Reasons why?

[Johnr]

Brought over from other thread:

Thanks Dougie,
As an ancient ," blind " pro-Druittist, in answer to your request and my offer
, here is a summary of my "possible- guilt " scenario:
(1) First cannonical murder was committed on St Cuthberga's Day, 31st
August.
St Cuthberga was the patron saint of Wimborne Minster Montague Druitt's
home town church.Stained glass windows in Wimborne Minster donated by
the Druitt family include one of St Cuthberga.
(2) Montague Druitt's funeral was attended by his uncle Mt Homer.A well
known pig breeder.
It has sometimes been suggested that JTR had had prior experience at
ripping open carcases or had medical knowledge.
The attendance of Mr Homer amongst the very few at MJD's funeral
suggests a possible closeness to nephew Monty.Could Monty have spent
his childhood school holidays from boarding school at the large pig farm of
Uncle Homer? Could he have been given the opportunity to slit open and
slaughter pigs on these occasions?
(3) Young middle class men did frequent the music halls and stews of the
notorious East End in the LVP.It was called "slumming".
Despite opinions by some posters, middle class professionals and particularly
red-blooded sporting lads like Druitt, frequently went "up East" for a spot of
music hall and Cockney pub frivolity.These lads did much drinking. And who
knows where they drifted off to later in the night? Or early morning?
As for playing cricket so soon afterwards..There are several serial killer
cases where the murderer has returned to the cosy familiarity of the
marital home or gone off to indulge in their regular pursuit, after a night of
secret mayhem and murder.Why, Mafia gunmen in the U.S. boasted of
returning to their family's bosom after shooting someone.

(4) Illogically, I still think the Steve White press story points to Druitt.
The Dundee Peoples Journal article about Steve White's brief encounter
with a supposed JTR, despite the best efforts of logical, experienced
researchers like Grey Hunter to dissuade me,still strikes me as an unusual
but close description of Montague Druitt. At the time, police were talking
more about East End emigres as possible murderers. Except of course, the
doctor suspects.
(5) Also illogically, I think Mitre Square holds the key to suspecting Druitt.
Because the local prostitutes thought it was safe to take their clients to
Mitre Square for some good old "horizontal dancing", this doesn't square
with the much-vaunted vigilance of coppers on the beat, and ex-policemen
acting as wharehouse caretakers.Let alone the heavy slumbers of a
policeman residing on the spot. Somethings wrong with evidence given at
the Inquest.
I still think the Foster sketch shows at point "A" the exact spot Steve
White's PC stood when he came out of the resident PC's house, when he
hollered out to the night watchman.Having seen the body (marked spot "B"
on Fosters sketch).

Enough to be going on with. Hope I haven't tangentised this thread.
JOHN RUFFELS.

[kensei]

Hi everyone, I started this thread with a simple question, and just thought I'd pop in here again with a somewhat more involved one. I have read that Druitt was playing in a cricket match on the morning that Annie Chapman was murdered. My memory may be faulty but I think I recall that the match started around ten a.m. and Annie was killed at around 5:30 a.m. with dawn just beginning to lighten the sky. Is it really plausible that Jack the Ripper, after hunting for a victim and not finding one until nearly dawn, then proceeded to do all that was done to Annie, make off with certain parts of her anatomy and then have to figure out what to do with them, come down from the emotional high of the kill as well as cleaning himself up, and then just a few hours after the murder and with NO SLEEP said to himself, "Ok, time to hurry off to my cricket match?"

I'm an ignorant American, but I understand cricket matches tend to be very long.

[kensei]

Oops, I see the question I just raised about the cricket match is already addressed on the neighboring thread "Is it plausible that Druitt did it?" Ah well, it is indeed a question that bears serious consideration.

[caz]

While the Druitt family was wondering about Montague, they got word that he had gone missing and then of his death. No need to contact authorities about their suspicions now...

Hi Andy,

No need, except that the authorities would be left indefinitely to presume the killer was still at large and could strike again at any time. If the family had been prepared to give up one of their own to the authorities (unlike Anderson’s low-class Polish Jews ) and see him dangling at the end of a rope, would they not have been equally public spirited after his early bath, seeking to reassure the police and public as soon as possible that the danger was past?

Love,

Caz
X

[aspallek]

Hi caz,

Maybe. But I think it more likely that the family would have assumed the police would soon figure out that the killings had ceased and thus step down their investigation. I think it would have been more important to them to protect the family name that to alert the police and suggest they call off their search. They probably also realized that mere family suspicion would not be enough to call off the investigation, anyway.

[aspallek]

Oops, I see the question I just raised about the cricket match is already addressed on the neighboring thread "Is it plausible that Druitt did it?" Ah well, it is indeed a question that bears serious consideration.

Yes it does, but the cricket match didn't start until 11 or 11:30, as I recall, so he would not have had to hurry. It is also worthy of note that he fared poorly in the match. Finally, with a guilty conscience he might have felt the need to participate in the fixture in order to avoid suspicion.

[ella090]

Surely the point that Dougie is trying to make is that even if someone has been studying JTR for a year, can still be able to create his/her own relevant opinion on the case.

It has been years that people have been trying to solve this mystery whether its been 50 years to 6 months. The point is that everyone has the ability to make an impact on this mystery.

I have been studying JTR for years but I find the thoughts and comments given on this forum very interesting no matter how much "research" people have done. - And by the by, I think if people didn't read other peoples books on JTR then there would be very little to talk about. Its how people gain a point of view on the subject and its just as important as your own research.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

There is no way to know the cause of the Druitt family suspicions. We simply must accept that.

On the contrary, there is no evidence that Druitt's relatives had any suspicions.

We should not accept an unsupported allegation that they did.

However, we may presume those suspicions were real.

There is no evidence that they were.

We should not presume something for which there is no evidence.

They were likely reported to Macnaghten by someone close to the family, close either in proximity or by friendship or perhaps both.

There is no evidence to support your statement other than Macnaghten's say-so.

And that is not worth very much.

As Dougue says, this kind of suspicion from one's own family is not something to be taken lightly. There must have been some compelling reason for this suspicion.

That is an unfounded assumption.

There is no evidence to support it.



Macnaghten made about a dozen factual errors in his Memoranda.

Why on earth is he regarded as a reliable source?

And why are his claims about Druitt being suspected being treated as true by some, when Anderson's categorical claim that a Polish Jewish suspect was positively identified by a witness as the murderer is being treated as true by others?

What are the chances that both claims are true?

Is it not much more likely that what we are dealing with is two boastful senior policemen claiming to know much more than they actually did, just like du Rose several decades later?

[Wickerman]

Can you imagine how little of this case would be left if we threw out everything for which we only have one source?

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

Can you imagine how little of this case would be left if we threw out everything for which we only have one source?

How much of what Macnaghten wrote would you hold onto?

[Wickerman]

How much of what Macnaghten wrote would you hold onto?

With Macnaghten it is a little different because he at least wrote his memorandum while he still had access to police files, it's not the same as a memoir written long after the fact. Some details he still had wrong, I acknowledge that, but a man in his position is going to get information that was not the result of police investigation. I'm just saying we shouldn't dismiss what he told us on the flimsy grounds that there was no evidence. The whole point of telling him of suspicions could have been to keep it quiet.
Wealthy families never did like gossip, especially about mental issues within the family.
Andy Spallek did find some intriguing details about Druitt, and so has Jonathan Hainsworth.

I wouldn't dismiss all what Mac. says simply because there is only him saying it. These families had connections that go way back to their college days, so behind the scene's a number of them were closer than the public might think.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

Some details he still had wrong ...

About a dozen.

What he said about Kosminski was wrong.

He claimed there were many circumstances that made him a strong suspect, that he had strong homicidal tendencies, that he strongly resembled a suspect seen near Mitre Square, and backdated his incarceration by almost two years.

Where do you suppose he got all that incorrect information from?

He said that Druitt was sexually insane, which is untrue.
Where do you think he got that from - private information?

And again, to spice things up, he backdates the date of his death by about three weeks, to shortly after the time of the final murder.

Where do you think he got that information from - the official files?

He claimed that Ostrog was a homicidal maniac, which is untrue.

Where do you think he got that information from - the official files?

[Wickerman]

Why does anyone get anything wrong, often because they write from memory. The difference between Anderson, Swanson, etc. & Macnaghten is they couldn't access files when they wrote their memoirs.
Where Mac. had things wrong, that can be proven wrong, is likely because he didn't consult the files as often as he should.
It is likely to me that the principal source about Kozminski was his superior - Anderson, and when your superior tells you something, you don't write the complete opposite. It also suggests to me there were no official files on Kozminski that shows him to be a significant suspect.

This thread though is about Druitt, and I'd like to know what makes you think he was not 'sexually insane'?
I know there are no official papers describing his mental condition, so I know that you don't know, one way or the other.
One suggestion has been raised about those rooms his brother had to search, that it wasn't likely at Elliot Place, or his Chambers, but there is a suspicion he might have been staying at the family friends place - the Manor House Asylum, Chiswick. The place where his mother died.

Practically everything that has come to light in recent years is conjecture, there are suggestions due to rumors, or possibilities, because of a letter here, or a remark there. If the family wanted something about Montie kept quiet they did a good job, but some clues are difficult to explain otherwise.

[rjpalmer]

He said that Druitt was sexually insane, which is untrue.

How do you know it is untrue?

[rjpalmer]

I know there are no official papers describing his mental condition, so I know that you don't know, one way or the other.

Sorry. You beat me to it.

As some of us will recall, Macnaghten had a familial relationship to the Druitts, as did one of his good friends.

He got Druitt's age wrong--a mathematical error of some kind? 41 for 31 seems like an odd 'mistake'--and his reference to a 'doctor' is an enigma--but claiming the memo is error-filled is an exaggeration.

There is a similar puzzle in the thumbnail description of Kozminski--the date of his supposed committal--but much of the rest of it seems reasonably accurate as far as we can tell.

Too many 'Ripperologists' are eager to toss out the bathwater, not bothering to even wonder if there's a baby somewhere in the bubbles.