Most ridiculous suspect

[FISHY1118]

Not worth responding to rubbish like this apart from…..



How can it be a ‘nothing phrase’ if it’s actually in a Dictionary Of Phrases. Staggering ignorance.

Its a nothing phase when regarding druit , only your ignorance is on display for all to see.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Hi RJ,

I too would be circumspect if I was telling porkies about a Ripper suspect.

And as for Anderson, well you know the old gag. Q. How do you know he's lying? A. His lips are moving.

Hope you're well.

Simon

What evidence is there that he was lying Simon?

[Simon Wood]

Hi RJ,

I too would be circumspect if I was telling porkies about a Ripper suspect.

And as for Anderson, well you know the old gag. Q. How do you know he's lying? A. His lips are moving.

Hope you're well.

Simon

[Herlock Sholmes]

Im not so sure about that Herlock.

As you know, Ive often said all the ripper suspects are weak, some just less weaker than others. But I think weve heard his name.

Out of my list of least weak named ripper suspects- Hutch, Bury, chapman, kelly, Koz, lech, Druitt, one by itself is weak. But its kind of like the saying about one stick is easy to break but a bundle together is hard. Put them all together and I think we have a better chance than not that the ripper is in there. add in names like Barnett, richardson, Bowyer, flemming, tumblety, and it gets a little stronger still. add in all the names associated with the case-other witnesses, police, long shot suspects and id say that number rises to almost a near certainty.

IMHO weve heard his name before.

I certainly wouldn’t say that he couldn’t be somewhere in the list of named suspects Abby.

[Herlock Sholmes]

I would posit "Judgement Day" or a "time machine" to avoid the side argument of how reliable the "sealed envelope" is. But your point is still valid- it's the same idea put out by (?Fido) of when the Ripper's name is revealed, we're all going to say "Who?".

Personally, I suspect that if ALL of the police/ asylum/ etc. records had survived and were available to researchers, the Ripper's NAME would be there someplace, probably in some unrelated incident (dog-muzzling incident for Koz, assault for several others). If he was a British citizen, it's likely he's in the Census records. But WHERE? (Remember that no one has found a reliable record in the Census for the woman we call "Mary Kelly" by that name.) If he/his family were immigrants, it's likely that there's some sort of record there. But WHERE? It's even quite likely that he was caught up in the police sweeps for the Ripper. But all were cleared, with only some suspicion left lingering on a few, such as Tumblety, Kosminsky, etc. (I suspect that Ostrog probably WAS suspected for a time, but eventually he couldn't be connected to the killings. However Bureaucratic Inertia kept him on the lists. McNaughton may have never known that he was in a French prison at the time.) And all of the contemporary suspects suffer the Saddler problem- no matter how good of a suspect they might be for a PARTICULAR killing, NOT ONE of them could be linked to any TWO or more of the killings. Which is the attraction of most of the modern suspects- it's a "Government Conspiracy, so They are lying about the whereabouts of Prince Eddy/Dr. Gull/the Prime Minister/ Darwin/ JWB/Tom Sawyer/Tarzan/Prof. Moriarty/ etc".

Druitt is a more likely than many that have been suggested, but to go ANY further than that is only speculation- we do not know why his family suspected him (if they actually DID), or what any police investigation revealed, or even if there WAS one. I do believe that the information came to the Police AFTER his suicide and there probably was some sort of follow-up, which must have been inconclusive.

J. Maybrick- all questions about the history of the diary itself aside, without the diary how likely is he as a suspect?

Good points CF. All that we can do is to remain open minded imo. None of us can name the ripper and the majority of the suspects, however weak or strong in our individual opinions, cannot be categorically dismissed by evidence. What should be avoided is any temptation to dismiss a suspect because of any preconceptions either as to the killers identity, a particular theory or any notion of what type of person the killer might have been. We find that this kind of bias rears it’s head occasionally on here with a minority of posters. When someone appears so ‘passionate’ or even ‘gleeful’ about dismissing a suspect it’s a fair bet that an agenda is lurking. However we as individuals assess Druitt the fact that he was mentioned by Sir Melville MacNaughten alone; just that one fact, makes him worthy of consideration and ahead of the majority of suspects. Mention truly unlikely suspects like Gull, Sickert etc and no one bats an eyelid, mention a suspect that was named the Chief Constable of The Metropolitan Police and certain people foam at the mouth. That’s ripperology, sadly.

[Abby Normal]

Well said Tristan. If we had the rippers name in a sealed envelope and we all had to bet £1000 on the name I’d vote that it was probably a name that none of us have ever heard of.

Im not so sure about that Herlock.

As you know, Ive often said all the ripper suspects are weak, some just less weaker than others. But I think weve heard his name.

Out of my list of least weak named ripper suspects- Hutch, Bury, chapman, kelly, Koz, lech, Druitt, one by itself is weak. But its kind of like the saying about one stick is easy to break but a bundle together is hard. Put them all together and I think we have a better chance than not that the ripper is in there. add in names like Barnett, richardson, Bowyer, flemming, tumblety, and it gets a little stronger still. add in all the names associated with the case-other witnesses, police, long shot suspects and id say that number rises to almost a near certainty.

IMHO weve heard his name before.

[C. F. Leon]

Being a professional "gentleman" from such an illustrious family, Monty is kind of the antithesis of who one would expect to see on such a list at that time.

But he fits the popular image of the Ripper- "The Toff with the black bag", especially with the misidentification of "the insane doctor that drowned himself". And we know THAT story started very quickly around that time.

The "three insane medical students" story has always intrigued me- how did that contribute to the popular "Killer Doctor" image of the Ripper?

We have:
- Druitt drowning himself
- Leo Goldstein with his black bag
- 3 insane medical students
- "Dr. Tumblety"

which eventually results in the "Dr. Stanley", "Dr. Pedichenko" and "Dr. Gull/Royal Conspiracy" stories.

[rjpalmer]

Why do we believe Macnaghten believed Druitt was the murderer?

He could by lying, Simon, but if so, he is certainly being circumspect about it.

Anderson is the only one who is insistent, and that is often a bad sign.

[C. F. Leon]

Well said Tristan. If we had the rippers name in a sealed envelope and we all had to bet £1000 on the name I’d vote that it was probably a name that none of us have ever heard of.

I would posit "Judgement Day" or a "time machine" to avoid the side argument of how reliable the "sealed envelope" is. But your point is still valid- it's the same idea put out by (?Fido) of when the Ripper's name is revealed, we're all going to say "Who?".

Personally, I suspect that if ALL of the police/ asylum/ etc. records had survived and were available to researchers, the Ripper's NAME would be there someplace, probably in some unrelated incident (dog-muzzling incident for Koz, assault for several others). If he was a British citizen, it's likely he's in the Census records. But WHERE? (Remember that no one has found a reliable record in the Census for the woman we call "Mary Kelly" by that name.) If he/his family were immigrants, it's likely that there's some sort of record there. But WHERE? It's even quite likely that he was caught up in the police sweeps for the Ripper. But all were cleared, with only some suspicion left lingering on a few, such as Tumblety, Kosminsky, etc. (I suspect that Ostrog probably WAS suspected for a time, but eventually he couldn't be connected to the killings. However Bureaucratic Inertia kept him on the lists. McNaughton may have never known that he was in a French prison at the time.) And all of the contemporary suspects suffer the Saddler problem- no matter how good of a suspect they might be for a PARTICULAR killing, NOT ONE of them could be linked to any TWO or more of the killings. Which is the attraction of most of the modern suspects- it's a "Government Conspiracy, so They are lying about the whereabouts of Prince Eddy/Dr. Gull/the Prime Minister/ Darwin/ JWB/Tom Sawyer/Tarzan/Prof. Moriarty/ etc".

Druitt is a more likely than many that have been suggested, but to go ANY further than that is only speculation- we do not know why his family suspected him (if they actually DID), or what any police investigation revealed, or even if there WAS one. I do believe that the information came to the Police AFTER his suicide and there probably was some sort of follow-up, which must have been inconclusive.

J. Maybrick- all questions about the history of the diary itself aside, without the diary how likely is he as a suspect?

[Herlock Sholmes]

And the provenance of this story is in no way better than the provenance of the Maybrick's faked diary.


Even more, the source of this didn't get the basic information about Druitt right, his age and occupation, and that shows he didn't know the family well to relay on.

And Macnaghten, the tea merchant, didn't do the slightest of investigation into Druitt either.


On the top of the most ridiculous suspects for me.



The Baron

[Abby Normal]

Hi Abby,

There’s this guy.

https://www.france24.com/en/europe/20211001-former-policeman-s-suicide-ends-35-year-hunt-for-french-serial-killer

He’d left a suicide note confessing to his crimes and DNA has proved him guilty.

This serial killer committed suicide too.

https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/mass-murderer-wilder-commits-suicide

I’m certainly not disputing that it’s probably a rarity though Abby. As you said though it might have been that some knew of his guilt. Speculation of course.

thanks herlock
I could definitely see it as more probable if he thought he was suspected.

[The Baron]

Why do we believe Macnaghten believed Druitt was the murderer?

Out of hand Simon





The Baron

[Simon Wood]

Why do we believe Macnaghten believed Druitt was the murderer?

[Ms Diddles]

Hi Ms Diddles,

MM must have believed he had good reasons at the time to suspect any of these men more than Cutbush.

One caveat I have is that times have changed - a lot - and what was looked for in the LVP, as 'evidence' of the deviant nature likely to lead to such crimes, may have been very different from what is considered to be evidence today.

To pick the obvious example, modern serial killers rarely if ever commit suicide until they are in custody and physically prevented from feeding their addiction to murder. I don't know if it would have been different back then. I suspect it was a combination of Druitt's alleged 'sexual insanity', and the timing of his suicide coupled with the theory - by 'normal' men - that the murderer's brain must have given way after Miller's Court, that sowed the seeds - none of which would have the same effect today.

Druitt's family connections brought him to MM's attention, which is also slightly troubling, as there must have been other men who fit the same broad criteria but just didn't enter MM's thinking. We'll never know if there was anything much more specific in that private information to incriminate him, but if there was, would he still have been just one of three on MM's list?

Love,

Caz
X

It's a valid point, Caz!

I'm sure that notions of offending behaviour / psychology will have changed considerably over the years.

Of the three named suspects on the MM, Koz and Ostrog fit the classic notions of a mad man and a wrong 'un.

I find Druitt's inclusion the most intriguing.

Was it simply his "sexual insanity" combined with the timing of his suicide as stated, or is there something much more incriminating in the private information?

I'm resigned to the fact that we will never know!

Being a professional "gentleman" from such an illustrious family, Monty is kind of the antithesis of who one would expect to see on such a list at that time.

That just makes me wonder if there is something more in that private information which resulted in his inclusion.

[The Baron]

But the evidence used to place him as a suspect is hearsay e.g "somebody told me" or "I heard" "somebody said to me" "i was told"

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

And the provenance of this story is in no way better than the provenance of the Maybrick's faked diary.


Even more, the source of this didn't get the basic information about Druitt right, his age and occupation, and that shows he didn't know the family well to relay on.

And Macnaghten, the tea merchant, didn't do the slightest of investigation into Druitt either.


On the top of the most ridiculous suspects for me.



The Baron