Most ridiculous suspect

[FISHY1118]

clueless is clueless , dont make it out to be anything different.

[Herlock Sholmes]

He had to travel back the next weekend for the finish of the cricket carnival on the 11th and 12th Aug. Thats 200 miles to get there , 200 miles back to kill Tabram on Tues 7th , 200 miles back to Bournemouth for the next sat 11th, and 200 miles back to london for work on the monday 13th ,id like his frequent traveler points thats for sure .

Again, I have to ask if you’re being serious when you make these points? Firstly, as Roger has told you, London to Bournemouth isn’t 200 miles away. It’s actually 106 miles so why are you doubling the distance if not to manufacture a point?

So, if he killed Tabram on the 7th you, for some utterly bizarre, inexplicable reason, think that having 3 or 4 days to take a train journey of 2 hours or so somehow makes Druitt ‘unlikely.’ Druitt could have killed Tabram and walked it to Bournemouth in time. There’s no issue with anyone who feels that Druitt is an unlikely suspect but one thing is for certain, he cannot be dismissed on timings.


Or, kill a Prostitute in Bournemouth on Saturday night and go home for the week .Job done

What do you think that serial killers do after they’ve committed a murder Fishy? They continue with their lives. What else can they do? Again, I just can’t understand why you’re making these point?

Which of the two is in the realms of probability ? and which is not ?

I don’t know who the ripper was. But I’ll talk about likelihood’s. Which of these is the least likely?

a) Druitt commits a murder on the 7th and then 4 days later gets to a location a mere 100 miles away (2 hours by train)

or,

b) Sickert’s in France having a good time with no mention of plans to return anytime soon, travels home by sea, and then by train, to kill Annie Chapman just 2 days later.

No reasonable person could say that b) is the likelier. And yet you feel exactly that.

and the C5 is even better.

Remembering the original reason for this discussion , not wether Druitt was or was not the ripper , but people who vote him as their worse suspect are ''clueless'' and now ''misguided'' thats been added to the list i see .

And I’ll say that you are still inventing something that I’ve proven that I didn’t say. Why are you persisting with a point that is untrue to make a point.

Ill say it again Fishy, bearing in mind that everyone on here can read and understand the English language.

I said that people are ‘clueless’ if they dismiss Druitt out of hand. Which means without due consideration or because they themselves have a suspect or theory to promote. You are simply misrepresenting what I said Fishy. And you won’t even admit this. You just continue with it as if no one will notice.

Not good.

[FISHY1118]

Originally posted by FISHY1118 View Post
So then its also fairly obvious that Druitt was in Bounemouth on the 3rd and 4th of Aug playing in a cricket carnival ,that he would not travel 200 miles to stab Martha Tabram to death on the 7th then travel 200 miles back ?

Why would he have to travel back? Druitt didn’t live in Bournemouth.

Not to mention all the other murders that are attibuted to JTR after Druitt was pulled dead out of the Thames River ?

If they were proven to have been ripper murders then Druitt very obviously couldn’t have been the ripper. But we don’t know. Individuals have opinions but none of us know for certain.

and his cricketing schudule during the C5 murders makes it damm near impossible that Druitt was Jack the Ripper .

He had to travel back the next weekend for the finish of the cricket carnival on the 11th and 12th Aug. Thats 200 miles to get there , 200 miles back to kill Tabram on Tues 7th , 200 miles back to Bournemouth for the next sat 11th, and 200 miles back to london for work on the monday 13th ,id like his frequent traveler points thats for sure .


Or, kill a Prostitute in Bournemouth on Saturday night and go home for the week .Job done

Which of the two is in the realms of probability ? and which is not ?

and the C5 is even better.

Remembering the original reason for this discussion , not wether Druitt was or was not the ripper , but people who vote him as their worse suspect are ''clueless'' and now ''misguided'' thats been added to the list i see .

[Kattrup]

I genuinely think that we can discard the suggestion the Mac simply picked ‘a suicide’ to add to his list.

Herlock, don't worry about it. The suggestion does not even rise to a level of consideration where it becomes necessary to actively discard it.

Someone, somewhere, had suspicions against Druitt. The suspicions could wrong or right in at least two different areas: Druitt's family suspected him of being the Ripper, and Druitt was the Ripper. The two are often conflated. Druitt's family might have suspected him of being the Ripper; that does not mean they were right. Likewise, they might not have suspected him, that does not mean he was NOT the Ripper (for instance, the informant might have had his or her own suspicions against Druitt, but couched them in terms of his family so as to distance him/herself from the role of accuser).

So far, all we know is that someone relayed the suspicion of Druitt's family suspecting him to the police.
I don't think Druitt was the Ripper, but he is a much less weak suspect than most. Putting him in a "worst suspects"-thread along with Sickert and Lewis Carroll etc. is very misguided, I think.

[Herlock Sholmes]

You might like to know....

The St. James Gazette published the Registrar-General's weekly list of deaths nationwide.
The list published Wednesday Jan 2, 1889 there were 52 violent deaths across London, 4 of them were suicides.

However, if we look back to the week following the murder, we find...
The list published Wed. Nov. 14th 1888 there were 50 violent deaths, 13 of them being suicide.
'' '' '' Wed. Nov. 21st there were 60 violent deaths, 3 of them being suicides.
'' '' '' Wed. Nov. 28th no suicides are registered.
'' '' '' Wed. Dec. 5th there were 54 violent deaths, 6 being suicides.
'' '' '' Wed. Dec. 12th there were 62 violent deaths and 5 cases of suicide.
'' '' '' Fri. Dec 28th there were 81? violent deaths, 8 of them being suicides.

So, roughly it appears in London between the murder on Nov. 9th to the first week of Jan 1889, when Druitt's body was found, there had been 39 suicides.
For some reason, for all his faults, the police picked Druitt.
It's not like there was a shortage of corpses to use as a scapegoat if that was their intent.

Thanks for that info Wick

Wasn’t it Farson who said something like ‘it’s Druitt’s unlikeliness as a suspect that makes him intriguing?’ I genuinely think that we can discard the suggestion the Mac simply picked ‘a suicide’ to add to his list.

[drstrange169]

What ever you want can be found.

[Wickerman]

....
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.

You might like to know....

The St. James Gazette published the Registrar-General's weekly list of deaths nationwide.
The list published Wednesday Jan 2, 1889 there were 52 violent deaths across London, 4 of them were suicides.

However, if we look back to the week following the murder, we find...
The list published Wed. Nov. 14th 1888 there were 50 violent deaths, 13 of them being suicide.
'' '' '' Wed. Nov. 21st there were 60 violent deaths, 3 of them being suicides.
'' '' '' Wed. Nov. 28th no suicides are registered.
'' '' '' Wed. Dec. 5th there were 54 violent deaths, 6 being suicides.
'' '' '' Wed. Dec. 12th there were 62 violent deaths and 5 cases of suicide.
'' '' '' Fri. Dec 28th there were 81? violent deaths, 8 of them being suicides.

So, roughly it appears in London between the murder on Nov. 9th to the first week of Jan 1889, when Druitt's body was found, there had been 39 suicides.
For some reason, for all his faults, the police picked Druitt.
It's not like there was a shortage of corpses to use as a scapegoat if that was their intent.

[FISHY1118]

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.

''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.''

It was your error not mine , Baron already called you out on that , stop jumping up and down trying to justify it .


''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''.

The same can be said for Druitt , the case against him also points very strongly he wasnst the ripper, how about staying in them same realms of reality where he is concerned ?. And im not just talking about Martha Tabram either ,but you still called people ''clueless''

I couldnt be bothered really with the last two points . im tired of people hiding behind their words which they can twist and contort to have 3/4 different meanings, Baron worked that out a long time ago ,and so have i . Wheres the letter ............ Anyone?

[The Baron]

I don't concider Maybrick to be a suspect, not even a person of interest, he has nothing to do with this case than Pink Panter does.


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

[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

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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.