If solved, what would happen next?

[Sam Flynn]

Hello Jon

There is no evidence whatsoever that Christabel, the Lady Aberconway, had any knowledge of Montague Druitt and his family beyond what her father had told her and what he had written in his 'memo'.

Is there any evidence that Christabel definitely learned this from her father, or is that conjecture? If it is conjecture, then it can only give tentative support to the idea that Sir Melville imparted this knowledge to his daughter.

[Chris]

For a person to be declared guilty of any such crime, a trial would have to take place.
After such a lengthy period has elapsed after the murders, it is almost a certainty that there could be no trial.
The accused is very likely deceased, no witnesses survive, the police records that pertain to the crimes are incomplete and for what physical evidence there may remain, there is no chain of custody.
The British Home Secretary does not have it within their purview to declare a person guilty, simply because of a laypersons untried accusations.

Although of course in the case of Jimmy Savile, the Metropolitan Police and the NSPCC did produce a joint report which in effect declared him guilty of the alleged offences posthumously.

[Caligo Umbrator]

Although of course in the case of Jimmy Savile, the Metropolitan Police and the NSPCC did produce a joint report which in effect declared him guilty of the alleged offences posthumously.

Hi Chris,
Indeed they did do that.
The whole investigation into recent and historical allegations against Mr. Savile involved the Met., the NSPCC, the CPS and the NHS - covering 28 regional hospitals. Over 30 Met. Officers were engaged for almost 2 years on the case.
There was also a secondary investigation undertaken by the BBC, who had employed J.S. for most of his career.
In all, about 450 victims of abuse came forward, over 600 statements were taken and at the end of the investigations over 200 offences were recorded against Mr. Savile.

The point of all the above is that there were living witnesses and significant evidence to back up the claims made by the victims.

In the JTR case there are no witnesses and, there is, in terms of physical evidence, very little - perhaps a shawl from a crime scene.
Though as you have pointed out on other threads there is some very significant doubt about even that piece of evidence.

So I'd agree there is a precedent that could be used to formally declare a particular person guilty of the crimes of JTR, however the cost of the investigation and the unlikelihood that the evidence would meet any prosecutable standard make such a proposition remote

Your Caligo.