Reasons why?

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

Simply because he used a random phrase ‘sexually insane?’ It’s another very trivial point. No even remotely important.

It is hardly trivial when it is made about someone together with an insinuation that he committed a series of sexual murders.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

Btw, PI, any acknowledgment on the ‘criminal lawyer’ point?

Was Young charged with having committed a sexual murder?

[Herlock Sholmes]

Was young charged with having committed a sexual murder?

Thats not relevant PI. You simply said that he wasn’t a criminal Lawyer. I pointed out that he was. He represented Henry Young in court in a criminal case. Therefore, by definition, he was a criminal lawyer. He did civil cases too of course.

[Herlock Sholmes]

It is hardly trivial when it is made about someone together with an insinuation that he committed a series of sexual murders.

Yes it is because it’s not a fact that’s important to the case. Anyone thinking back to a conversation can misremember 31 for 41. Or misremember someone’s job. I’d say that the part about potentially being Jack The Ripper would have taken up his attention.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

Thats not relevant PI.

It is relevant.

The original point was about barristers having knowledge of the nature of sexual murder.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

Yes it is because it’s not a fact that’s important to the case.

Of course it is important, even though it is not a fact.

That is why Macnaghten mentioned it.

It is also important that what Macnaghten wrote is not credible.

[Herlock Sholmes]

It is relevant.

The original point was about barristers having knowledge of the nature of sexual murder.

You said, in post #213 “It seems clear that the mention of barristers relates to criminal lawyers, which excludes Druitt.”


I responded in post 216 “Why does it exclude Druitt?”


You said in post # 217 “Because he was not a criminal lawyer.”



So you were very clearly excluding Druitt because you thought that he wasn’t a criminal lawyer. I’ve shown that you are wrong. Just accept it PI.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Of course it is important, even though it is not a fact.

That is why Macnaghten mentioned it.

It is also important that what Macnaghten wrote is not credible.

You have decided that he’s not credible. That’s purely your own opinion which is of course up to you. I’ve made my own position clear. The idea that Macnaghten named Druitt at random is just…..well, it’s a bit silly imo.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

I’ve shown that you are wrong. Just accept it PI.

I showed a few posts ago that you contradicted yourself, but I haven't noticed any sign that you've accepted it.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

You have decided that he’s not credible. That’s purely your own opinion.

It is not purely my own opinion.

He claimed that Druitt was sexually insane.

How could he possibly have known that?

He claimed that Kosminski had strong homicidal tendencies.

Asylum records disprove that.

He claimed that Ostrog was a homicidal maniac.

He was not.

He thought that Druitt was a doctor, which means he could hardly have been aware of the dismissal or the reference to it in the suicide note.

That means that he did not even know the basic facts of the case.

He claimed that Kosminski had a great hatred of prostitutes.

There is no evidence to support that, and he could not possibly have known it to be a fact, yet he stated it as a fact.

He made numerous categorical statements of fact when he could not possibly have known them to be facts.

He did not state them as opinions or suppositions or assumptions.

It is quite obvious that he is not credible.

[Doctored Whatsit]

If Macnaghten had privileged information about the events leading up to Druitt's suicide, then he would surely have known about his dismissal and the allusion to it in the suicide note.

But it is evident that he did not know.

Mac only alleged that he had private information that led him to believe that Monty's family suspected him of being JtR. He didn't claim to have "privileged information about the events leading up to Druitt's suicide". There is no evidence of any investigation of his "private information", which seems to have contained information suggesting that Monty was "sexually insane". We are totally ignorant of the full details of what Mac knew, and how he came to know it, or thought he knew it, or whether he merely alleged he knew it. If the dismissal from the school was for a sexual matter, then that could have been the source for the "sexually insane" comment. His informant need not have told him everything about it, such as where it happened, and that he was dismissed as a result of it.

Personally, I am not enthusiastic about Druitt as a suspect, nor about Mac's allegation, but the allegation exists, and has to be considered. We can doubt the story, but we cannot disprove it.

[Herlock Sholmes]

I showed a few posts ago that you contradicted yourself, but I haven't noticed any sign that you've accepted it.

I admitted the typo PI.

[Herlock Sholmes]

It is not purely my own opinion.

He claimed that Druitt was sexually insane.

How could he possibly have known that?

Ive explained this to you PI but you appear to believe that Macnaghten was making a psychological diagnosis. He was basically using a phrase which thought described Druitt/the ripper. The private information that he received would surely have contained a description of some kind of abnormal behaviour. As this information led him to suspect Druitt of being Jack The Ripper then what problem could there be with using that phrase to describe the him? You’re making it sound as if Macnaghten would have required a doctor’s diagnosis to allow him to use the phrase.

He claimed that Kosminski had strong homicidal tendencies.

Asylum records disprove that.

But he pulled a knife on someone and who knows what he had been told about Kosminski?

He claimed that Ostrog was a homicidal maniac.

He was not.

He fired a gun at some police officers and was incarcerated for, among other things, attempted murder and was detained in an asylum. So, attempted murder = homicidal. Incarcerated in an asylum = maniac. Yes, of course ‘homicidal maniac’ wasn’t a strictly accurate description of him but again Macnaghten wasn’t making a professional diagnosis he was simply using a phrase that came to him.

He thought that Druitt was a doctor, which means he could hardly have been aware of the dismissal or the reference to it in the suicide note.

That means that he did not even know the basic facts of the case.

And I’ve never claimed that he did know of the dismissal (accept in one post where I committed a typo) and it’s unimportant anyway of course. When Macnaghten was given the private information we can hardly expect the person to have given him a full biography of Druitt and we can’t have expected Macnaghten to have researched Druitt’s biography. He wasn’t considering an arrest so he didn’t require a watertight case, every t crossed ever I dotted. Druitt’s dismissal wasn’t a ‘fact of the case’ it was a ‘fact of Druitt’s life.’

He claimed that Kosminski had a great hatred of prostitutes.

There is no evidence to support that, and he could not possibly have known it to be a fact, yet he stated it as a fact.

What you should say is that we, in 2023, have no evidence of that. How can you know that something hadn’t occurred at the time to suggest a hatred of prostitutes?

He made numerous categorical statements of fact when he could not possibly have known them to be facts.

He did not state them as opinions or suppositions or assumptions.

A bit of an exaggeration.

It is quite obvious that he is not credible.

He’s not credible ‘in your own opinion.’ Many people feel that he is credible. If we take the approach that anyone that makes minor, unimportant errors of detail (which they had no reason to know) deserves to be dismissed then the conclusion is understandable. I take the approach that a suspect being named by a very senior police officer is worthy of interest at least. Especially when it involves a suspect that was mentioned by someone 3 years previously who came from the area where the suspects family lived and when we consider that that very senior police officer had a link (albeit it not a close one) to the family of that suspect.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Mac only alleged that he had private information that led him to believe that Monty's family suspected him of being JtR. He didn't claim to have "privileged information about the events leading up to Druitt's suicide". There is no evidence of any investigation of his "private information", which seems to have contained information suggesting that Monty was "sexually insane". We are totally ignorant of the full details of what Mac knew, and how he came to know it, or thought he knew it, or whether he merely alleged he knew it. If the dismissal from the school was for a sexual matter, then that could have been the source for the "sexually insane" comment. His informant need not have told him everything about it, such as where it happened, and that he was dismissed as a result of it.

Personally, I am not enthusiastic about Druitt as a suspect, nor about Mac's allegation, but the allegation exists, and has to be considered. We can doubt the story, but we cannot disprove it.

Exactly Doc. I’ve never understood why some of those that see Druitt as a poor suspect can’t just leave it at that? Instead they feel the need to try and dismiss him even though we don’t have the evidence to do it. If that evidence should ever surface I can guarantee that I’ll be the first person to say “fair enough, that’s Druitt eliminated.” But until then he remains a suspect with more going for him than most.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

If the dismissal from the school was for a sexual matter, then that could have been the source for the "sexually insane" comment. His informant need not have told him everything about it, such as where it happened, and that he was dismissed as a result of it.

Do you not consider the suggestion highlighted in bold type to be most unlikely?

Would it not be very difficult to provide such information without providing the context?