Tuesday, 7 October 2014

Ray Donovan


DONOVAN CLEARED OF FRAUD CHARGES BY JURY IN BRONX
By SELWYN RAAB
Published: May 26, 1987


Former Labor Secretary Raymond J. Donovan and seven other construction executives were acquitted yesterday of state charges of fraud and grand larceny after an eight-month trial in the Bronx.

The jury deliberated barely 10 hours over two days. One juror, Caesar Brown, said later that little discussion was needed and that just one ballot was required to find each defendant not guilty.

When the last verdict was announced at 4:42 P.M. by the jury forewoman, Rosa Milligan, cheers and applause enveloped the courtroom. Most of the 12 jurors stood and applauded as they watched the defendants, their relatives and defense lawyers shouting with joy, embracing and slapping one another's backs. Backing of Reagan

In the same courtroom, when the trial began last September, the chief prosecutor, Stephen R. Bookin, had told the jury, ''This case is about greed, plain and simple.''

Mr. Donovan, who was the first sitting Cabinet officer to be indicted, came under scrutiny soon after his nomination t as Labor Secretary in December 1980. The charges against him did not involve his Reagan Administration position, but he resigned from the Cabinet two years ago, after having been ordered to stand trial.

Yesterday, in a statement from the White House, President Reagan said: ''I have always known Ray Donovan as a man of integrity, and I am happy to see this verdict. I have never lost confidence in him.''

Mr. Donovan and five other executives of the Schiavone Construction Company of Secaucus, N.J., were on trial, along with State Senator Joseph L. Galiber, Democrat of the Bronx, and William P. Masselli. Mr. Galiber and Mr. Masselli were partners in the now defunct Jopel Contracting and Trucking Corporation of the Bronx. Political Motive Charged

The eight men and their two companies were accused of scheming to defraud the New York City Transit Authority of $7.4 million on a subway construction project in the late 70's and early 80's.

Mr. Donovan steadfastly asserted his innocence yesterday, as he had throughout his indictment and trial. He maintained that the accusations by the Bronx District Attorney, Mario Merola, were politically motivated.

''It's a cruel thing they did to me,'' Mr. Donovan said as he left the courthouse in the South Bronx with his arm wrapped around his wife, Catherine, as they prepared to return to their home in Short Hills, N.J.

''After two and half years, this nightmare is behind us,'' the 56-year-old Mr. Donovan said earlier in an impromptu news conference in the corridor just outside the courtroom. ''The jury has reawakened my faith in our system of justice. It was shattered here for nine months.

''The question is, should this indictment have ever been brought? Which office do I go to to get my reputation back? Who will reimburse my company for the economic jail it has been in for two and a half years?''

Defense lawyers gambled on a strategy of not calling any witnesses after Mr. Bookin rested his case last month. The defense lawyers relied on summations in which they sharply attacked Mr. Merola and Mr. Bookin, saying the prosecutors had sought the indictment of Mr. Donovan for publicity and to advance their own careers. Interruption by Distraught Juror

After the verdict, the jury forewoman, Ms. Milligan, was asked in an interview whether she agreed with the defense contention that the case was politically motiviated.

''Yes, in some ways,'' Ms. Milligan, an X-ray technician, said.

Mr. Brown, a computer operator, declined to say how the jury's deliberations had been affected by an interruption Friday when a juror, Milagros Arroyo, became distraught and had to be dismissed from the jury.

Over the protests of the defense lawyers, the presiding judge, Acting Justice John P. Collins of State Supreme Court, seated an alternate juror Saturday and ordered the reconstituted jury to resume deliberating ''anew'' on Saturday.

Six of the eight defendants had refused to agree to the seating of the alternate juror and demanded mistrials, which Justice Collins denied Saturday. $13 Million in Defense Costs A lawyer for the Schiavone company, Theodore W. Geiser, said the legal costs for the Schiavone executives in the case ran to $13 million. Schiavone executives said that since the indictment in September 1984, the company had been disqualified from bidding on projects in New York State.

Defense lawyers said they would review Federal and state laws to determine whether the Schiavone company and the executives could sue Mr. Merola or the city for financial losses.s Companies Found Not Guilty The reconstituted jury of six men and six women deliberated about five hours Saturday and five hours yesterday. Almost half the time was spent listening to secretly recorded conversations involving Mr. Masselli and hearing the judge's definition of grand larceny in the second degree.

Each defendant was accused of one count of grand larceny and nine counts of falsifying business records in the first degree and offering a false instrument for filing in the first degree. Schiavone and Jopel also were defendants. Jopel, which is out of business and was not represented by a lawyer, was found not guilty, together with Schiavone.

The grand larceny count, which both sides agreed was the pivotal charge, carries a maximum prison sentence of seven years.

Yesterday, the jury listened to the tapes for about two hours in the morning. After lunch, the jurors asked Justice Collins to repeat his instruction on grand larceny. Forty minutes later, at 3:55 P.M., Justice Collins announced that the jury was returning. Taken to the Well

The eight defendants, who throughout the convoluted trial had sat in the front row of the spectators' section, were taken to the well of the courtroom and seated directly behind the desk of Mr. Bookin and two other prosecutors.

The jurors filed in at 4:08, with none glancing at the defendants. Courthouse lore holds that jurors never look at defendants when they are about to pronounce guilty verdicts.

Mr. Donovan, closest to the jury box, was the first defendant to arise. He looked directly at Ms. Milligan as she declared him ''not guilty'' 10 times.

As the verdict was about to be disclosed, Mrs. Donovan, seated in the spectators' section, dabbed with a handkerchief at her eyes and face and clutched the hand of a Schiavone employee at her side. Shouts From Jurors

It took Ms. Milligan 32 minutes to deliver the verdict - 100 times she said ''not guilty'' - on 10 counts for each of the eight men and the two companies.

After the jury had filed out - with some of the members shouting ''hallelujah'' and ''yippee'' - Mr. Donovan reached up to Justice Collins on the bench and shook his hand.

A defense lawyer, Theodore V. Wells Jr., wept as the verdicts were read. Later, Mr. Brown, the juror, said that it was Mr. Wells's cross-examination of a prosecution expert witness, an accountant, that convinced him and other jurors that the prosecution had no case.

''It took three years out of my life,'' Senator Galiber said in an interview after the verdict. ''But I am not angry. It takes too much time out of life to be angry.'' Denial by Merola

The president of Schiavone and a defendant, Joseph A. DiCarolis, denounced Mr. Merola and Mr. Bookin. ''Mr. Bookin took the facts and twisted them around for his own ambition, and Mario Merola gave him his blessing,'' Mr. DiCarolis said. ''Thank God for the jury system.'' Mr. Merola, at a news conference last night, denied that he had been politically motivated. The evidence, he said, had been uncovered during an investigation of the 1982 murder of Mr. Massellii's son, Nat, and another murder.

''I'm not ashamed,'' Mr. Merola said. ''We had an obligation to pursue these facts, and that's how we ended up indicting Schiavone, Donovan and the rest of them.''

Mr. Merola attributed much of the delay in the cumbersome trial to defense motions and tactics. He emphasized that both Federal and state judges had refused to throw out the indictment. Reports About Silverman

Justice Collins had ordered the jury sequestered, on May 14, after unconfirmed reports that a special Federal prosecutor, Leon Silverman, who investigated Mr. Donovan in 1982, had reopened an inquiry into possible perjury by Mr. Donovan.

Mr. Silverman refused to comment on the reports at the time, and his aides said he was in Italy on business until late in the month.

The prosecution based its case on 40 witnesses and 558 exhibits presented over seven months. Much of the evidence concerned intricate details about subway excavation and payments to subcontractors.

Defense lawyers relied on summations to refute the prosecution's contention that Mr. Donovan, while he was the executive vice president of Schiavone, had conspired with the other defendants to cheat the Transit Authority.

The tangled case arose from an undercover inquiry by the Federal Bureau of Investigation of Mr. Masselli, who, in the late 70's, was identified by law-enforcement authorities as an associate in the Genovese crime group. Minority-Group Subcontractors

In 1978, Schiavone was awarded a contract to construct the IND East 63d Street tunnel between Queens and Manhattan. The contract called for Schiavone to make ''good faith efforts'' to award 10 percent, or $18.6 million, of the maximum contract price to subcontractors owned by members of minority groups.

Schiavone reported to the authority that it gave $12.4 million - two-thirds of the minority-group work - to the Jopel Company, headed by Mr. Galiber, who is black, and by Mr. Masselli, who is white, to haul dirt and rock.

The F.B.I. inquiry of Mr. Masselli ended abruptly in 1979, when agents learned that an informer, Michael Orlando, had committed robberies and a hijacking while infiltrating Mr. Masselli's operations.

Mr. Orlando, while also serving a Federal prison term for hijacking, came forward in 1982 and informed prosecutors that he had new information about mob crimes. Under a grant of immunity from the Bronx District Attorney's office, he admitted that in 1978 he shot to death an underworld rival of Mr. Masselli, Salvatore Frascone. Mr. Orlando, according to the prosecutors, contended that Mr. Masselli had ordered the murder, partly to resolve a dispute over lucrative construction contracts with Schiavone.

Mr. Bookin contended that Jopel was paid, at most, $5 million of the $12.4 million Schiavone had reported. At least $7.4 million earmarked for minority-group contractors, Mr. Bookin argued, had been retained by Schiavone through a ''bogus'' arrangement in which Jopel said it had paid Schiavone for leased equipment. Allegations have hounded Mr. Dono-van since his Cabinet nomination. In 1982, Mr. Silverman, in two reports, found ''insufficient credible evidence'' that Mr. Donovan had witnessed union payoffsor that he had links to organized crime.

During the trial Mr. Masselli said he was ill with bleeding ulcers and said he was undergoing other tests. He is free on $200,000 bail, awaiting trial in the murder of Mr. Frascone. The prosecutor in the homicide case is Mr. Bookin, and his principal witness is Mr. Orlando.

Other Schiavone executives who were acquitted were Richard C. Callaghan, senior vice president; Morris J. Levin, second vice president and corporate counsel, and Gennaro Liguori, second vice presidention. Albert J. Magrini, who retired as vice president, was also acquitted.

George Bernard Shaw


"Blood Money To Whitechapel"
George Bernard Shaw
The Star, September 24th 1888.

BLOOD MONEY TO WHITECHAPEL.
           O          

TO THE EDITOR OF "THE STAR."

SIR,-- Will you allow me to make a comment on the success of the Whitechapel murderer in calling attention for a moment to the social question?  Less than a year ago the West-end press, headed by the St. James's Gazette, theTimes, and the Saturday Review, were literally clamering for the blood of the people--hounding on Sir Charles Warren to thrash and muzzle the scum who dared to complain that they were starving--heaping insult and reckless calumny on those who interceded for the victims--applauding to the skies the open class bias of those magistrates and judges who zealously did their very worst in the criminal proceedings which followed--behaving, in short as the proprietary class always does behave when the workers throw it into a frenzy of terror by venturing to show their teeth. Quite lost on these journals and their patrons were indignant remonstrances, argument, speeches, and sacrifices, appeals to history, philosophy, biology, economics, and statistics; references to the reports of inspectors, registrar generals, city missionaries, Parliamentary commissions, and newspapers; collections of evidence by the five senses at every turn; and house-to-house investigations into the condition of the unemployed, all unanswered and unanswerable, and all pointing the same way. The Saturday Review was still frankly for hanging the appellants; and the Times denounced them as "pests of society." This was still the tone of the class Press as lately as the strike of the Bryant and May girls. Now all is changed. Private enterprise has succeeded where Socialism failed. Whilst we conventional Social Democrats were wasting our time on education, agitation, and organisation, some independent genius has taken the matter in hand, and by simply murdering and disembowelling four women, converted the proprietary press to an inept sort of communism. The moral is a pretty one, and the Insurrectionists, the Dynamitards, the Invincibles, and the extreme left of the Anarchist party will not be slow to draw it. "Humanity, political science, economics, and religion," they will say, "are all rot; the one argument that touches your lady and gentleman is the knife." That is so pleasant for the party of Hope and Perseverance in their toughening struggle with the party of Desperation and Death!

However, these things have to be faced. If the line to be taken is that suggested by the converted West-end papers--if the people are still to yield up their wealth to the Clanricarde class, and get what they can back as charity through Lady Bountiful, then the policy for the people is plainly a policy of terror. Every gaol blown up, every window broken, every shop looted, every corpse found disembowelled, means another ten pound note for "ransom."  The riots of 1886 brought in £78,000 and a People's Palace; it remains to be seen how much these murders may prove worth to the East-end in panem et circenses. Indeed, if the habits of duchesses only admitted of their being decoyed into Whitechapel back-yards, a single experiment in slaughterhouse anatomy on an artistocratic victim might fetch in a round half million and save the necessity of sacrificing four women of the people. Such is the stark-naked reality of these abominable bastard Utopias of genteel charity, in which the poor are first to be robbed and then pauperised by way of compensation, in order that the rich man may combine the idle luxury of the protected thief with the unctuous self-satisfaction of the pious philanthropist.

The proper way to recover the rents of London for the people of London is not by charity, which is one of the worst curses of poverty, but by the municipal rate collector, who will no doubt make it sufficiently clear to the monopolists of ground value that he is not merely taking round the hat, and that the State is ready to enforce his demand, if need be. And the money thus obtained must be used by the municipality as the capital of productive industries for the better employment of the poor. I submit that this is at least a less disgusting and immoral method of relieving the East-end than the gust of bazaars and blood money which has suggested itself from the West-end point of view.--Yours, &c.,

G. BERNARD SHAW.


The Star
Largest Circulation of Any Evening Paper in the Kingdom.
LONDON. MONDAY, 24 SEPTEMBER, 1888.

ONE HALFPENNY
Front Page

WHAT WE THINK.

AT the recent meeting of the British Association the dovecots were much fluttered by the appearance of a strange and rather startling figure. A tall, thin man, with a very pale and very gentle face, read a paper which calmly denounced as robbers some of the men the world is accustomed to regard as the ornaments of society, the patterns of morality, and the pillars of the church. This was Mr. GEORGE BERNARD SHAW. The whole thing was done, not with the savagery of a wild and illiterate controversialist, but with the light touch, the deadly playfulness, and the rapier thrusts of a cultivated and thoughtful man. Mr. SHAW is as yet little known to the general world, but he is a power, as he deserves to be, among the militant Radicals of the metropolis. He represents one of the wings - he himself would call it the moderate and rational wing - of the Socialist party. To the propagation of his ideas, he gives up willing time, labor, the opportunities of self-advancement. To such men we can forgive much; their enthusiasm, and their self-devotion are more important than their opinions.

We publish a letter to-day from Mr. SHAW. It is on the hideous and squalid tragedies which, occurring in the East, have stirred up the West-end to unusual and unaccustomed interest in the fate of the poor and the disinherited of the nation. Mr. SHAW writes with what will be considered violence by many, if not by most of our readers, and his proposals are far in advance of those which even some of our most advanced Radicals will be disposed to adopt. They are certainly in advance of any measures that we ourselves are ready to recommend. But we willingly give Mr. SHAW the opportunity of ventilating his ideas; first, because we are in favor of free discussion; and secondly, because though we may not accept his remedies, we sympathise largely with the protest he makes against the fashion in which some of our contemporaries have treated the Whitechapel murders. His revolt against the gush and the cant which are now appearing in certain aristocratic journals, is timely and called for. These journals, which are now calling upon the West to do its duty to the East, are the very journals, as Mr. SHAW points out, which but a few months ago were applauding Sir CHARLES WARREN as warmly and enthusiastically as though he were another Mr. BALFOUR. In the House of Commons, and still more in the drawing-rooms of the West-end, gilded youths and Primrose matrons were pluming their feathers on the spirited way in which the mob had been taught to conduct itself; and after the triumphant reply of Mr. MATTHEWS in the House of Commons, and the splendid majority - largely made up of men calling themselves Liberals - all the reactionaries were congratulating themselves on the excellent results of a policy of coercion in London, as well as in Ireland. On these gratulations come four hideous and squalid tragedies, and at once the same society, that was exultant with class triumph, has grown pale with class terror, and follows with babbling, childish, unctuous proposals - as much a remedy for the state of things revealed as the buns of the French lady for the starvation of the French revolutionaries. We may ask why it required these murders to call attention to the state of the poor at all? The deaths of these unhappy women certainly call aloud for vengeance, and the officials through whose incompetence such things are possible, will be called by-and-bye to a heavy account. But death, sudden, swift, possibly painless - and especially to those who have tried the game of life and have lost honor, self-respect, hope, everything - is infinitely less of a tragedy than the daily struggle for work that can't be got; for food that can't be earned. Give to many of the thousands that stand shivering every morning outside the portals of our great dockyards; give to the man that haunts the coffee shop or the newspaper office every morning to search out the places that are vacant; give to the father of children that meet him at night with the cry for food he hasn't to give - give to many of these the choice between the continuance of life and the painless passage through sleep to death, and the result would be that death would be their choice. It is the tragedy of defeated life, and not the calm of triumphant death, that should appeal to our hearts and imaginations.

And now as to the remedies. First we want better, truer, more honest teaching in our churches. As will be seen from another portion of our impression, a parson is very indignant with us because we have opened our columns to a discussion on the failure of Christianity. The free discussion of any subject is doubtless a soreness and an affliction to many reactionaries - especially when they wear a black coat and have taken service in the Established Church. How can anybody - how can the poor, especially - think well of Christianity when those who are its most eminent - its most highly paid teachers - always take the side which means the further enrichment of the rich, and the deeper impoverishment of the poor? When the landlords had the tax on corn, starvation walked abroad through the land. When reformers like COBDEN and BRIGHT proposed to bring food home to the poor, the clergymen of the Establishment were among the most active apostles of the continued reign of high rates and dear bread, and starved homes. Take the whole talk which is the outcome of these Whitechapel tragedies; does anybody suppose that the interest, shallow and purposeless and resourceless as it is, would have shown itself at all in the days before the people had got some voice in the control of the country? It is the voter and not the man that has excited the interest; and did not, again, the clergymen of the Establishment head the party in town, and still more the country, that opposed by every means in their power the admission of the artisan and the laborer to the franchise? How, we ask again, can we expect humble men to believe in a Christianity which is always on the side of privilege, unjust burdens, deeper poverty, greater helplessness of the weak?

But we can place little confidence in the good teaching of others - or even in their goodwill. The salvation of the disinherited must come largely, if not mainly, through themselves. We have no objection to men like Mr. SHAW preaching their gospel of social regeneration, though we may regard some of their opinions as unwise and impracticable, and the majority of them as unattainable for a considerable time to come. What we ask is that they and their friends shall not neglect the political machinery through which ultimately all changes - social as well as political - have to be attained; and that if they care but little for these things, they will allow others who have taken this work in hand, to go forward without interruption. For our part, we think some of the humblest of these political changes would do much to solve some of the most gigantic of our social problems. Suppose, for instance, that our politicians and our divines, and our social philosophers, and even our Home Secretaries and Police Commissioners, had to deal with a London in which every citizen had a vote - does anybody think that the cry of distress would be drowned in the tumult of bayonets and the clanging of swords? As it is we have to deal in London with masses that are still almost unenfranchised. The vote of London is not a working class, but a middle-class, vote. As long as that state of things lasts, we shall have no proposals for the fundamental changes that will reduce our poverty. We shall have to put up with such canting and shallow philosophy as that which Mr. SHAW so triumphantly assails in our columns to-day.

BLOOD MONEY TO WHITECHAPEL.

TO THE EDITOR OF "THE STAR."

SIR, - Will you allow me to make a comment on the success of the Whitechapel murderer in calling attention for a moment to the social question? Less than a year ago the West-end press, headed by the St. James's Gazette, theTimes, and the Saturday Review, were literally clamoring for the blood of the people - hounding on Sir Charles Warren to thrash and muzzle the scum who dared to complain that they were starving - heaping insult and reckless calumny on those who interceded for the victims - applauding to the skies the open class bias of those magistrates and judges who zealously did their very worst in the criminal proceedings which followed - behaving, in short as the proprietary class always does behave when the workers throw it into a frenzy of terror by venturing to show their teeth. Quite lost on these journals and their patrons were indignant remonstrances, arguments, speeches, and sacrifices, appeals to history, philosophy, biology, economics, and statistics; references to the reports of inspectors, registrar generals, city missionaries, Parliamentary commissions, and newspapers; collections of evidence by the five senses at every turn; and house-to-house investigations into the condition of the unemployed, all unanswered and unanswerable, and all pointing the same way. The Saturday Review was still frankly for hanging the appellants; and the Times denounced them as "pests of society." This was still the tone of the class Press as lately as the strike of the Bryant and May girls. Now all is changed. Private enterprise has succeeded where Socialism failed. Whilst we conventional Social Democrats were wasting our time on education, agitation, and organisation, some independent genius has taken the matter in hand, and by simply murdering and disembowelling four women, converted the proprietary press to an inept sort of communism. The moral is a pretty one, and the Insurrectionists, the Dynamitards, the Invincibles, and the extreme left of the Anarchist party will not be slow to draw it. "Humanity, political science, economics, and religion," they will say, "are all rot; the one argument that touches your lady and gentleman is the knife." That is so pleasant for the party of Hope and Perseverance in their toughening struggle with the party of Desperation and Death!

However, these things have to be faced. If the line to be taken is that suggested by the converted West-end papers - if the people are still to yield up their wealth to the Clanricarde class, and get what they can back as charity through Lady Bountiful, then the policy for the people is plainly a policy of terror. Every gaol blown up, every window broken, every shop looted, every corpse found disembowelled, means another ten pound note for "ransom." The riots of 1886 brought in £78,000 and a People's Palace; it remains to be seen how much these murders may prove worth to the East-end in panem et circenses. Indeed, if the habits of duchesses only admitted of their being decoyed into Whitechapel back-yards, a single experiment in slaughterhouse anatomy on an aristocratic victim might fetch in a round half million and save the necessity of sacrificing four women of the people. Such is the stark-naked reality of these abominable bastard Utopias of genteel charity in which the poor are first to be robbed and then pauperised by way of compensation, in order that the rich man may combine the idle luxury of the protected thief with the unctuous self-satisfaction of the pious philanthropist.

The proper way to recover the rents of London for the people of London is not by charity, which is one of the worst curses of poverty, but by the municipal rate collector, who will no doubt make it sufficiently clear to the monopolists of ground value that he is not merely taking round the hat, and that the State is ready to enforce his demand, if need be. And the money thus obtained must be used by the municipality as the capital of productive industries for the better employment of the poor. I submit that this is at least a less disgusting and immoral method of relieving the East-end than the gush of bazaars and blood money which has suggested itself from the West-end point of view. - Yours, &c.,

G. BERNARD SHAW.


Page 2

Good Tory Doctrine.

The Saturday Review says: "There is a pestilent doctrine openly asserted by some gentry of the Press, and acted on by others who would hardly dare to assert it openly, that the public has a right to know things. The public has no right to know anything whatever save matters which come before the Queen's Courts, while even this right is limited."

This, writes a correspondent, explains the partiality of Tory prints for fiction.

A PULPIT ATTACK ON "THE STAR."
A Clapham Parson Says We Possess an Incredible Capacity for Falsehood.

"T. D. H." writes:- I entered St. Paul's Church, Clapham, yesterday morning, and great was my surprise to hear the preacher, a man certainly of considerable power as a speaker, introduce his discourse by an attack upon The Star. He referred to the letters sent to your columns on "Is Christianity a Failure?" and in calling attention to the subject he said:- "Last week I took up an evening paper which advertises itself as possessing a circulation of over 100,000 a day, a number, however, which is not authenticated in the usual way by an auditor's statement, and which anybody who understands anything about the matter would know at once could not be relied upon." . . . "A paper you never look at, and place no reliance upon . . . Than which hardly anything more appalling, more detestable, possessing a more incredible capacity for falsehood, and of stating facts not as they are, but as they are not, could not well be imagined."

These are a few of the remarks I jotted down at the time, and can answer for almost verbal correctness. I was led to ask myself, "Why this attack upon The Star?" I think, whatever be its cause, that it shows that everywhere in LondonThe Star is becoming a mighty influence, that all classes of society are touched by its fearless exposition of the truth, and moved either to abuse or gratitude.

But, sir, is it any wonder that vital Christianity is a failure amongst so many, when men hear the exponent of its teaching uttering slanders of the above description in a place where they could not well be rebutted? Is this the practice of that "charity" which "hopeth all things?"

Regent's Park Rowdyism.

"A Sprinter," writing from Edgware-road, states from the experience of himself and about a dozen other men who frequent Regent's-park for running practice, that rowdyism there is almost a nightly occurrence. "We often hear screams," he continues, "and on two or three occasions have stopped men of the rough class running away, but as it was dark the females assaulted could not identify their assailants, and we let them go." He says the men hide behind the palings and trees, their presence in the park being for the purpose of blackmailing unfortunate women. The police sometimes turn these sprinters away from their practice ground, but would be far better employed in hunting up these parasites.

Another Thames Mystery.

Late on Saturday evening a waterman found the body of an insensible man in the Thames off Old Chelsea Church. The man was brought ashore and seen by Dr. Fitzgerald, who ordered his removal to the Chelsea Infirmary. This morning he was still in an insensible condition, nothing being on him which gave any clue to his identity. The following is a description of the man: - Age apparently about 38 years, complexion fair, ditto whiskers, black cutaway coat and vest, dark trousers, side spring boots, all much worn.

A Crime of the Long Ago.

During some excavations on the site of Cave Cottage, High-road, Chiswick, some workmen on Saturday came upon a skeleton - presumably that of a female - with a bullet wound through the skull. It is supposed to have lain in the ground between 50 and 100 years. The place where it was found was formerly a portion of the old high road to London, the scene of so many notorious murders.


Page 3

FIFTH EDITION.

A HORROR AT GATESHEAD.
A Crime Very Similar to Those which have Startled Whitechapel.

Gateshead has been the scene of a Whitechapel murder. The victim is a young woman named Jane Beatmoor, 28 years of age. She was in delicate health, and on Saturday went to the Gateshead Dispensary for medicine. After returning home she went out again to purchase some sweets to take with her medicine. She called at several farms while she was out, and at half-past seven at night left the house of an acquaintance named Mrs. Newall, evidently with the intention of returning home. She had not arrived at 11 o'clock, and her mother and stepfather went to look for her, without success, and concluded she must have spent the night with some neighbor. Early yesterday morning a miner named John Fish, going to work, found the body of the deceased at the bottom of the railway embankment

HORRIBLY MUTILATED.

The county police were communicated with, and Superintendent Harrison and Sergeant Hutchinson, of Birtley, were soon on the spot. A closer inspection revealed the fact that the lower part of the deceased's body had been cut open and the entrails torn out. She was also cut about the face. The affair has caused quite a panic in the district, the resemblance to the Whitechapel tragedies encouraging the idea that the maniac who has been at work in London has travelled down to the north of England to pursue his fiendish vocation.

The unfortunate woman is stabbed in three places, once in the bowels and twice in the face.

THE WOUND IN THE STOMACH

is very deep, the knife having knocked a piece off the vertebral column. The body was found only a few hundred yards from the Girls' Home, by the side of the colliery railway. There were no marks of a struggle where she was found, and no trace of footsteps. The police are completely baffled, as the murderer has left not the slightest clue. Yesterday thousands of persons visited the spot.

Another account says: - The woman Beatmoor was more commonly known in the district as Jane Savage. She resided with her parents at a place called Whitehouse, near Northside, situate on the dreary tract of country known as Birtley Fell. Her mother married a second time, her present husband being one Joseph Savage, and by her stepfather's name Jane Beatmoor was more commonly known. Savage follows the calling of a miner, and is a sober, industrious man, much respected by all his neighbors. His stepdaughter, also, was of a quiet, inoffensive nature, and was generally liked. On Saturday evening she called at the Moor Inn, near Birtley, where sweetstuffs and general stores are kept. She purchased some sweets, and resumed her journey to a neighbor's farm. She was last seen alive on the way to the farm about eight o'clock, and several persons state that she was

IN THE COMPANY OF A YOUNG MAN.

It was about seven o'clock yesterday morning that a fitter named John Fish, employed at Ouston Colliery, when at at a point known as Sandy Cut, suddenly came upon the woman's body. The place is a dreary spot, and one in which a foul deed might be perpetrated with little fear of detection or interruption. The body lay about three or four feet from the line,

THE HEAD BEING IN A GUTTER

about nine or ten inches deep. The young woman's legs were pointed towards the line. The body leaned partly on the left side. On the right side of the throat just below the ear, a frightful gash was visible. Police-constable Dodds, stationed at Eighton Banks, about a mile distant, was at once sent for, and the body was removed to the deceased's house. The house was securely locked up and the occupants transferred to a neighboring dwelling.

A Woman Cuts Her Throat in Blackfriars.

A woman named Ellen Chambers, living with her niece, Mrs. Evans, at 21, Green-street, Blackfriars-road, attempted suicide this morning by cutting her throat. The woman has been living at the address given for about two years, and has been separated from her husband for about 14. She is 59 years of age, and of late the neighbors have noticed a slight strangeness in her manner. The wound was inflicted with an ordinary table-knife, which, together with the woman, Police-constable 83 M removed in a cab to Guy's Hospital. There the woman at present lies, but apparently not in a very dangerous condition.

IN THE POLICE COURTS TO-DAY.

He Didn't Remain to Pray.

A rough-looking young feeling, giving the name of Charles Sharp, well-known to the police, was charged at Dalston with disorderly conduct at the Salvation Army Barracks, St. Thomas-street, Haggerston. He disturbed the congregation by talking and cracking nuts. He was requested to desist, but he declined and an attempt was made to eject him. In the lobby of the hall he threw off his coat. When the constable came on the scene Sharp put himself into fighting attitude and knocked the policeman's helmet off. Convictions for stabbing and violent assaults were proved against him and he was sentenced to two month's hard labor.

A Reporter Complains of Police Violence.

Elizabeth Owen was charged at Bow-street with being drunk and disorderly. - Beaumont Kent, a reporter, said that he saw the constable use very great violence towards the woman. He rushed at her, drove her against the wall, and then dragged her across the street to an empty shop, and taking her by the throat knocked her head against the shutters three or four times. Witness stepped up and remonstrated. The constable told him not to interfere, and pushed him back roughly. He tried to get hold of him by the throat, and said he would run him in if he had any more of his cheek. Witness followed to the station, and there the same constable asked him rudely what he was doing. Witness said, "You know what I am doing." The constable ordered him to leave the station, and threatened to chuck him out. He declined to leave, and was then seized by the arms and pulled very violently away from an iron bar he was holding. His hands were injured, two of the small bones being put out. - Mr. Bridge said witness might have a summons against the constable, or report the matter to the Commissioners. - Mr. Kent said, in the interest of the public, he should prefer to have a summons. He should not be satisfied with an investigation before the Commissioners. There was no dispute about the woman Owen being drunk, and she was fined 2s. 6d., or one day's imprisonment.

Is It a Clue?

Some one representing himself as a detective called at a number of boarding establishments in Great Ormonde-street on Saturday afternoon, making inquiries for a man by the name of Morford, who was supposed to have had lodgings in that street up to 10 Sept., but who since that time has mysteriously disappeared. At some of the places called at the detective said something about a letter having been received by the authorities which led to the idea that Morford might throw some light on the Whitechapel murders. He was described as a man who had been educated as a surgeon, but who had lost standing in the community through drink. It seems that attention was directed to him through a pawnbroker, who took several surgical instruments in pledge from him, and who afterwards had reason to suspect that he was not of sound mind. A shopkeeper in Great Ormonde-street thought he knew the man who was being searched for, but as the detective had no address but "Morford, Great Ormonde-street," he was not able to make much progress without letting the whole neighborhood know what he was about.

Last evening, at half-past nine, the attention of Police-constable 457 D was called to a brown-paper parcel lying behind some railings at the corner of Devonshire-street and Great Portland-street. On pulling open one corner he noticed that it contained some under-clothing with apparently bloodstains upon it. He took it to the Tottenham-court-road Police-station, where the contents were found to consist of a drab flannel shirt, a pair of men's drab pants, a pair of cuffs, and a collar. The two first-named articles were saturated with blood, but the collar and cuffs were only slightly splashed. The Divisional Surgeon was sent for, and gave it as his opinion that the blood was human.

"Kate S. Tee" or "A. L."

The young lady whose body was washed up at Eastham, Cheshire, on Saturday, has been identified as having left the Eastham Ferry Hotel on the previous night in company with a young man, dressed as a clerk, and aged about 29. The only clue to her identity are the words scratched on her purse, "Kate S. Tee" and the initials on the band of her petticoat, "A. L."

Moonlighting in Kerry.

A party of moonlighters visited the house of John Fitzgerald, a farmer, at Shannacrinner, near Abbeydorney, last night. They fired two shots at him, one entering the right thigh. The man is not dangerously injured.


Page 4

NEWS OF ALL SORTS.

Warrenism in the Provinces.

Sir Charles Warren's example in transforming the police from a civil body for looking after criminals into a military body for attacking public gatherings is being followed in the provinces. Chief-constable Hitchman, the head of the Norwich police, has just laid a report before the local town council asking that the number of men on the force may be increased, and giving as his reason that "the duties of the police have much increased of late in consequence of meetings being held in open and public spaces, rendering it necessary to have a force of police in reserve ready to act in case of emergency." Mr. Crotch, a Socialist member of the town council, pointed out the decrease of crime in the city as a reason for not granting the constable's request, but the council is Tory, and the Tory instinct that open-air meetings of democrats are dangerous and must be looked after prevailed, and the demand of the East Anglian Warren was granted.

THE PEOPLE'S POST BOX.
Is Christianity a Failure?

SIR, - The principles of Christianity are - as they were when the great Author taught them on earth, when the apostles preached them, and when the martyrs consecrated them in the voluntary surrender of their lives - precious and living truths. The people heard them gladly - the poor - and deemed it a privilege to suffer; and aloof from them stood the Pharisees.

And now? The reverse of all that is the truth. They are the Pharisees who be the lip, ear, and eye worshippers of Him who preached the Sermon on the Mount. Strange thing, this. And the people? They are as far alienated from its spirit, and of Him who breathed life into it, as they are in sympathy and social caste from their oppressors.

And the world still wags its head and stones its prophets. Religion is still taught as an academic idea suitable for academic minds, and this being so no wonder its influence is feeble, its light less searching, where it should have been bold and fearless in the cause of right, justice, and oppression.

And yet Christianity, per se is no more accountable for these, than can be temperance (or any other principle) for drunkenness or excess. All principles, whatsoever their source or origin, or whatever object they serve or constitute - their fruits are but what man chooses to make them. The principles are obscured, but the evil predominates. Thus with Christianity, so divine its origin, so intrinsic in its worth, apart from higher objects, is to-day identified in history, past and present, with class ascendency, with wealth in all degrees, with Queen's writ and crowbar brigade - against men whose crime is in their poverty - who will listen with placidity to a nation's wrongs and crimes against flesh and blood. Christianity still remains, the difference is it is preached by men whose lives rebuke their sincerity, who live only unto themselves. - Yours, &c.,

C. E. C.



20 Sept.

SIR, - Does not your correspondent "Homo Sum" in divesting Christianity of its dogmas deprive it of its very "centre" and reason of existence? I do not think Christianity has failed in 2,000 years to bring happiness to the masses because it has, like all religions, dogmas. But because the dogmas of Christianity, like those of Buddhism and Judaism - in fact, of all religions - are based, not upon undoubted certainties - i.e., such axioms as two and two are four or Euclid's mathematics - but upon the beliefs and faiths of men.

The true aim of the man who desires the greatest happiness to the greatest number, it seems to me, should be to banish or ignore so-called "religious beliefs," and to strenuously insist on righteous action by man to man - to do to others as he would be done by; and, finally, to insist on the truth of that inexorable law of Nature which tells us "As thou sowest so shalt thou reap;" that the law of cause and consequence knows of no exception; and that reason and experience are our only teachers. Such teachings even as "Love your neighbor as yourself" are utopian, beyond the reach of men. - Yours, &c.,

F. W. H.


SIR, - Your able correspondent, "Homo Sum," when he says "Christianity is delightful but Christians are often frauds," strikes the keynote of the question "Is Christianity a failure?" Christianity as taught and practised by its great Founder has never been tried nationally, very seldom individually. Till it is tried, its precepts acted on, and the perfect brotherhood of man as taught by Christ recognised, we are not in a position to say whether or not it is a failure.

Christ has given us a strong foundation, a solid basis, and man has raised a rotten superstructure that must and ought to crumble away. But the foundation will still be there ready for a building in accord with its Founder's design.

In our schooldays most of us have learnt imperfectly or been badly instructed. We act unwisely if, in after life, we blame the subject taught rather than ourselves for not accurately receiving the instruction imparted or our teachers for their wrong teaching. - Yours, &c.,

EARNEST.



21 Sept.

SIR, - "Homo Sum" wishes to know how on this religion of unselfishness has been founded a society so banally selfish. My answer is an Hibernicism: Because it has not been founded on it. There would be no trouble in Ireland to-day (or elsewhere) if only men would do unto others as they would like men to do unto themselves, and there would be no murders in Whitechapel (or elsewhere) if men loved their neighbors as themselves. - Yours, &c.,

W. LOVELESS.

714, Old Kent-road, S. E.




PHENOMENAL SUCCESS.

The Average Daily Circulation of

THE STAR

For the Week ending 14 Sept. was

190, 033.

The Number of Copies Circulated

during the Six Days was

1, 140, 200.

This Number is Greater by

412, 000

Than the Number Ever Circulated in 

any week by any other

EVENING PAPER IN LONDON.


Naomi Wolf

Naomi Wolf (Clinton/Gore's Former Sex Appeal Advisor)


"...congressional overseers, with the blessing of the White House, told the DHS to authorise mayors to order their police forces—pumped up with millions of dollars of hardware and training from the DHS—to make war on peaceful citizens."

"I began, nearly a year ago, to try—privately—to start a conversation with my alma mater that would reassure me that steps had been taken in the ensuing years to ensure that unwanted sexual advances of this sort weren't still occurring. I expected Yale to be responsive. After nine months and many calls and e-mails, I was shocked to conclude that the atmosphere of collusion that had helped to keep me quiet twenty years ago was still intact—as secretive as a Masonic lodge."




"Dear Sir or Madam,

I see that the Sydney Morning Herald, Talking Points Memo and the Guardian are all addressing the fact that I, and my citizen journalism community on facebook, has asked for normal journalistic sourcing on the ISIS story. 

Some of the coverage distorts the nature of my questions.

I am not asserting that the ISIS videos have been staged. No one can yet know anything for sure about the ISIS videos as they have simply not been independently analyzed, according to the news outlets which we have contacted for more information about the verification process. I am simply reporting what we have had confirmed by public editors of several newspapers: the fact that the videos have only one source and have not been independently verified. This second verification is - or used to be -- a normal part of news investigation. 

I certainly sincerely apologize if one of my posts was insensitively worded. I have taken that one down. 

But that does not mean I don't stand by the need for all journalists to have two independent sources confirming a major story before they release it as confirmed. 

More importantly for journalism and for the long haul facing us as a planet as we react to these videos: I am not saying the ISIS beheading videos are not authentic. I am not saying they are not records of terrible atrocities. I am saying that they are not yet independently confirmed by two sources as authentic, which any Journalism School teaches, and the single source for several of them, SITE, which received half a million dollars in government funding in 2004, and which is the only source cited for several, has conflicts of interest that should be disclosed to readers of news outlets. 

Why is this even controversial? There are plenty of reasons for the normal vetting process of news to take place here, as in any news story. There could be plenty of reasons that a violent extremist group may wish to manipulate what it communicates to the rest of the world, and the job of newspapers is independently to verify a news story that is driving massive change -- boots on the ground -- airstrikes -- and most worrying to me, lasting suppression of critical liberties such as the bills that just passed in Australia threatening all journalists there with ten years in prison for national security reporting. I hope, finally, that the nation of my/our request for proper, normal news sourcing is clear. 

I will add: a hundred thousand Iraqis and four thousand young and brave American men and women, US soldiers, died terrible deaths -- deaths as awful as any depicted right now in these videos -- because American reporters and editors did not check on a news stream full of assertions that turned out to be straight-out false, about WMD. At that time reporters and editors simply took dictation from government sources. The false story made it into several major respected news outlets, including one of our most august newspapers, New York Times. 

And we rushed to war. 

We are here again. It is of course terrible to see videos purporting to show assassinations; it is terrible that anyone is assassinated anywhere. But if we don't do our jobs as journalists and citizens and check all the news on the basis of which we are being rushed into war -- and on the basis of which Australia and Britain are being stripped drastically and speedily of historic freedoms, -- then many worse things will happen to children and old people, and to our brave young men and women in that part of the world, than a hundred thousand videos will be able to document. Terrible deaths may be ahead for many innocent people, probably out of camera range, many many multiples of the deaths on the videos I am seeking to double source now, if journalists and editors do not independently verify the news now. 

And it will be our fault, as journalists and editors. That is why we should do our job and double source the news. 

Thank you -- Naomi Wolf"


I quote The Enemy:  In June 2013, New York magazine reported that in a recent Facebook post, Wolf had expressed her "creeping concern" that NSA leaker Edward Snowden "is not who he purports to be, and that the motivations involved in the story may be more complex than they appear to be." 

Wolf was similarly skeptical of Snowden's "very pretty pole-dancing Facebooking girlfriend who appeared for, well, no reason in the media coverage … and who keeps leaking commentary, so her picture can be recycled in the press."

Wolf responded at her website, "I do find a great deal of media/blog discussion about serious questions such as those I raised, questions that relate to querying some sources of news stories, and their potential relationship to intelligence agencies or to other agendas that may not coincide with the overt narrative, to be extraordinarily ill-informed and naive." 

Specifically regarding Snowden, she wrote, "Why should it be seen as bizarre to wonder, if there are some potential red flags—the key term is 'wonder'—if a former NSA spy turned apparent whistleblower might possibly still be—working for the same people he was working for before?"


She's stating the obvious.

We KNOW Snowden is a liar.

Greenwald, Assange and Ellsberg too - for one thing, they have revealed NOTHING.... All they have to back them up is media exposure and the fetishism of expertise and formalism.

Of course, you can't say that in the Guardian - they'd have to hand all their awards back.




"It was more sophisticated than we had imagined: new documents show that the violent crackdown on Occupy last fall [2011]—so mystifying at the time—was not just coordinated at the level of the FBI, the Department of Homeland Security, and local police. The crackdown, which involved, as you may recall, violent arrests, group disruption, canister missiles to the skulls of protesters, people held in handcuffs so tight they were injured, people held in bondage till they were forced to wet or soil themselves—was coordinated with the big banks themselves."

"How simple … just to label an entity a 'terrorist organization' and choke off, disrupt or indict its sources of financing."

"[The FBI crackdown on Occupy] was never really about 'the terrorists'. It was not even about civil unrest. It was always about this moment, when vast crimes might be uncovered by citizens—it was always, that is to say, meant to be about you."



Monday, 6 October 2014

BOSSI, The Rockefellers and the Men Who Killed Malcolm X







"Ehrlichman quickly found a candidate, a well-decorated, forty year-old Irish New York City cop, John J. Caulfield. Caulfield had been a member of the NYPD and its undercover unit, the Bureau of Special Services and Investigations (BOSSI). He had made cases against dissident and terrorist organizations, and BOSSI as a whole was known for its ability to penetrate and keep track of left-wing and black groups. One of the unit's jobs was to work closely with the Secret Service and guard political dignitaries and world leaders who frequently moved through the city. During the 1960 election, Caulfield had been assigned to the security detail of candidate Richard Nixon. He had befriended Nixon's personal secretary, Rose Mary Woods, and her brother Joe, the sheriff of Cook County, Illinois. In 1968, after leaving the New York City Police Department, Caulfield had served as a security man for the Nixon campaign.

But when Ehrlichman approached him in early 1969 and asked Caulfield to set up a private security firm to provide services for the Nixon White House, Caulfield declined, and instead suggested that he join Ehrlichman's staff and then, as a White House employee, supervise another man who would be hired solely as a private eye. Ehrlichman agreed, and when Caulfield arrived at the White House to start work in April 1969, he said he had the ideal candidate for presidential gumshoe, a BOSSI colleague, Anthony Ulasewicz."


Anthony Ulasewicz, the son of Polish immigrants, was born in New York on 14th December, 1918. His father was a tailor in the garment industry. His mother, who was a janitor, died of viral pneumonia, when he was a boy.

Ulasewicz attended Stanislaus Parochial School and Peter Stuyvesant Public High School. In 1937 Ulasewicz joined the Army National Guard. He was stationed at the 168th Street Armory, in Manhattan.

On 17th February, 1943, Ulasewicz joined the New York City Police Department. He started off as a patrolman in Harlem's Twenty-Fifth Precinct. Later he served in the United States Army during the Second World War.

In 1949 Ulasewicz joined the NYPD's Bureau of Special Service and Investigation (BOSSI). His assignments included escorting and guarding the security of world leaders and their families. People who Ulasewicz protected included Paul Robeson, Dwight Eisenhower, Nikita Khrushchev, John F. Kennedy, Rafael Trujillo and Fulgencio Batista.

Ulasewicz's intelligence work included the investigating the kidnapping and murder of Jesus de Galindez, the academic who had written a book critical of the Trujillo's military dictatorship. Ulasewicz discovered the CIA had stolen documents belonging to Galindez soon after he went missing. Ulasewicz decided to back-off when he discovered that the CIA was probably involved in his abduction. However, J. Edgar Hoover insisted on a full investigation. Galindez had been a FBI undercover agent (codename “Rojas”) who had been providing important information to Hoover.

Recruited to the FBI in June, 1944, Galindez had originally been asked to discover information about Spaniards who had migrated to the Dominican Republic after the Spanish Civil War. Galindez role was to discover if any of these men were “communists” and who might get involved in the campaign to bring democracy to the Dominican Republic.

Galindez also provided Hoover with information on the rebels in Cuba. This included information that Fidel Castro was a communist agent. This was important news at the time because Hoover was aware that the CIA were at the time helping Castro in his struggle with Fulgencio Batista.

Ulasewicz eventually traced the two men who flew the drugged Galindez to Dominica. Both these pilots, Gerald Murphy and Octavia de la Maza were murdered soon after this had taken place. So also was Ana Gloria Viera (Maza’s girlfriend) who was also on board the plane that night. Murphy, a young American pilot, had the contact details of man called John Frank in his possession when his body was found. Frank had been working with Robert Maheu. At the time it was believed that Frank and Maheu were involved in some CIA operation. It included a deal that involved the future of Batista’s gambling empire in Cuba and the training of CIA operatives in the Dominican Republic.



(2) (2)Tony Ulasewicz, The President's Private Eye (1990)
Caulfield became Ehrlichman's contact with BOSSI, and through Ehrlichman, Caulfield met H. R. Haldeman, who would become Nixon's chief of staff after he was elected President. Both Ehrlichman and Haldeman were impressed with BOSSI's thoroughness in handling security, and at Ehrlichman's prodding, Haldeman persuaded the Police Commissioner to let Caulfield become head of Nixon's campaign security detail. Caulfield's assignment was classified as detached departmental service. Almost immediately after his appointment, Caulfield called to ask me to join Nixon's campaign train, but I turned him down. The job simply held no challenge for me. In my mind a campaign security assignment would mean nothing more than a lot of glitz and tinsel draped over a lot of travel, talk, and parties and too little sleep.





(2) (2)Tony Ulasewicz, The President's Private Eye (1990)
Caulfield became Ehrlichman's contact with BOSSI, and through Ehrlichman, Caulfield met H. R. Haldeman, who would become Nixon's chief of staff after he was elected President. Both Ehrlichman and Haldeman were impressed with BOSSI's thoroughness in handling security, and at Ehrlichman's prodding, Haldeman persuaded the Police Commissioner to let Caulfield become head of Nixon's campaign security detail. Caulfield's assignment was classified as detached departmental service. Almost immediately after his appointment, Caulfield called to ask me to join Nixon's campaign train, but I turned him down. The job simply held no challenge for me. In my mind a campaign security assignment would mean nothing more than a lot of glitz and tinsel draped over a lot of travel, talk, and parties and too little sleep.

In March 1969, after Nixon had won and taken office, Caulfield again approached me about a possible assignment. It wasn't going to be what I thought, Caulfield said; it would be so different in fact that he couldn't talk about it over the phone. This time I was a bit more receptive, having in the last few weeks begun to think about retiring. In 1969, at age fifty-one, I was only seven years away from retirement on a full police pension, but setting myself up in business as a private investigator had begun to interest me. An affiliation with the White House would surely benefit the future of my own operation, and so I was ready to hear Caulfield out. We met at the Hofbrau, a bar and restaurant near 42nd Street which had long been a hangout for both New York's cops and reporters for the Daily News.

I hadn't seen Caulfield in over a year, and in an instant I could see that he had already become a tout for all the power that makes Washington move. He was just bursting with his news that he had found the Yellow Brick Road and was going to make a million bucks as a lobbyist when he finished working for Nixon. "The lobbyists in Washington run the whole show," he said. But I wasn't interested in his ambitions; all I wanted to know was what was so hush-hush that he couldn't tell me about it over the phone.

Over a few drinks, Caulfield outlined the big secret. He said the White House wanted to set up its own investigative resource which would be quite separate from the FBI, CIA, or Secret Service.


The House that Jack Built - The Highest in the Land

from Spike EP on Vimeo.


Left to Right : The Duke of Connaught, The Prince of Wales, and The Duke of Clarence.

“LONDON, Nov. 1, 1970 (AP)
– The Sunday Times expressed belief today that Jack the Ripper, infamous London murderer of nearly 100 years ago, was Edward, Duke of Clarence, grandson of Queen Victoria and older brother of George V. The Times was commenting on the statement of an eminent British surgeon who said that the Ripper ‘was the heir to power and wealth.’ The surgeon, Thomas E.A. Stowell, while claiming to know who the criminal was, refused to identify him in an article to be published tomorrow in The Criminologist…. The Sunday Times, in commenting on Dr. Stowell’s article, said there was one name that fitted his evidence. It said: ‘It is a sensational name: Edward, Duke of Clarence, grandson of Queen Victoria, brother of George V, and heir to the throne of England. All the points of Dr. Stowell’s story fit this man.’” 


(Spierig, p. 11)

Shortly after having published his article in The Criminologist and thus made his allegations public, Dr. Stowell wrote a letter to the London Times in which he disavowed any intention of identifying Prince Eddy or any other member of the royal family as Jack the Ripper. In this letter Stowell signed himself as “a loyalist and a Royalist.” Stowell died mysteriously one day after this letter appeared, and his family promptly burned all his papers.

An American study of the Jack the Ripper mystery was authored by the forensic psychiatrist David Abrahamsen, who sums up his own conclusions as follows: “It is an analysis of the psychological parameters that enabled me to discover that the Ripper murders were perpetrated by Prince Eddy and J.K. Stephen.” 
(Abrahamsen, pp. 103-104) 


J.K. Stephen had been chosen as a tutor for Prince Eddy, who was mentally impaired. Stephen was a homosexual. He was the son of the pathological woman-hater Fitzjames Stephen. J.K. Stephen’s uncle was Sir Leslie Stephen, the writer. There is evidence that J.K. Stephen sexually molested his cousin, best known today by her married name, Virginia Woolf, the novelist. This experience may be related to Virginia Woolf’s numerous suicide attempts.

While he was at Cambridge, Prince Eddy was a member of the Apostles secret society. Abrahamsen quotes a maxim of the Apostles: “The love of man for man is greater than that of man for woman, a philosophy known to the Apostles as the higher sodomy.” [p. 123] Prince Eddy died on Jan. 14, 1892. J.K. Stephen died in a sanitarium on Feb. 3, 1892.

Prince Eddy’s younger brother, the later George V, assumed his place in the succession, married Eddy’s former fiancée, Princess May of Teck, and became the father of the Nazi King Edward VIII. If the persistent reports are true, the great-uncle of the current queen was the homicidal maniac Jack the Ripper. Perhaps the recurring dispute about what to call the British royal house – Hanover, Windsor, Guelph, Saxe-Coburg-Gotha, etc. – could be simplified by calling it the House of Jack the Ripper.

Of the existence of a coverup there can be no doubt. One of the main saboteurs of the investigation was a certain Gen. Sir Charles Warren, the chief of the London Metropolitan Police. Warren suppressed evidence, had witnesses intimidated, and was forced to resign amidst a public outcry about Masonic conspiracy. Warren was the master of a new Freemasonic lodge that had recently been created in London. This was the Quatuor Coronati Lodge of Research, number 2076 of the Scottish rite. The Quatuor Coronati lodge had been founded in 1884 with a warrant from the Grand Master of British Freemasonry, who happened to be Edward VII.