wales in the Whitehall case, it was stated in the St James Gazette that the result of the story was a workman in the vicinity was subsequently interviewed (after this story broke) who admits having been on the spot on the day in question, though his business there was not very clear.

    Leave a comment:


  • Pipeman
    replied
    Originally posted by Sam Flynn View Post
    Literally across the street.
    Originally posted by Jerry Dunlop View Post
    I'll have to find the article, but the story of the man in Canon row climbing the fence was found to have no basis and no sack was found in or near the area.
    That's interesting if the pinchin torso was dumped with a sack. how do we know the story wasn't true?

    Leave a comment:


  • Jerry Dunlop
    replied
    The site itself was very difficult to get into because of the high hoarding. All the workers claim that the string attached to the gate was only known to them. The gate locks were not forced when checked by the police. One man said it would be near impossible to throw the torso over the hoarding and have it settle in the vault where it settled. Another man stated it couldn't have been thrown from the Richmond Terrace. Even if one manages to get inside the vault over the hoarding (carrying a corpse mind you) it was very hard to get to the particular dark recess in the vault where the torso ended up. The Thames was right there, the easier choice would be dump her in there. Maybe she was murdered and cut up in the vault in the first place?

    Leave a comment:


  • Jerry Dunlop
    replied
    Originally posted by Sam Flynn View Post
    That's where a wheelbarrow, a sack, or even a suitcase might have come in handy.
    I'll have to find the article, but the story of the man in Canon row climbing the fence was found to have no basis and no sack was found in or near the area.

    Leave a comment:


  • Sam Flynn
    replied
    Originally posted by Pipeman View Post
    So you'd have to cross the street with a torso.
    That's where a wheelbarrow, a sack, or even a suitcase might have come in handy.

    Leave a comment:


  • Jerry Dunlop
    replied
    Originally posted by Pipeman View Post
    So you'd have to cross the street with a torso. Where was the man seen climbing the face?
    Canon Row. You can see it on my map where it intersects Derby Gate.

    Leave a comment:


  • Jerry Dunlop
    replied
    Originally posted by Pipeman View Post
    So how close the Victoria embankment to the Whitehall vault? is it directly in the backyard or across the street? what businesses surrounded the Whitehall building? It does seem like the Whitehall vault was chosen because of it's proximity to the embankment?
    Steps away, Rocky.

    Leave a comment:


  • Pipeman
    replied
    Originally posted by Sam Flynn View Post
    Literally across the street.
    So you'd have to cross the street with a torso. Where was the man seen climbing the face?

    Leave a comment:


  • Sam Flynn
    replied
    Originally posted by Pipeman View Post
    So how close the Victoria embankment to the Whitehall vault? is it directly in the backyard or across the street?
    Literally across the street.

    Leave a comment:


  • Pipeman
    replied
    So how close the Victoria embankment to the Whitehall vault? is it directly in the backyard or across the street? what businesses surrounded the Whitehall building? It does seem like the Whitehall vault was chosen because of it's proximity to the embankment?

    Leave a comment:


  • QJ Coy
    replied
    Originally posted by Jerry Dunlop View Post
    I could write a fictional book based on the information I wrote in my last post.

    Get this, Jack the Ripper and torso man were both named Frederick Wildbore but were two different men. Younger Jack (Frederick in Whitechapel), the son of a London doctor, was ripping up bodies in Whitechapel where he lived, and torso man (Frederick in Battersea), a carpenter, was sawing up bodies in the West end of London where he lived. The final murder the two combined to make a hybrid ripper/torso deposit under the Pinchin arch where Younger Jack had lived as a child.

    Any good writers want to take a crack at it? haha
    Not bad but how about this: Jack and Torso knew each other and were trying to set each other up by leaving clues. So get this, the Torsos crimes were done by Jack and Jacks crimes were done by Torso. Huh, huh?

    Leave a comment:


  • Jerry Dunlop
    replied
    Originally posted by Debra Arif View Post
    Jerry, was your man at Netherton Rd Tottenham in 1881? Apologies if I've missed you saying that already. His wife Sarah's maiden name was Bishop, it's given in the GRO births for daughter Henrietta, 17 mos. in 1881.
    Thanks Debs,

    Yes he was.

    Leave a comment:


  • Debra Arif
    replied
    On August 19th 1888, Frederick John Wildbore and Sarah Ann (nee Bishop married Islington 1879) baptised their five daughters all in one go at St John's Wandsworth. Frederick John was a carpenter and his occupation was carpenter. The address given is those records is also 117 Maysoule Rd.
    Oldest daughter Henrietta was born in 1879 and the GRO index shows her mother's maiden name was Bishop.

    Leave a comment:


  • Debra Arif
    replied
    Originally posted by Jerry Dunlop View Post
    Ok this got a little more complicated. I may need help because I am terrible at family history searching. This may be a dead end so I apologize in advance, but it's worth looking into.

    First off, I believe Wildbore's wife's maiden name was Bishop. That would really interest me in regard to Esther Bishop and a possible Rainham torso connection. If Sarah Bishop and Esther Bishop were related it would have implications for sure.

    Second, I found an LSA (is that a surgeons assistant?) by the name of Samuel Wildbore that was living in Whitechapel in 1860. I also found a record of a Frederick Wildbore being christened in Whitechapel in 1860 and the parents names are given as Samuel and Martha. The most interesting part is the address Samuel Wildbore is practicing at in 1860 is 1, Back Church Lane. Only steps away from the arch on Pinchin Street. Whether he was there or not in later years is questionable at this point. I wonder if our Frederick Wildbore has a connection to this family?
    Jerry, was your man at Netherton Rd Tottenham in 1881? Apologies if I've missed you saying that already. His wife Sarah's maiden name was Bishop, it's given in the GRO births for daughter Henrietta, 17 mos. in 1881.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X