Home office report

[glyn]

[B]As for Druitt, I get a vague impression that some here,or at least in "Ripperworld" generally,know far more about Druitt than You maybe right, but without written/documentary support it would remain hearsay. Family "oral" history may be interesting, but it could be challenged.
What proof could the family hold - a hitherto unrevealed suicide note and confession? MJD's bloody overcoat and hunting knife? Otherwise it would just be rumour.

Phil

Maybe confirmation that Druitt was/wasnt a contemporary suspect?

[Trevor Marriott]

What as in credible ripperologist?



Are you arguing that Prince Eddie or James Maybrick was JtR?



Which first point Phil? I simply stated that as Suspects AK seems a better fit than MJD. And I provided fairly solid reasoning for that conclusion.



Why have you come across another possibility in the record base?

Retorical. No you havent



Well yes he could have done. But we do have examples of other serial killers. And while there are examples of serial killers tralling to a specific area or club to pick up victims, they are the exception to the rule.



OK we'll just through all expert opinion out the window and make it all up as we go along.



Well i cant think of any, who did you have in mind the elephant man?

Surely what we are doing here is considering the viability of a suspect.



Yes but my piont was that it didnt apply to Druit where as it does to AK. Admittedly hardly damn in itself. What we are considering is the weight of evidence. Even though in both cases there is not a lot (although better than most)



We do know that AK's family were in Greenfeild street and at the time of teh murders MJD was in Blackheath.



No its only strange to a complete dig bat. To everyone else it seems perfectly logical that if Druit were JtR it seems more feesable to have had a wide spread of kills....the logic for this is simply that prostitution was common in many parts of London not just Whitchapel



You could try and argue that Phil but you'd look pretty silly...but I'm game for a laugh if you are



Kosminski was the suspect

Pirate

I think you ought to define suspect when talking about some of these candidates for JTR as in "likely" and "prime" there is a big differnece between the two catergories and most dont even fit into any of the two.

[Jeff Leahy]

I think you ought to define suspect when talking about some of these candidates for JTR as in "likely" and "prime" there is a big differnece between the two catergories and most dont even fit into any of the two.

Well your an ex policeman Trevor so perhaps you have more specific interpretation of the word 'Suspect'?

But Kosminski, Druit, Chapman and Tumbelty were 'contempary suspects' in that they were considered by those that investigated the murders.

We have documention to suport those claims. The Macnaughten memoranda, The Little Child Letter, TLSOMOL, Abberlines press reports about Chapman (a known serial killer) and of course the Swanson Marginalia...

THis is real evidence. And if they fit into either catigory we dont know because so much information has been lost or destroyed.

Pirate

[Chris]

Doesnt it also depend on whether Swansons.. "Kosminski was the suspect"... was genuine or a forgery? (as has been suggested by some)

Well, I don't believe it is a forgery, but even if it were, we would still have Macnaghten's statement that 'Kosminski' was put into an asylum, and no one has ever managed to find an alternative asylum inmate with that surname either.

On a side note,can anyone give an opinion why Kosminski (according to Swanson) would have had his hands "tied behind his back" when taken for the supposed identification?Surely if taken by the Police ,he would have been handcuffed,not hogtied?And wouldnt the usual practice be to take the witness to the suspect,not the other way round?

That referred to his being sent to the workhouse, not to the identification. I don't think it's ever been suggested that the police took him to the workhouse.

[Trevor Marriott]

Well your an ex policeman Trevor so perhaps you have more specific interpretation of the word 'Suspect'?

But Kosminski, Druit, Chapman and Tumbelty were 'contempary suspects' in that they were considered by those that investigated the murders.

We have documention to suport those claims. The Macnaughten memoranda, The Little Child Letter, TLSOMOL, Abberlines press reports about Chapman (a known serial killer) and of course the Swanson Marginalia...

THis is real evidence. And if they fit into either catigory we dont know because so much information has been lost or destroyed.

Pirate

There has to be more than a name. In the case of the officers who later named some of these one has to ask what their real motives were. If they were regarded as any form of a suspect in 1888 where is the proof from the time of the murders. If they were looked upon in any way as suspects at that time it would have been recorded somewhere.

The old excuse of saying evidence was lost or stolen is wearing thin now the truth is there was none in the first place to be stolen or lost.

The truth is that Swanson,Anderson, Macnaghten ,Abberline all came up with different names doesnt that say something for their credibilty and the evidnetial value of what they said

[Trevor Marriott]

Well your an ex policeman Trevor so perhaps you have more specific interpretation of the word 'Suspect'?

But Kosminski, Druit, Chapman and Tumbelty were 'contempary suspects' in that they were considered by those that investigated the murders.

We have documention to suport those claims. The Macnaughten memoranda, The Little Child Letter, TLSOMOL, Abberlines press reports about Chapman (a known serial killer) and of course the Swanson Marginalia...

THis is real evidence. And if they fit into either catigory we dont know because so much information has been lost or destroyed.

Pirate

I should also mention that the Macnaghten memo and the Swanson Marginalia do not stand up to close scrutiny either

[Jeff Leahy]

There has to be more than a name. In the case of the officers who later named some of these one has to ask what their real motives were. If they were regarded as any form of a suspect in 1888 where is the proof from the time of the murders. If they were looked upon in any way as suspects at that time it would have been recorded somewhere.

The old excuse of saying evidence was lost or stolen is wearing thin now the truth is there was none in the first place to be stolen or lost.

The truth is that Swanson,Anderson, Macnaghten ,Abberline all came up with different names doesnt that say something for their credibilty and the evidnetial value of what they said

Well yes its frustrating. But there must have been files on Kosminski, Ostrog and Druitt....We dont have them, they are gone, no more...

And your wrong in saying that Swanson and Anderson didnt agree....it would appear from any obvious reading of the Marginalia that they did..

And the story swanson tells is pretty clear also...

A suspect taken with difficulty and positively identified...

I dont see how much clearer that could be?

And of course we have the possibility that someone did witness one of the victims being murdered....a possibility that what they are saying did indeed happen...

And yes its problematic.....but considerably less so than anyother Jack teh Ripper theory you care to mention. Including Sailors.

Pirate

[Jeff Leahy]

I should also mention that the Macnaghten memo and the Swanson Marginalia do not stand up to close scrutiny either

They appear to contain factual errors...

Ho9wever throwing the baby out with the bath water has never made much sense to me.

Pirate

[Trevor Marriott]

They appear to contain factual errors...

Ho9wever throwing the baby out with the bath water has never made much sense to me.

Pirate

And of course we must not forget good old Major Smith of The City of London Police in his memoirs he stated the police did not have a clue as to the identity of the killer or killers.

He mentions nothing about any suspect or suspects nor does he mention anyhting about the so called watch kept on Kosminski by the City police.

So who is lying Major Smith or Anderson,Swanson,Abberline,Macnaghten.

I know where my money is going if it becomes a betting heat

I doubt in any event the city police would have been keeping watch on a house or someone from within another police force, and besides why would they keep watch on him there had been no murders when he was supposedly looked at by the police.

[Jeff Leahy]

And of course we must not forget good old Major Smith of The City of London Police in his memoirs he stated the police did not have a clue as to the identity of the killer or killers.

He mentions nothing about any suspect or suspects nor does he mention anyhting about the so called watch kept on Kosminski by the City police.

So who is lying Major Smith or Anderson,Swanson,Abberline,Macnaghten.

I know where my money is going if it becomes a betting heat

I doubt in any event the city police would have been keeping watch on a house or someone from within another police force, and besides why would they keep watch on him there had been no murders when he was supposedly looked at by the police.

Your not really going to quote Major Smith, the most unreliable source in the whole case, at me, surely?

I wonder if he read Cox and Sagars reports?

Pirate

[Trevor Marriott]

Your not really going to quote Major Smith, the most unreliable source in the whole case, at me, surely?

I wonder if he read Cox and Sagars reports?

Pirate

Well he is as reliable as the others why would he say they didnt have a clue what mileage could he have gained the answer is none.

Where as all the others had hidden agendas.

[Jeff Leahy]

The Manchester Guardian observed that Smiths tone became " a little incoherent" when he wrote 'of blunders of the headsd of the MET, especially Sir Robert Anderson"

The yorkshire post commented on the books subtitle, pointing out that smith never served a day in the ranks and that his position and subsequent promotions were achieved by favour.

Shall I go on? Washing hands etc....lol

Smith was not a serious policeman ..Swanson was...

Pirate

[jason_c]

Well he is as reliable as the others why would he say they didnt have a clue what mileage could he have gained the answer is none.

Where as all the others had hidden agendas.

As do you Trevor. You have your own favoured suspect. Its therefore natural that you dismiss MacNaghten and Anderson while favouring Smith.


.

[Trevor Marriott]

As do you Trevor. You have your own favoured suspect. Its therefore natural that you dismiss MacNaghten and Anderson while favouring Smith.


.

I must also ask another question then about Major Smith and The City Police.

How come there are no city records showing all this work that they are supposed to have put in watching Kosminski etc .

Now that would be a coincidence if that like all the met stuff was also "lost" or "stolen" as you suggest would it not.

As I said before its to easy to say all the relevant documemnts etc were lost or stolen. If they were lost or stolen how come other stuff has survived. After all,the only records there could have been are on a par to what we have now from the very contentious police officers memoirs that ABCD were likely suspects.

I dont doubt that at some point Aaron Kosminski,Thomas Cutbush came to the notice of the police as a result of them being involved in incidents where knives were used, as did many other people during the period of the murders. Ostrogg was mentioned because it was suggested he was a mad russian doctor and at some point the police thought that a doctor could have been behind the murders.

All of this shows the naievety of the police and the fact that as major smith said they didnt genuinley have a clue and they were simply clutching at straws.

The above names would have no doubt been entered in a similar register to that which Special Branch still have. This register has not been retained so it cant help us sadly.

The special branch registers as we know do contain new ripper material. It may not tell us who the killer or killers were but may go along way to telling us who it wasnt.

Because of the way Special Branch were operating and because they were using more experienced men I would have bet that if anyone could have assisted with the investigation then it would have been them with their vast network of informants. So we will have to wait and see if the tribunal are in our favour.

[Chris]

How come there are no city records showing all this work that they are supposed to have put in watching Kosminski etc .

Now that would be a coincidence if that like all the met stuff was also "lost" or "stolen" as you suggest would it not.

A certain amount of City CID records from the 1880s have survived and are at the LMA, but there is virtually nothing relating to the Ripper investigation (only a couple of stray reports on Oswald Puckridge). Obviously there would have been a large amount of paperwork on the case at one time, but it hasn't survived.