Reasons why?

[Wickerman]

If I may rephrase my first question, Jon:

Is it likely that a man who may have been sexually insane/oversexed and dismissed by his employers on account of sexual activity, would have eviscerated women without having sexual relations with them, bearing in mind that according to the medical evidence, the murderer had no sexual contact with his victims?

I can rephrase my reply, but just like your question, the meaning of my answer remains the same.

We cannot know if the killer had sexual contact with his victims, due to their practice of safe-sex.
The doctors merely made the point that there was no evidence of conventional intercourse.

It seems very apparent you do not think it is likely, but you must be thinking these streetwalkers provided conventional sex, as I pointed out where we have such confessions of those streetwalkers they say they did not.

There was a published interview with an older woman who came up from the streets to become a Madam, the owner of her own brothel. She admitted how safe sex was applied by her kind.
When she died, in her 80's, it was reported she was a virgin.

[Herlock Sholmes]

It’s interesting that weight is given to Abberline’s denunciation of the ‘Druitt theory.’ Macnaghten is criticised for calling Druitt a Doctor which it’s claimed shows a lack of knowledge of detail and yet Abberline also calls him a doctor. Indicating that Abberline has no real knowledge of Druitt. Macnaghten clearly said that his information was private (therefore not available to all) so he was obviously privy to information that the 2 year retired Abberline wasn’t. I think that we can safely conclude that Abberline was speaking without any knowledge and that no weight can be given to his comments.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

I’m not wrong.

You are clearly wrong.

You claimed that Macnaghten was 'simply using a phrase that he felt suited someone that murdered prostitutes.'

You cannot possibly know that.

You are, moreover, assuming a presumption of guilt on Macnaghten's part, which is unfounded.

A nitpick. But ok. I’ll re-phrase it if it makes you happier

It is not about nit-picking.

Your statement was incorrect.

Read the MM and don’t repeat the point.

You are not in a position to tell me whether I can repeat a point.

He doesn’t need to [produce any evidence to support his statement that Druitt was sexually insane]

He does, or else the statement is unsupported.

He was free to use whatever words he wanted too. Perfectly legitimate.

No-one has the right to state that another person is insane without citing evidence in support.

To dismiss this out of hand shows a lack of genuine interest in the case and more of an interest in winning points.

Druitt threads would be much more constructive, and even more interesting, if those that are dead set on wiping his name from the records and proving that Macnaghten was a pathological liar just didn’t bother taking part.

Will you please withdraw those personal remarks made about me?

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

We cannot know if the killer had sexual contact with his victims, due to their practice of safe-sex.
The doctors merely made the point that there was no evidence of conventional intercourse.

It seems very apparent you do not think it is likely, but you must be thinking these streetwalkers provided conventional sex, as I pointed out where we have such confessions of those streetwalkers they say they did not.

How likely is it that the murderer had any kind of sexual intercourse with Catherine Eddowes in Mitre Square?

[jmenges]

I would like to remind those of our members who are currently walking a very fine line of a portion of the Major Rules. One infraction for a Personal Attack is 3 points against you and comes with an automatic one-month ban from the boards.


Examples of Posts -Personal Attacks

This post is fine. Zero points, no infraction given:

Point A defies common sense for the following reasons...Reason 1, Reason 2, Reason 3. Point B is even more ludicrous when you consider all factors given. There is nothing in the laws of physics that would support such an erroneous and baffling conclusion.

This Post contains on-topic commentary AND personal attacks. Regular Personal Attack penalty applies:

Point A is wrong for Reason 1, Reason 2 and Reason 3. You consistently post in a manner that defies common sense and basic logic. It is utterly maddening trying to have a debate with you.

This post contains nothing of value to the boards and will earn you the personal attack penalty plus a trolling penalty that will vary based on the invective and seriousness of the content:

I am sick of trying to have a debate with you, you clearly aren't capable of it. I leave you to your ramblings.


To repeat- any post that contains both on-topic content and a personal attack will send you to the woodshed for a month.

Clear?

JM

[Fleetwood Mac]

How likely is it that the murderer had any kind of sexual intercourse with Catherine Eddowes in Mitre Square?

When Dr Brown stated: the sigmoid flexure was invaginated into the rectum very tightly, I'd imagine that would have made such an examination more difficult.

I reckon the doctors probably did check for signs of anal sex; whether or not the doctors could detect anal sex from immediately before a murder, is another matter. Possibly, I suppose it depends on whether or not any obviously recent injuries were caused: tears, bleeding and so on. 'More likely than today given the Victorians did not have the accessories that are available today (with obvious results).

I'd say that no sex of any kind took place because the WM had other designs, although it's not always the case that sexual serial murders do not have ante-mortem sex.

[Wickerman]

How likely is it that the murderer had any kind of sexual intercourse with Catherine Eddowes in Mitre Square?

You were talking in general, now you want to be specific.
Nichols & Kelly fall into the possible category, whereas Stride, Eddowes & Chapman, less likely.
Even if some traces of conventional sex had been found, they couldn't know for sure that it was from the killer.
In the case of Mary, is it possible Blotchy raped her, but her next client made no advances along those lines, he only had murder on his mind?

What does all this conjecture have to do with Druitt?

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

What does all this conjecture have to do with Druitt?

What are the chances of a 'sexually insane' individual murdering five women without having any sexual contact with them?

[Wickerman]

What are the chances of a 'sexually insane' individual murdering five women without having any sexual contact with them?

Are you not aware that sex crimes include physical abuse?, they are not limited to conventional intercourse.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

Are you not aware that sex crimes include physical abuse?, they are not limited to conventional intercourse.

I am.

I am not sure what point you are making.

My point is that being sexually insane is thought to have meant being oversexed.

The indications are that the Whitechapel murderer was undersexed.

[Wickerman]

I am.

I am not sure what point you are making.

My point is that being sexually insane is thought to have meant being oversexed.

The indications are that the Whitechapel murderer was undersexed.

Undersexed?
Is this what you think, or what you have read from specialists?

Don't you remember this book?

Psychopathia Sexualis: The Classic Study of Deviant Sex
By Richard Krafft-Ebing

Why do you think so many specialists referred to that book in connection with the Ripper murders?
It certainly was not because the Ripper was viewed as 'undersexed'.

[Herlock Sholmes]

We don’t know what is meant by sexually insane because it’s not a technical/medical term. It was just a phrase that non-medical man Macnaghten came up with to describe why he thought that the ripper did what he did. If we want to get an idea of what Macnaghten meant by it though a good place begin might be his own memoirs, Days Of My Years:


“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.”

So he was clearly referring to the kind of sexual insanity that causes the person in question to get sexual excitement from death and blood and gore.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

Undersexed?

I was referring to the extent of sexual activity of the person in question.

Whatever sexual misdemeanour Druitt may have committed, that came to the attention of his school, what are the chances that it was the evisceration of women in the absence of sexual activity?

And if Macnaghten heard some story that led him to describe Druitt as being sexually insane, and if sexual insanity meant sexually overactive, does that seem like someone who eviscerates women without leaving any sign of sexual contact?

There is every possibility that the Whitechapel Murderer was sexually inactive.

[Herlock Sholmes]

We have no idea why Druitt was sacked from the school because we have nothing to go on of course. We could write a fair length list of possible reasons but still not hit on the right one. All that we know is that it was a serious issue but even then that could cover all manner of ills (especially in Victorian England where there are things that we would see today as not particularly serious but they would look on with horror) So we can’t assume, even if he was guilty, that the reason for his sacking would have been directly connected to the murders. It could have been an issue (or issues) of behaviour, such as a violent outburst for example.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

If "sexually insane" means that he was a person who killed for the pleasure of killing... well, this would be a fairly weird statement to make, would it not?

It would analogous to saying "I believe that such-and-such a person was a serial killer because he ... killed for pleasure."

It just does not make sense as an argument, unless there is actual proof he was the murderer... for a possible suspect, such a statement makes no sense, unless you know it for a fact.

Therefore, I tend to think that "sexually insane," in this particular context, must mean something else.

(Rob House)

https://www.jtrforums.com/forum/persons-of-interest-or-actual-suspects/mj-druitt/13447-does-sexually-insane-mean-homosexual?t=13251

As I noted in # 258, Macnaghten cannot have been using the term 'sexually insane' to refer to someone who committed sexual murders unless he made a presumption of Druitt's guilt, which is not the same as saying that he was 'more likely than Cutbush' to have been the murderer.