Jump to content


Bronze Membership
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About ayedeeyew

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Near Bristol

Recent Profile Visitors

4,665 profile views
  1. Not on a full size medal, but it is sometimes encountered on miniature versions of the same (due to the difficulties of getting the ribbon to behave correctly on the reduced scale through the ring - most companies seem to have just enlarged the scale of the ring to compensate) :
  2. For what it's worth, my thinking is along similar lines to Alans, but with a somewhat different conclusion. I have taken the original detailed shot of the medals and tried to take out the worst of the distortion due to the angle they are worn at. There is still some, particularly on the vertical plane, but it makes life a little easier for measuring the diameter of the planchets of the medals at least. I have attached it below. The first is clearly the 1887 Jubilee Medal with 1897 clasp, no doubt there. The planchet diameter of this is 36mm. Using this as a scale when the picture is altered it is clear that the third medal appears to match this perfectly in terms of the diameter of the planchet. This would make it the 1902 Coronation Medal to me as this also had a planchet diameter of 36mm (and freshly issued/polished bronze is just as shiny as any silver medal). However, in comparison the planchet of the centre medal comes up slightly undersize on a vertical plane (perhaps 33 or 34mm if I am generous) versus maybe 30 or 31mm on the horizontal (if this medal had a swivel suspender as with both the 1887/1897 and 1902 medals this difference may be due in part to it slightly twisting to the viewers left and consequently appearing narrower). It is well known in medal collecting circles that most older copies of medals tend to come up slightly smaller than originals (generally due to them being cast from moulds taken from an original and suffering shrinkage accordingly). If the second medal is not simply something different but similar to the 1902 medal, I wonder if the second medal was not simply a copy of one? Perhaps there was some delay or such between Sergeant Bradley being issued his actual medal and as he was entitled to wear it he made other arrangements? Then when he received his actual medal he had himself proudly photographed wearing the real thing alongside his copy that was already mounted? More speculation I'm afraid...
  3. I thought I would give this another bump. I am now working on Metropolitan Police kit for both WW1 Special Constabulary and regular WW2 kit. Looking for some insignia to finish off both tunics, in particular: WW1 - Black horn KC buttons with the pie-crust edging (illustrated below). In particular the approx. 16mm diameter pocket sized ones. WW2 - Chromed/silver/white metal letters for the epaulettes and collars. For the epaulettes, separate letters M and P. For the collar, letter H's. Ideally should be about 20mm or so tall. Also looking for a few more KC chromed/silvered Metropolitan Police buttons, especially the approx. 16mm diameter pocket sized ones. If you have anything of these that you'd like to part with let me know.
  4. I recently purchased this WW2 era Police jacket on Ebay. The buttons are Cheshire Constabulary with the PoW feathers, but the epaulettes have a badge I haven't been able to identify, a shield with six rampant lions on. I believe Cheshire Constabulary should be a matching badge of the PoW feathers. Does anyone recognize who this is for please?
  5. For what it's worth, I don't believe it is an original 1880's jacket as there are a couple of stylistic features that to me would put it later. However, those could maybe at a pinch fit with say a c.1900/01 jacket or within a few years, and if stocks of buttons were being used up or an old hand held onto his older style as long as possible that could make sense. Some posters my recall my thread on the subject of the period kit below: https://gmic.co.uk/topic/54174-metropolitan-police-kit-c1880-1920-what-do-you-have-put-away/?tab=comments#comment-496219 One of the key differences between the later dress tunics which are often used to represent Ripper period jackets is the cuffs. The later dress jackets almost always have plain box cuffs, sometimes faux French/barrel cuffs. In the late 19th/early 20th century period they should have V or lancer cuffs - exactly as here. That to me is a strong piece of evidence in its favour. And I would happily buy jackets like that at £15 all day long.
  6. What an excellent find, and a rare survivor that I'm sure is making a lot of faces envious on screens around the world. Is it possible for you to post a few more images of the interior, as I for one would be very interested to see just how similar and different these early jackets are to the later dress ones that often get used as Victorian tunics. As to replacement buttons, I highly recommend: http://www.goldenagebuttons.co.uk/lists/Police.htm Metropolitan (Type 2). ”Metropolitan Police” in buckle around QVC Horn, one-piece convex, 25 mm. £2.50 Although if you're looking to get exact matches I might have one or two. What maker/style should they have on the back?
  7. It is worth pointing out that it could equally be the ribbon for the 1914 Star, as it is identical to that of the 1914-15 Star (and quite likely a better contender given the officers previous military service and high rank).
  8. Wide left arm against narrow right arm is the standard way to do a V in Roman numerals, eg:
  9. Thanks Alan, that proves my point quite nicely. Admission of guilt is not the same as a criminal conviction. Though Christie admitted to many of the murders they only needed the one conviction to achieve the ultimate punishment and that was what was successfully achieved.
  10. My understanding was as per the following information from his Wiki entry - namely that although guilty of multiple murders he was only ever convicted of one - his wife - essentially on the grounds of it being the one with which a conviction was most likely to be secured (and succeeded): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Christie_(murderer) “Christie was tried only for the murder of his wife Ethel. His trial began on 22 June 1953, in the same court in which Evans had been tried three years earlier. Christie pleaded insanity and claimed to have a poor memory of the events. Dr. Matheson, a doctor at Brixton Prison who evaluated Christie, was called as a witness by the prosecution. He testified that Christie had a hysterical personality but was not insane. The jury rejected Christie's plea, and after deliberating for 85 minutes found him guilty. Christie did not appeal against his conviction.”
  11. Medal Index Card of John Christie confirms entitlement to the standard BWM and VM only. It is interesting to note that the card bears a pencilled inscription of 11 over 5 over 53. This is a simple date code to show that the card was examined on the 11th of May 1953. Given Christies arrest on the 31st March 1953 and trial beginning on the 22nd June the same year it appears that his surviving military records were being checked as part of this process. Given Christie had sold virtually everything of value by the turn of 1952/53 and was reduced to living in near poverty it is likely that his medals (if still surviving in his possession at that time) went the same way before his crimes were detected...
  12. As I understand it, he was actually War Reserve Police, though he is frequently described as being a Special Constable in articles and such, as well as his Wiki entry alternating between the two when referring to his previous Police duties.
  • Create New...