Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Reasons why?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Herlock Sholmes
    replied
    Originally posted by PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1 View Post


    Because he was not a criminal lawyer.

    Yes he was. In 1887 he defended Henry Young against a charge of murder.

    Having responded to the first halves of my #210 and # 214, will you do me the courtesy of responding to the second halves of my #210 and # 214?
    #210 - Not directly at you. It’s a point that I’ve often made, and totally stand by, that the subject Druitt raises far to much ‘high feeling,’ leading to attempts to dismiss him which veer into the ‘desperate.’ Many people feel a greater need to ‘dismiss’ Druitt than they do for almost all other suspects.

    #214 - Re-phrase the question. Honestly I’m struggling to follow this.

    Leave a comment:


  • Doctored Whatsit
    replied
    Originally posted by PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1 View Post


    Then what is the argument about?

    I have been arguing that Macnaghten did not know that Druitt was dismissed from the school.

    If you do not wish to contest that, then fine, but that means that Macnaghten was poorly informed and a most unreliable source for information about Druitt.

    If he did not know that Druitt was dismissed, then presumably he did not know about the inquest nor the suicide note which appears to refer to his dismissal.

    In that case, what reliance can be placed on anything else Macnaghten wrote about Druitt?


    Mac only claimed to suspect Druitt because of private information. He did not allege, as far as I am aware, that the police had carried out a detailed investigation, and that he had just refreshed his memory from the reports when making his observations. What he actually knew, and whether he remembered it all correctly, is just supposition. We cannot know.

    Leave a comment:


  • PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1
    replied
    Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

    Typo.

    I meant that I never claimed that he did know about the dismissal.

    Then what is the argument about?

    I have been arguing that Macnaghten did not know that Druitt was dismissed from the school.

    If you do not wish to contest that, then fine, but that means that Macnaghten was poorly informed and a most unreliable source for information about Druitt.

    If he did not know that Druitt was dismissed, then presumably he did not know about the inquest nor the suicide note which appears to refer to his dismissal.

    In that case, what reliance can be placed on anything else Macnaghten wrote about Druitt?


    Leave a comment:


  • PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1
    replied
    Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

    Why does it exclude Druitt?

    Because he was not a criminal lawyer.

    Having responded to the first halves of my #210 and # 214, will you do me the courtesy of responding to the second halves of my #210 and # 214?

    Leave a comment:


  • Herlock Sholmes
    replied
    Originally posted by PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1 View Post


    It seems clear that the mention of barristers relates to criminal lawyers, which excludes Druitt.
    Why does it exclude Druitt?

    Leave a comment:


  • Herlock Sholmes
    replied
    Originally posted by PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1 View Post



    I suggest you re-read what you have written above.

    You are saying that you never claimed that he did not know and you follow that up by complaining that according to me you suggested that he must have known.

    Which of the two is it?


    You wrote in # 189:

    Perhaps they had just told Macnaghten that ‘he’d recently been sacked from his job,’ without mentioning that it was at a school?

    I responded in # 210:

    In that case, one could reasonably expect Macnaghten to have written that Druitt was said to have been a doctor who
    had been struck off, rather than just a doctor of good family.

    You replied in # 212:

    Not if he hadn’t been told about the dismissal.


    I responded to your comment, which assumed he had been dismissed, and then when I reply to that, you suggest that he was not dismissed.

    That does not make sense.
    Typo.

    I meant that I never claimed that he did know about the dismissal.

    Leave a comment:


  • PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1
    replied
    Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

    And I’ve never claimed that Macnaghten didn’t know about his dismissal. Why do you keep posting as if I’ve suggested that he must have known?


    I suggest you re-read what you have written above.

    You are saying that you never claimed that he did not know and you follow that up by complaining that according to me you suggested that he must have known.

    Which of the two is it?


    You wrote in # 189:

    Perhaps they had just told Macnaghten that ‘he’d recently been sacked from his job,’ without mentioning that it was at a school?

    I responded in # 210:

    In that case, one could reasonably expect Macnaghten to have written that Druitt was said to have been a doctor who
    had been struck off, rather than just a doctor of good family.

    You replied in # 212:

    Not if he hadn’t been told about the dismissal.


    I responded to your comment, which assumed he had been dismissed, and then when I reply to that, you suggest that he was not dismissed.

    That does not make sense.

    Leave a comment:


  • PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1
    replied
    Originally posted by Darryl Kenyon View Post

    If MM didn't know that Druitt was a teacher its unlikely that his comment about Druitt being sexually insane was about him and the boys at his school.

    Good point.

    In that case,what could Macnaghten have meant?



    Originally posted by Darryl Kenyon View Post

    Very few people, except barristers, doctors, and police officers, realize that such a thing as sexual mania exists, and, in a murder case similar to the two mentioned above, it is a most difficult task for prosecuting counsel to make a jury fully understand that it supplies and accounts for the complete absence of any other motive for the crime.

    It seems clear that the mention of barristers relates to criminal lawyers, which excludes Druitt.

    Leave a comment:


  • Herlock Sholmes
    replied
    Originally posted by PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1 View Post



    Of course it is valid.

    The reason I have been making that point is that it means that Macnaghten could hardly have known about the dismissal.

    The suggestion you made in # 189 - 'Perhaps they had just told Macnaghten that ‘he’d recently been sacked from his job,’ without mentioning that it was at a school?' - would imply that Macnaghten thought that Druitt had been struck off the medical register.

    No. It could have simply meant that he was dismissed from a hospital or clinic.

    Do you find that plausible?


    In that case, one could reasonably expect Macnaghten to have written that Druitt was said to have been a doctor who had been struck off, rather than just a doctor of good family.

    Not if he hadn’t been told about the dismissal.

    Would you not therefore agree with me that it is most unlikely that Macnaghten knew of the dismissal?

    And I’ve never claimed that Macnaghten didn’t know about his dismissal. Why do you keep posting as if I’ve suggested that he must have known?

    Leave a comment:


  • Darryl Kenyon
    replied
    If MM didn't know that Druitt was a teacher its unlikely that his comment about Druitt being sexually insane was about him and the boys at his school. But was It ? . MM Days of my Life -
    “As I have said before, when writing of the Whitechapel murders, such madness takes Protean forms. Very few people, except barristers, doctors, and police officers, realize that such a thing as sexual mania exists, and, in a murder case similar to the two mentioned above, it is a most difficult task for prosecuting counsel to make a jury fully understand that it supplies and accounts for the complete absence of any other motive for the crime.
    Students of history, however, are aware that an excessive indulgence in vice leads, in certain cases, to a craving for blood. Nero was probably a sexual maniac. Many Eastern potentates in all ages, who loved to see slaves slaughtered or wild beasts tearing each other to pieces, have been similarly affected. The disease is not as rare as many people imagine. As you walk in the London streets you may, and do, not infrequently jostle against a potential murderer of the so-called Jack the Ripper type. The subject is not a pleasant one, but to those who study the depths of human nature it is intensely interesting.’

    I have highlighted Barristers and Doctors because I am just wondering if MM is alluding to the fact that Druitt knew he was sexually insane and that contributed towards his suicide .

    Also when we look at the Littlechild letter, Littlechild himself writes -
    It is very strange how those given to 'Contrary sexual instinct' and 'degenerates' are given to cruelty, even Wilde used to like to be punched about. It may interest you if I give you an example of this cruelty in the case of the man Harry Thaw and this is authentic as I have the boy's statement. Thaw was staying at the Carlton Hotel and one day laid out a lot of sovereigns on his dressing table, then rang for a call boy on pretence of sending out a telegram. He made some excuse and went out of the room and left the boy there and watched through the chink of the door. The unfortunate boy was tempted and took a sovereign from the pile and Thaw returning to the room charged him with stealing. The boy confessed when Thaw asked whether he should send for the police or whether he should punish him himself. The boy scared to death consented to take his punishment from Thaw who then made him undress, strapped him to the foot of the bedstead, and thrashed him with a cane, drawing blood. He then made the boy get into a bath in which he placed a quantity of salt. It seems incredible that such a thing could take place in any hotel but it is a fact. This was in 1906.

    The main purpose of the correspondence to Sims is to seem to answer a question regarding Dr D [ Druitt ] . Yet Littlechild mentions a case where a man seems to be indulging in Sado Masochistic pleasures towards a young man

    It seems likely to me in both comments by both policemen that sexual insanity could be defined as having said Sado masochistic tendencies. Was this Druitts vice, so to speak ?
    I do find it interesting that Littlechild mentions the pain and humiliation the call boy had to endure . Was Druitt doing something similar to his pupils, craving sexual gratification through, say making the boys strip before he caned them ? Had Sims mentioned this to Littlechild in his previous correspondence ?

    Did MM not mention the P/T teacher role of Druitt and instead hedging his bets wrote " Said to be a Doctor " [ when MM may have thought Druitt had had some training, yet mentioning privately to Sims that he was also a P/T teacher and that's were his sexual insanity came from, cruelty to his pupils ] , because he was protecting Blackheath's schools reputation ? Just a few thoughts

    Regards Darryl

    Leave a comment:


  • PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1
    replied
    Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post


    You keep repeating ‘if he knew his occupation…” Well he clearly didn’t know his occupation because he said that he was a doctor. So why keep making the ‘if he knew his occupation’ point? It’s not valid.


    Of course it is valid.

    The reason I have been making that point is that it means that Macnaghten could hardly have known about the dismissal.

    The suggestion you made in # 189 - 'Perhaps they had just told Macnaghten that ‘he’d recently been sacked from his job,’ without mentioning that it was at a school?' - would imply that Macnaghten thought that Druitt had been struck off the medical register.

    Do you find that plausible?

    In that case, one could reasonably expect Macnaghten to have written that Druitt was said to have been a doctor who had been struck off, rather than just a doctor of good family.

    Would you not therefore agree with me that it is most unlikely that Macnaghten knew of the dismissal?



    Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

    What I mean by desperation is that the whole point about Macnaghten getting Druitt’s occupation is a fairly trivial,one ...

    Can we take it then that your comment about desperation is not directed at me?

    Leave a comment:


  • Herlock Sholmes
    replied
    Originally posted by Wickerman View Post

    Right, so you're thinking the Friday must have been the closest one to the purchase of the ticket?
    Some have suggested this also, yet others think "since yesterday' would have been more appropriate, if he wrote it the next day.

    Some suicide victims do not kill themselves at a first attempt, they loose confidence, and try again a day or so later, or a third time perhaps.
    In such a case the 'since Friday' is a Friday several days before perhaps over a week, or more?
    I have to admit to being rusty on ‘Druitt’ details Wick. I might have to try and fit in a bit of reading up over the weekend. I don’t have any fixed ideas though.

    William said that he had been contacted by Monty’s friends on the 11th to say that they hadn’t seen him for a week. So this suggests that he was last seen alive around December 4th, which was a Tuesday.​ Obviously that meant that the next Friday was the 7th. Which would have meant him being in the water for 3 weeks.

    Your point about failed attempts is a good one though Wick. I was going to suggest ‘ maybe he’d been sacked because he’d attempted suicide at the school’ but then I thought ‘how could he have done it without leaving physical evidence that would have shown up at the inquest?’ Maybe a cleaner found a suicide note? Yeah, I’m pushing it now.

    Leave a comment:


  • Herlock Sholmes
    replied
    Originally posted by PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1 View Post



    I have read through your reply carefully, but I cannot see anything in it that addresses my main point, which was:

    If he knew his occupation, then he must have known that he was dismissed.

    This is not a trivial matter.

    Macnaghten does not mention the dismissal and evidently did not know that Druitt was a schoolmaster.

    Had he known that, then he would hardly have thought that he was a doctor.


    I have no idea what you mean by 'desperation'.

    Perhaps you would explain.
    I’ll be absolutely honest here PI, I really can’t make my mind up if you’re simply making these points to get some kind of ‘reaction’ because no matter how clearly or how often I explain things you keep repeating the same points as if I haven’t posted anything.

    You keep repeating ‘if he knew his occupation…” Well he clearly didn’t know his occupation because he said that he was a doctor. So why keep making the ‘if he knew his occupation’ point? It’s not valid.

    The point that I also made in regard to this is that……if there was a gap of time between him receiving the information and him writing his memo (and yes, I’m only making a suggestion here) this might explain why Macnaghten misremembered the actual occupation of this son of a doctor.

    What I mean by desperation is that the whole point about Macnaghten getting Druitt’s occupation is a fairly trivial,one and yet it’s raised as if Macnaghten was some kind of pathological liar. People make errors of memory all the time. It doesn’t mean that nothing that they say can ever be trusted.
    Last edited by Herlock Sholmes; 12-15-2023, 08:08 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1
    replied
    Originally posted by Wickerman View Post

    Druitt was a solicitor/Lawyer by profession (called to the Bar, in 1885), the teaching position was only part-time wasn't it?


    Yes.

    He was a barrister, not a solicitor.

    I suppose you could say both positions were part-time.

    But his legal position has no known bearing on the case, whereas his teaching position does.

    And not only does Macnaghten not mention his dismissal from it, but he thinks Druitt is a doctor.

    Had he known that Druitt was dismissed from his teaching post, then he would have known he was a teacher.

    Therefore Macnaghten could hardly have known about the dismissal.
    Last edited by PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1; 12-15-2023, 07:36 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1
    replied
    Originally posted by Wickerman View Post

    When you say 'reported', do you mean it is in writing somewhere?

    On Friday 30 November 1888, Druitt was dismissed from his post at the Blackheath boys' school.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X