If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
His opinions have damned Druitt to a posthumous ignominy he scarcely deserved, Jason.And in using those words, he demonstrated quite clearly that he was acting on partial information. In other words, he admitted to not truly knowing what he was on about.He included an almost certainly innocent man on a list of "more likely" Ripper suspects, on the basis of mere hearsay and/or demonstrably faulty information. For a man in his position, that was an utterly astonishing thing to do. I mean, he didn't even check! It's not as if he couldn't have easily verified his "more likely" suspect's particulars before putting pen to paper.Quite a few have been, on the basis of Macnaghten's sponsorship of him, and it seems that Macnaghten himself personally suspected Druitt was a strong suspect - on the basis of no concrete evidence at all! I'd say that was pretty much indefensible, irrespective of whom he intended his "audience" to be.
Interesting topic Sam . given the recent discussion .
'It doesn't matter how beautiful your theory is. It doesn't matter how smart you are . If it doesn't agree with experiment, its wrong'' . Richard Feynman
Tweet
Comment