Talk:Walter Dew

A fact from Walter Dew appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 5 January 2008, and was viewed approximately 1,457 times (disclaimer) (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that British police detective Walter Dew was involved in hunting both Jack the Ripper and Dr Crippen?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2008/January.

Wikipedia

Biography

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles

London Low‑importance

	London portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject London, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of London on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LondonWikipedia:WikiProject LondonTemplate:WikiProject LondonLondon-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Law Enforcement Low‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Law Enforcement. Please Join, Create, and Assess.Law EnforcementWikipedia:WikiProject Law EnforcementTemplate:WikiProject Law EnforcementLaw enforcement articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Untitled

I have reverted Dreamguy's edit as I believe that the article's later section covers Dew's acknowledged lapses of memory in his autobiography pretty fully. As an experienced detective constable in H Division from early 1887 it is surely wrong to dismiss Dew's claim that he was involved in a minor way in the hunt for the Ripper. At this time the Met. were drafting police officers into Whitechapel from Divisions all over London. Is Dreamguy stating that Dew was overlooked at this time, that he was absent, or what? How could he not have been involved in the inquiry? He was an experienced police officer on the scene and a member of the Division actively hunting the Ripper.

In his memoirs Dew related the case of 'Squibby', which case I am sure Dreamguy is familar with. Is this story a fabrication? If not, it places him in Whitechapel looking for the killer; if it is then why is it included in all articles and other sources realting to Dew including the book 'Walter Dew: the Man who caught Crippen'. I have used the words 'claimed' and 'Dew said' throughout the disputed section. Please do not just delete substantiated and sourced material in this way. Jack1956 (talk) 22:02, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dew was definately a Detective Constable in H Division at the time of the Ripper case and definately involved in looking for the Whitechapel Murderer. See Nicholas Connell's much praised book: 'Walter Dew: The Man Who Caught Crippen' for the true facts. (See also Stewart Evans' review of this book: 'The ever reliable Nicholas Connell's important study of the great Scotland Yard detective who hunted both Jack the Ripper and Dr Crippen'.) Colin4C (talk) 22:57, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nick's a good guy, but if he bought into Dew's claims uncritically, that doesn't mean it's a fact, it means that he personally believes in aspects of an autobiography we know to be filled with a huge number of errors. Wikipedia does not take sides and state opinions as fact. It violates NPOV policy to present claims as facts. 76.114.86.121 (talk) 19:56, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Query

Are 68.47.175.159 and 194.66.226.95 and Dreamguy the same person? Colin4C (talk) 16:51, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, they are. He has admitted it, claims to have forgotten to log on for a couple of weeks. Jack1956 (talk) 08:19, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There's no rule that says anyone has to log on. Insisting otherwise is just ongoing harassment by some people who want to win edit wars through wikilawyering instead of follow Wikipedia policies. 76.114.86.121 (talk) 19:52, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Kelly's Eyes

Dew's claim that Kelly's eyes were photographed for the image of the killer on the retina are corroborated in an official statement at the time of the killing and in a contemporary German journal. See page 91 of the revised edition of Rumbelow's 'The Complete Jack the Ripper' (2004) for details. Colin4C (talk) 11:14, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is nonsense. Police doctors had already states in earlier inquest testimony that such an action would be completely pointless, and no reliable source claims otherwise. 76.114.86.121 (talk) 19:48, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have reference for my statement. See Donald Rumbelow (2004) 'The Complete Jack the Ripper': page 91. Where is yours? Colin4C (talk) 20:59, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dew's claims that Mary Kelly's eyes were photographed shows a lack of knowledge of how optograms were obtained, which was not simply to take a photograph of the victim's eye, but to dissect the eye and stain the retina with a reactive agent. In short, there was--and never has been--a police procedure such as Dew describes Revmagpie (talk) 07:16, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Druce-Portland case

Dew investigated several of those involved in the Druce Portland Case (for which see William Cavendish-Scott-Bentinck, 5th Duke of Portland ‎ "and elsewhere on the web") Jackiespeel (talk) 17:57, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

His writing is less legible to modern eyes than some of his policing contemporaries (having looked at the files in The National Archives) - observation rather than original research. Jackiespeel (talk) 16:31, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]