Upon what basis did the Druitt family suspect Montague?

[lynn cates]

hour

Hello Velma.

"If she was not killed until 5:30 a.m., where was she those missing hours?"

But if she were killed at 4.30, that's only one hour's difference.

Cheers.
LC

[Robert]

Hi Curious

Mrs Richardson did not mention having seen Chapman in the house at any time previously. She said that she had called to Mr Thompson as he left the house at 3.50 AM. If Chapman had been in the hall then, Thompson would doubtless have informed the police to that effect.

[curious]

Hi Curious

Mrs Richardson did not mention having seen Chapman in the house at any time previously. She said that she had called to Mr Thompson as he left the house at 3.50 AM. If Chapman had been in the hall then, Thompson would doubtless have informed the police to that effect.

Hi, Robert,
My memory is faulty, but I'm sure I've read that Mrs. Richardson knew Annie Chapman as that little dark woman she (Richardson) had bought crochet work and needle work from because she felt sorry for her.

Unfortunately, I haven't had time to locate that source . . . yet.

Just as at this moment, I can't find the time that a friend reported seeing Annie Chapman sitting down and saying that she couldn't let anything get her down . . . or could not give in to it, or something along those lines.

[curious]

Just as at this moment, I can't find the time that a friend reported seeing Annie Chapman sitting down and saying that she couldn't let anything get her down . . . or could not give in to it, or something along those lines.

ok, here is quoting from the Annie Chapman section on Casebook:
5:00 PM: Amelia Palmer again sees Annie in Dorset Street. Chapman is sober and Palmer asks her if she is going to Stratford (believed to be the territory where Annie plied her trade). Annie says she is too ill to do anything. Farmer left but returned a few minutes later only to find Chapman not having moved. It's no use my giving way," Annie says "I must pull myself together and go out and get some money or I shall have no lodgings."

So, it was in the afternoon when Chapman was feeling so bad. . . not late that night.

[Mayerling]

The Classically Trained Schoolmaster

Just for jolly.......

The idea that a classically educated English gentleman, a barrister and schoolmaster who knew Greek and Latin would wander around the East End in the middle of the night carving up prostitutes is silly beyond words.

Just my take on this theory.

Hi and Merry Christmas to all (and Happy New Year too)

1) I don't think that Monty was guilty - he strikes me as a peculiarly tragic figure in his own right. However...

2) Although Stephen suggests it is "silly beyone words" for "a classically educated English gentleman, a barrister, and a schoolmaster who knew Greek and Latin" to carve up prostitutes, one can make the claim that it is silly beyond measure for two rich and well educated young men from Chicago families to kidnap the distant cousin of one, kill him, and leave his body in a park's culvert, to commit "the perfect crime". But it happened in 1924 Chicago. One can add that it is silly that an 18th Century schoolmaster, who found the connections between old English and the Chaldean language could have murdered a pedlar. But it happened in the 1740s and led to an execution in 1759. The background and education of the suspect should not be the basis for rejection.

Jeff

[Mayerling]

Was Druitt effete?
All his pictures suggest so. He does not strike a ‘butch’ pose does he? The pictures are deliberately posed to create the effect Druitt wanted to create. He was not snapped unawares by candid camera. Whispy bum fluff on his lip, he looks effete to me.
I detect a similar strain in his known debate topics: whether Bismark's influence was "morally and socially a curse to the world”

Evening,

I don't know if his pictures make him look effete or not - if he suddenly wore "fancy" clothing like Oscar Wilde or even Lord Tennyson I might agree with you.

As for that debate topic - which he did not probably create (it sounds like it was the assigned topic for that school debate), it probably would have been approved by another individual who was alive (and thriving) in the late 1870s, until his execution in 1879. Charles Peace, while pretending to be Mr. Thompson the retired engineer, would tell his neighbors he disapproved of Disraeli's foreign policy which was alligned at the Congress of Berlin with Bismarck's (because a whale and an elephant can't attack each other). This made Charlie a supporter of Gladstone, "Little Britain", and the Liberals - like Monty!

Jeff

[Mayerling]

At Valentine's, and a comment on John Churton Collins

Hi again.

I have been reading through everything on this thread since the start. I have questions regarding the school. You may have the answers.

1) Wasn't Dr. Valentine married, and did he have any children, particularly daughters?

2) How old was Valentine, and if he was married, how old was his wife, and how old were his children?

A tour of the sites of the murders in 1905 by Professor Churton Collins was mentionedon this thread earlier. He was an early member of "the Murder Club" known as Our Society. At one point he brought into a meeting an arm bone that belonged to John Williams, the leading suspect in the 1811 Ratcliffe Highway Murders. But Churton Collins was also a contentious pedant, who frequently as quarreling with other scholars in English Literature. He died under mysterious circumstances in 1908, by drowning - he had been looking into the murder at Sevenoaks of Mrs. Luard. He may have been overmedicated, fainted into a pool of water, and drowned. At least that was the official cause of death.

[Robert]

Hi Jeff

Valentine was single and was born c 1842.

[Mayerling]

Hi Jeff

Valentine was single and was born c 1842.

Thanks for replying Robert.

I am going to see how much you or anyone else knows about Valentine. As far as you know

1) Did he have any sisters or nieces or young female cousins who may have lived at the school with him?

2) Did the school have any female servants (cooks or maids perhaps) that were on the staff?

The rationale for my inquiry is the following:

We have all been assuming that Druitt got fired for some incident involving one of the students - i.e. a homosexual or pederastic incident - that Valentine stumbled upon, that would cause him to throw Druitt out. But Druitt had been teaching at the school for some time - and nothing had happened (that we know of) prior to 1888. I won't say such a male on male incident was not impossible, but if it happened the reaction would have been harder to control: the parents of the boy involved (or boys involved) would have taken their sons out of the school and brought charges - Valentine would not have been able to prevent it.

But if there is no record, then any activity by Druitt leading to his being discharged (of a sexual nature) would have heterosexual and connected somehow to Valentine's family - something that Valentine could have controlled the resulting dispersion of information about. I was guessing that if Valentine was married with daughters Druitt might have picked up a relationship with the schoolmaster's wife or one the daughters. But there are none. I just wonder if there was any other woman relative or servant that Druitt might have had a relationship with.

Jeff

[Cogidubnus]

Bloody good point well made Jeff...and of course if he felt he'd let himself slip, and his situation was helpless, then he might well believe he was going soft...

All the best

Dave

[Robert]

Hi Jeff

Well looking at the censuses, and a family tree on Ancestry (which I haven't verified), it seems that Valentine had one brother who provided him with a number of nephews and nieces (I counted eight). The oldest niece was born 1874. The oldest nephew was born 1873.

There are no female staff or relatives listed at Eliot Place in 1881. There is one nephew and four female staff there in 1891.

In 1901 Valentine is retired and living with his widowed sister-in-law, nephews and nieces.

Re the female staff, if Druitt had a relationship with a female member of staff and was sacked because of it (pregnancy would be the most likely reason) then one wouldn't expect to see her name at the school in 1891 as she too would probably have been sacked.

And lastly, I feel bound to add a joke hypothesis : someone (not you, Jeff) will probably suggest that Druitt and Valentine were lovers. There is no evidence for this.

[Robert]

Hi again Jeff

The info I gave about 1881 is wrong. The inestimable Chris Scott gives the full picture :

http://www.jtrforums.com/showthread.php?t=13739

[Cogidubnus]

So there might indeed be some females upon whom Montague John might just've lavished attention...thanks Robert.

All the best

Dave

[Bridewell]

If she had been resting in the hallway, she could have felt a call of nature and went out to visit the privy, then was ambushed on her way back inside.

Just another possible take . . . ESPECIALLY if you believe the 5:30 time of death and no one reported seeing her for hours.

curious

Hi, Curious,

The 5.30(ish) time of death is based on the assumption that Mrs Long saw Chapman on the street with her killer. If Long was right, there was no ambush, surely?

Regards, Bridewell.

[Bridewell]

Interesting!

Hi Jeff

Valentine was single and was born c 1842.

Hi Robert,

An interesting point. The dubious claim that Druitt was homosexual is based largely on the (to me unremarkable) fact that, at the age of 31, he was still single. Valentine was still single at 47 - and never married. There is no evidence that either man was homosexual, but both were single and Valentine was 16 years older than Druitt. The circumstances claimed to be evidence that Druitt was homosexual would therefore (if it were to be considered evidence at all) be even more applicable to Valentine.

As pure hypothesis, what would be the likely outcome if a homosexual Valentine had made advances to a heterosexual Druitt? Druitt's departure perhaps, under a nebulous cloud of unspecified 'trouble', but with a sizeable pay-off? Druitt was found with two cheques, totalling £66 (£50 & £16). That's worth about £5,000 today, which seems a large severance payment (if that's what it was) for a teacher who had been in trouble at the school. Why two cheques? One for outstanding wages perhaps, but what was the other?

We don't know if the cheques were payments to Druitt or intended payments by Druitt, but the former seems more likely. If Druitt intended to settle (sizeable) debts before dying, why not post the cheques? If he didn't intend to settle such debts, why write the cheques out in the first place? I would argue that they were cheque payments to Druitt, but that he didn't pay them into his account because there was no point. So who paid him such large sums of money - and for what?

Regards, Bridewell.