Most ridiculous suspect

[Darryl Kenyon]

Firstly, the Maybrick scrapbook makes a clear prediction: it predicts that Florence Maybrick's initials will be found in Mary Kelly's room.

Ike

Or the forger of the diary when researching the ripper saw what he thought could be discerned as an F M in one of the photo's and ran with it.

[Herlock Sholmes]

"Yes," said Mr. Abberline, "I know all about that story. But what does it amount to? Simply this. Soon after the last murder in Whitechapel the body of a young doctor was found in the Thames, but there is absolutely nothing beyond the fact that he was found at that time to incriminate him. A report was made to the Home Office about the matter, but that it was 'considered final and conclusive' is going altogether beyond the truth"



It amounts for nothing Roger, "absolutely' is the critical word here. The fact that he was found at a time to incriminate him means nothing, thats no evidence in itself at all, and Abberline said he knows ALL about that STORY.

It is no differenat than saying Pink Panter was in London at the time in order to incriminate him.



The Baron

Unless you’re suggesting that MacNaughten, on receiving his information, thought “well I must drop the retired Fred Abberline a line and tell him all about this,” then we can’t say that Abberline knew everything about Druitt. It’s a very silly suggestion. He knew what he knew. Abberline is irrelevant to the Druitt story. His opinion counts for next to nothing.

How come Abberline knowing nothing about the alleged identification of Kosminski isn’t a problem? It appears that where Druitt is concerned a different set of ‘rules’ apply. Just like the different rules that you’ve previously applied to MacNaughten.

[rjpalmer]

It amounts for nothing Roger, "absolutely' is the critical word here. The fact that he was found at a time to incriminate him means nothing, thats no evidence in itself at all, and Abberline said he knows ALL about that STORY.

Yes, Baron, but did Abberline really know 'ALL' the story, or was it a case of 'he only thought he knew'?

Abberline retired in early 1892, and at that point Mac had only been at Scotland Yard for two-and-a-half years. So there's wiggling room for Mac's "private information" to have been received after Abberline's retirement. That doesn't make MJD the Ripper, but it does dull the edge of Abberline's criticism.

Further, what about my final point?

Consider the case of Edward Buchan. He nearly cut his own head off with a knife in late November 1888, and Buchan actually lived in the East End.

"A determined case of suicide occurred in Poplar on Monday morning. A Marine stores dealer, named Edward Buchan, aged 29 years, carrying on business at 42 Robin Hood Lane, cut his own throat with a knife."

"It appears that shortly after ten o'clock a sister of the man heard a strange noise, and on entering the back shop saw Buchan in the act of cutting his throat. She raised an alarm and the father came to her assistance and attempted to take the knife from the man's hand, but failed, and cut his own hand badly in the attempt. Dr. Skelly was at once summoned, but Buchan died shortly after. He had nearly severed his head from his body. He had been strange in his manner for some time past. The body was subsequently removed to the mortuary, to await a coroner's inquest."


Yet Druitt, a mere drowning victim in Chiswick, becomes considerably more than a blip on the Met's radar, but by all indications Buchan doesn't.

The circumstances strike me as a little odd. What Caz argues about Maybrick is far more true of Druitt: outwardly, he strikes most commentators as a very poor suspect indeed, with no reason to suspect him.

Yet, there Druitt is: in the MEPO files.

I've never been convinced that anyone has ever come up with an entirely satisfactory explanation for why that is.

[JeffHamm]

Hello Jeff,

Looking closer I see that the first ‘hump’ of the ‘m’ has a solid horizontal line which makes it appear as an ‘A.’ The first line of the second ‘hump’ is more faint and with a small space with no blood which hints that the two ‘humps’ aren’t necessarily connected. The squiggle beneath the second hump is also in as solid lines as the rest of the ‘m’ and with no similarly thick lines anywhere near suggesting to me that the ‘squiggle’ is part of the whole mark. To get an ‘m’ we have to erase that horizontal line and the squiggle.

Also just below the ‘M’ we appear to have the word ‘GET’ written rather clearly all things being considered?

Ah, yes, I see those too (tried to fill them in below). In fact, I think the squiggle is probably a 2, and it's superimposed over a 2nd A (So AA2). Also, there's another human figure to the right, happy and well dressed, and a Scotty Dog above. There's the "skeleton man" above that, another face right beside skeleton man's, and a more faint, but discernible deamonic type head to the right of that, near the downward arrow

You know, I think we're starting to prove the murder must have been at 3:30-4:00 as it would take a long time to do all the artwork.



- Jeff

[Abby Normal]

Ah, yes, I see those too (tried to fill them in below). In fact, I think the squiggle is probably a 2, and it's superimposed over a 2nd A (So AA2). Also, there's another human figure to the right, happy and well dressed, and a Scotty Dog above.

You know, I think we're starting to prove the murder must have been at 3:30-4:00 as it would take a long time to do all the artwork.



- Jeff

lol I saw the little smiling humpty dumpty man on the bottom right too. what a pair- Zombie man and the egghead. both staring at the remains of kelly. *shudders

[Herlock Sholmes]

Yes, Baron, but did Abberline really know 'ALL' the story, or was it a case of 'he only thought he knew'?

Abberline retired in early 1892, and at that point Mac had only been at Scotland Yard for two-and-a-half years. So there's wiggling room for Mac's "private information" to have been received after Abberline's retirement. That doesn't make MJD the Ripper, but it does dull the edge of Abberline's criticism.

Further, what about my final point?

Consider the case of Edward Buchan. He nearly cut his own head off with a knife in late November 1888, and Buchan actually lived in the East End.

"A determined case of suicide occurred in Poplar on Monday morning. A Marine stores dealer, named Edward Buchan, aged 29 years, carrying on business at 42 Robin Hood Lane, cut his own throat with a knife."

"It appears that shortly after ten o'clock a sister of the man heard a strange noise, and on entering the back shop saw Buchan in the act of cutting his throat. She raised an alarm and the father came to her assistance and attempted to take the knife from the man's hand, but failed, and cut his own hand badly in the attempt. Dr. Skelly was at once summoned, but Buchan died shortly after. He had nearly severed his head from his body. He had been strange in his manner for some time past. The body was subsequently removed to the mortuary, to await a coroner's inquest."


Yet Druitt, a mere drowning victim in Chiswick, becomes considerably more than a blip on the Met's radar, but by all indications Buchan doesn't.

The circumstances strike me as a little odd. What Caz argues about Maybrick is far more true of Druitt: outwardly, he strikes most commentators as a very poor suspect indeed, with no reason to suspect him.

Yet, there Druitt is: in the MEPO files.

I've never been convinced that anyone has ever come up with an entirely satisfactory explanation for why that is.

As I’ve asked many times Roger if, as some suggest, MacNaghten was simply compiling a list of random pseudo-suspects that he could claim were ‘better than Cutbush’ (to give the lie to the story in The Sun) why choose Druitt? With all of the resources he had to hand why not any random recently dead criminal or ‘lunatic?’ Instead he chooses a well-to-do Barrister/Schoolteacher with no criminal record. A man who, for all that Mac knew, might have had a discoverable alibi for any of the murders (unlike a random nobody whose life would have been far less traceable.) And finally, why was it so important to find a suspect who died after Kelly when many people (including Munro, who Mac greatly admired and respected) believed Mackenzie to have been a victim?

The suggestion that he simply plucked Druitt out of thin air doesn’t stand up to scrutiny. It doesn’t mean that Druitt was the ripper of course because he could have been mistaken but it shows that MacNaughten felt that he had valid reasons for naming him as a suspect. Therefore there might actually have been very valid reasons at the time for doing so. This is only one of the reasons why I feel that Druitt is far too easily dismissed by some.

[Abby Normal]

As I’ve asked many times Roger if, as some suggest, MacNaghten was simply compiling a list of random pseudo-suspects that he could claim were ‘better than Cutbush’ (to give the lie to the story in The Sun) why choose Druitt? With all of the resources he had to hand why not any random recently dead criminal or ‘lunatic?’ Instead he chooses a well-to-do Barrister/Schoolteacher with no criminal record. A man who, for all that Mac knew, might have had a discoverable alibi for any of the murders (unlike a random nobody whose life would have been far less traceable.) And finally, why was it so important to find a suspect who died after Kelly when many people (including Munro, who Mac greatly admired and respected) believed Mackenzie to have been a victim?

The suggestion that he simply plucked Druitt out of thin air doesn’t stand up to scrutiny. It doesn’t mean that Druitt was the ripper of course because he could have been mistaken but it shows that MacNaughten felt that he had valid reasons for naming him as a suspect. Therefore there might actually have been very valid reasons at the time for doing so. This is only one of the reasons why I feel that Druitt is far too easily dismissed by some.

hi herlock
he was suspected of being the ripper by a family member and or friend of the family who relayed this to MM. it would be fascinating to know why they suspected him, but it must be something pretty bad to have made such an impression on MM.

[GBinOz]

Also just below the ‘M’ we appear to have the word ‘GET’ written rather clearly all things being considered?

Interesting. I saw that as the face of a cat. And directly above it, the face of a fox.
Cheers, George

[Aethelwulf]

Ah, yes, I see those too (tried to fill them in below). In fact, I think the squiggle is probably a 2, and it's superimposed over a 2nd A (So AA2). Also, there's another human figure to the right, happy and well dressed, and a Scotty Dog above. There's the "skeleton man" above that, another face right beside skeleton man's, and a more faint, but discernible deamonic type head to the right of that, near the downward arrow

You know, I think we're starting to prove the murder must have been at 3:30-4:00 as it would take a long time to do all the artwork.



- Jeff

Stop it Jeff - that perky little scotty dog set me off on a fit of the giggles. Ike must be sat in a dark room with steam coming out of his ears!

If you go back to original and combine the 'AA' with the 'GET' area you can make a little cat face.

[Herlock Sholmes]

hi herlock
he was suspected of being the ripper by a family member and or friend of the family who relayed this to MM. it would be fascinating to know why they suspected him, but it must be something pretty bad to have made such an impression on MM.

Hi Abby.

Yes this is what’s intriguing. We don’t know of course so we can’t assume but I just don’t think that MacNaughten added his name to the list of three at random. Let’s face it, we know that the Druitt family were related by marriage to one of Mac’s best friends and we know how that class tended to stick together and their horror of scandal. Of course any suspicion about Druitt might have been unfounded, maybe he was acting suspiciously in general or acted in a suspicious way on a night or two of the murders but it wasn’t actually connected to the murders but it might have been. Perhaps they found something (a knife or an item of bloodied clothing or even a note?) We have no way of knowing and we’re unlikely to ever know 133 years later but we know from the record that it appeared that serious things that were going on in the family at that time plus he was sacked from the school but we don’t know why. I find him the most interesting suspect but others disagree and I’ve got no issue with that but we have no grounds for dismissing him point blank.

[FISHY1118]

nah im done here. you and and baron have shown your true colors, calling druitt and lechmere , de facto suspects at that, ridiculous while touting actual ridiculous crackpot suspects like sickert. not worthy of further discussion for me.

Firstly Abby i never said either Druitt or Lechmere were defacto [strange choice of words but anyway ] supects . I merely pointed out that to label any one thats excludes Druitt from being a suspect as ''clueless'' was over the top and stupid in my opinion. When, as stated there is more than enough evidence of information that lets one make that decision to leave him out . Are you with me so far ? .

Now as for sickert , and again go back if you like over my post if you like, ive said i dont think Sicker was jack the ripper, but what erks me is when posters consistantly state as ''Fact'' the he was in France at the time of the murders , in perticular the chapman murder when no such evidence that ive seen of this exist.

Either find some like ive suggested, and ill shut up. [and i mean the Mrs Sickert letter with the 6th sept 1888 date would be a start , or when posters continue to just assume he was in France based on what people may have said or written at the time [or since] that can be open to interpetation not fact , then i will call then out on every occasion .

So like Druitt, and yes Maybrick [god knows why ], Walter Sickert has every right to be considered a ripper suspect.

[Abby Normal]

Hi Abby.

Yes this is what’s intriguing. We don’t know of course so we can’t assume but I just don’t think that MacNaughten added his name to the list of three at random. Let’s face it, we know that the Druitt family were related by marriage to one of Mac’s best friends and we know how that class tended to stick together and their horror of scandal. Of course any suspicion about Druitt might have been unfounded, maybe he was acting suspiciously in general or acted in a suspicious way on a night or two of the murders but it wasn’t actually connected to the murders but it might have been. Perhaps they found something (a knife or an item of bloodied clothing or even a note?) We have no way of knowing and we’re unlikely to ever know 133 years later but we know from the record that it appeared that serious things that were going on in the family at that time plus he was sacked from the school but we don’t know why. I find him the most interesting suspect but others disagree and I’ve got no issue with that but we have no grounds for dismissing him point blank.

yup. and good point about serious things going on with the family and druitt at the time. I hadnt really thought about that angle before. its common knowledge now in serial murder cases that stressors in the perps life can and often do trigger them to kill. interesting, must ponder upon it a bit more.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Firstly Abby i never said either Druitt or Lechmere were defacto [strange choice of words but anyway ] supects . I merely pointed out that to label any one thats excludes Druitt from being a suspect as ''clueless'' was over the top and stupid in my opinion. When, as stated there is more than enough evidence of information that lets one make that decision to leave him out . Are you with me so far ? .

Why are you persisting on this point in the face of incontrovertible, black and white, unmissable, impossible-to-misinterpret evidence that I said no such thing. Why do you find it so hard to admit to being in error when you accuse me of saying something that I clearly didn’t? We’ve been here before Fishy.

Now as for sickert , and again go back if you like over my post if you like, ive said i dont think Sicker was jack the ripper, but what erks me is when posters consistantly state as ''Fact'' the he was in France at the time of the murders , in perticular the chapman murder when no such evidence that ive seen of this exist.

Again, I didn’t say that it was a “fact” that he was in France at the time of the Chapman murder. I said that evidence points very strongly in favour of him being in France.

Either find some like ive suggested, and ill shut up. [and i mean the Mrs Sickert letter with the 6th sept 1888 date would be a start , or when posters continue to just assume he was in France based on what people may have said or written at the time [or since] that can be open to interpetation not fact , then i will call then out on every occasion .

Again, you are accusing me, and others, of stating this as a fact. We aren’t. Just that the balance of probabilities point that way.

So like Druitt, and yes Maybrick [god knows why ], Walter Sickert has every right to be considered a ripper suspect.

Anyone can name anyone as a suspect and like most suspects Sickert cannot definitively be dismissed. Who has stated otherwise?

Its down to the individual how they rate a particular suspect. We still need to stay within the realms of reality though and avoid making silly points ( like Druitt being unlikely because he was a 100 miles away 3 days before a murder!) or by resorting to accusing someone of saying something that they haven’t said.

[The Baron]

nah im done here. you and and baron have shown your true colors, calling druitt and lechmere , de facto suspects at that, ridiculous while touting actual ridiculous crackpot suspects like sickert. not worthy of further discussion for me.

And what is your true color Abby?!

Druitt is the most ridiculous suspect for me, Lechmere comes in a closed second, do you have problem with that? You just have to live with it.

And since when I was interested in discussing with you?

You still say Lechmere didn't rise an alarm when he found Nichols.. discussing with you is like trying to convince a diary believer that there is no FM writting on the wall.

Just stay well man.



The Baron

[Abby Normal]

And what is your true color Abby?!

Druitt is the most ridiculous suspect for me, Lechmere comes in a closed second, do you have problem with that? You just have to live with it.

And since when I was interested in discussing with you?

You still say Lechmere didn't rise an alarm when he found Nichols.. discussing with you is like trying to convince a diary believer that there is no FM writting on the wall.

Just stay well man.



The Baron

druitt and lechmere are more ridiculous to you than maybrick? lewis carroll? Van Gogh? lol