Originally posted by PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1
View Post
As I've asked before - why, if he was simply looking for a name to add to his 'better than Cutbush' list, didn't he pick a more convincing suspect than Druitt? A man in Macnaghten's position would have had his pick from any number of dead criminals, lower class suicides, dead vagrants and incarcerated or dead lunatics. Any of which he could have named without risk of comebacks. Yet he chose an well-to-do Barrister who also worked at a posh school. A man who was related by marriage to one of his best friends. A man who, if someone looked into his life, might have been discovered to have had an alibi, for eg. a court appearance or some school or cricket-related business.
Don't you find it strange to say the least that Mcnaghten, a part of the upper class establishment, would have randomly suggested someone like Druitt as the ripper knowing full well that he was entirely innocence?
Leave a comment: