Upon what basis did the Druitt family suspect Montague?

[Ben]

What about Mungo Ireland? Never named in any newspaper, or public record, but pretty much accepted as being guilty of the Jack the Stripper murders.

There is no general acceptance that Ireland was Jack the Stripper, and as such he can't really be compared to Druitt (who is even less accepted as being JTR than Ireland is of being JTS!). Baumeister is interesting, but unlike the proposed Druitt-the-ripper, there could have been no question in his mind that the game was up. He was being actively investigated by the police as the prime suspect and there was no realistic avoidance of imminent identification as a serial killer. The same was true of Leonard Lake, who committed suicide IN custody.

Macnaghten speculated that Druitt killed himself because his brain "gave way" after his "awful glut" in Miller's Court, which is very far removed from what we know of actual serial killer behaviour.

Whatever incriminating evidence Macnaghten claimed to have destroyed, it clearly didn't impress Abberline, who believed there was nothing beyond the timing of Druitt's suicide "to incriminate him". Unless, of course, Macnaghten deliberately withheld information from the most senior "on the ground" investigator at the time of the murders, but Abberline himself considered this "next to impossible". I tend to agree.

All the best,
Ben

[RivkahChaya]

My example of Herb Baumeister was actually meant to show how rare the exceptions are. "Here's the only one I can come up with." Not to mention, he had other things going on in his life, like his business and marriage failing, after a couple of decades of success as an upper-middle class community leader type; his wife said he was showing signs of depression before he came under suspicion, and that might actually be why he got sloppy in his disposals, and how he came under suspicion.

He may have been headed for depression and suicide as a result of financial ruin and the collapse of his facade, and not so much facing what he had done as a criminal; that they all came down on him at once was a coincidence.

Actually, when you get down to it, even if Druitt were JTR, that probably had less to do with his suicide than his getting fired does. Really, we have no idea what the "private information" was. It may have been circular; if it was someone in the family saying "Oh my gawd, I hope it doesn't mean anything that the murders stopped when Montie died," then we have an argument predicated on itself, which is no argument at all. However, Mac might not have known that it was circular. He just might have known that the family were all saying "I hope not, but...."

[Jonathan H]

Family Secrets?

I recently saw the riveting documentary 'West of Memphis', produced by Peter Jackson, about the miscarriage of justice due to state corruption and fundamentalist hysteria in Arkansas which led to the unsafe convictions of three teenage boys for triple homicide in 1993.

Relevant here is that the convicted mens' benefactors (eg. Jackson) and crack legal team (aided by DNA) unearthed what seems to be the identity of the real murderer.

It has to be said right away that this is a man who is still alive, denies any culpability, and so far as I know is not even a 'person of interest' to the local police and courts.

The advocates of the West-Memphis-3 found people who claimed that the [alleged] real killer's family, as in his brothers, knew the truth. That this terrible knowledge had leaked to a nephew, who then confided in his friends out of shame and guilt. We see the friends interviewed and are shown the depositions they signed (and told they passed lie detector tests -- for what they are worth).

I theorize that something like this is how the belief, whether it be right or wrong, got out about Montie in Dorset among the various constituency stratum of the Tory toffs in early 1891.

It was very different from this modern case because Druitt was deceased.

On the other hand, Scotland Yard were still arresting men and in 1891 seemed to have a prime suspect in Sadler. This did not move M.P. Farquharason an inch from his opinion that he had the solution, so presumably it did not move the Druitts who knew either.

[RivkahChaya]

Just a note on the West Memphis 3, while I agree that is does look pretty bad for the new "suspect," Terry Hobbs, who was the stepfather of one of the dead boys, there are two reasons that he will probably never be brought to trial.

The first is the DNA evidence. DNA was found in the knots of the shoelaces used to tie the boys up, which were the boys own shoelaces, and it matched the stepfather, but it's reasonable to expect that the stepfather's DNA would be in his own stepson's laces, and the other DNA could be somehow transfer, since the boys were friends, and spent time at one another's houses. It probably isn't, because by the time it was tested, some 13 years after the murders, minor transfer DNA probably would not be there, especially since the bodies had been in a sort of boggy swamp, so, technically "submerged" for a time. For DNA to be present in the laces tying the other two boys, the killer would really have had to rub his hands on them, but being as it is, at this point, 20 years after the fact, the suspect will probably say he tied the other boys shoelaces at some point, and it will be hard to dispute. The boys were eight, and eight-year-olds can tie shoes, unless they have a disability, and in this country, and e-year-old who can't tie shoes is going to be receiving occupational therapy in school, but like I said, it will be hard to refute an invented story 20 years later. "He had his hands full."

Second, the teenagers, now men, in order to expedite their release from prison after jury misconduct was uncovered, took Alford pleas, which is a type of "no contest" plea, where an accused person can maintain their claim of innocence, while admitting that the prosecution has enough evidence to convict them. If the men had not taken those pleas, they would have had to remain in prison for another appeal, and then probably retrials, unless the governor stepped in and pardoned them, or something (I don't know enough about the case to know why he didn't, but I know several people close to the case vocally expressed the fact that they wished he would, so I'm assuming it was possible). Anyway, given that they took Alford pleas, which is considered a type of "guilty" plea, even though it allows the accused person to maintain innocence (a judge can actually rule as part of a parole or plea agreement that a person is not allowed to publicly maintain innocence, in the form of giving TV interviews, that sort of thing), if Hobbs were brought to trial, he would have a defense in the fact that other people have already been convicted for the crime.

I don't think the crime is being investigated, so no new evidence will come to light. There would have to be something extraordinary for the DA to go through the process of vacating all the plea agreements, dropping all charges against the men originally convicted, and then bringing charges against Hobbs.

A little note, something that bugged me in the TV coverage: Hobbs is correctly described as the "stepfather" of Stevie Branch, as he was married to Stevie's mother at the time (they are now divorced), and his biological father, who had previously been married to his mother, was still in the picture. However, one of the other boys, Christopher Byers, had been adopted by his mother's second husband years before the murders, had his last name, and did not even know his biological father. That man, John Mark Byers, should have described as Christopher's father, because that's what he was, but the press continually (not the documentary, the original press coverage) called him Christopher's stepfather. That really, really annoyed me.

[Roy Corduroy]

If the West Memphis Three didn't murder the three boys, then to my mind there is one and only one viable alternative - Mr. Bojangles.

Roy

[Jonathan H]

The most devastating aspect of the doco for me was that the whole Satanic Ritual Abuse mythos of the 90's got contaminated this case because the victims bodies were judged -- by a manifestly inadequate medical examiner subsequently debunked by a succession of qualified pathologists -- to have been molested and mutilated before and after death.

It is far more likely that they were simply murdered and then dumped in the creek, and their remains subject to natural predation (by sharp-beaked turtles).

To me the case is one of those too-frequent frightening modern examples of where people in authority think they they know what they are dealing with, driven by community fear and hysteria, and so basic police procedures of interviewing other suspects and witnesses falls by the wayside in a rush to judgement.

Once that train has pulled out of the station it is in the interest of the state not to admit error, not to reverse their initial findings -- not without committing career suicide.

Plus from an Australian point of view there was a collective and audible intake of air when the audience grasped that the judge and the prosecutor are elected officials, thus the system can be perceived to be corrupt to the core. Or at least potentially corrupted by the need to please the voters.

By comparison the arrest and investigation of Tom Sadler in 1891, despite the tabloid pressure (some of which was for Sadler -- see Sims) and acute humiliation for the state, is a model of probity as the suspect was released without charge due to a lack of evidence.

I still wonder what certain Druitts were thinking, and thinking of doing -- if anything -- as they watched their secret leak in Dorset, and then a few days later 'another' Ripper murder seemingly saved their bacon. Except that a man they must have been innocent of the Whitechapel crimes was now under the hammer -- what to do?

As the case against Sadler crumbled, Henry Farquharson, still not identified, began talking directly to the press and was adamant that [the un-named] Druitt was 'Jack'.

Then after Feb 18th the M.P. went mute. In 1895 he died, and three years later the story reappeared in the public sphere but disguised, eg. untraceable back to the Druitts and Dorset.

[Roy Corduroy]

Good evening Jonathan,

Then after Feb 18th the M.P. went mute.

As far as this caper, yes he went mute. But he was sucessfully sued the next year (1892) for slandering someone else.

three years later the story reappeared in the public sphere

Yes

but disguised

Well ... duh

Roy

[Jonathan H]

Farquharson's information about his opponent was essentially correct, just used as slander because the opponent had been a victim of sexual assault and not expelled as a perpetrator.

Plus you think Mac would not have known the values and limitations of a source like that Tory bruiser, a fellow card-carrying member of the ruling elite: the Old Boy Network?

The MP consistently claims that the un-named Druitt killed himself the same evening as the final murder. It is why his 'strange story' seems so convincing.

In his memoirs, Macnaghten shows that he knew this was not true, which means that his investigation of Montie had to extend beyond the loose-lipped politician. He tiptoed away from the double-bang timeline, ruining the MP's 'doctrine'

Duh?

Is that right Roy?

You accept that the MP's suspect tale was rebooted in disguised form?

Careful pal, because the deeply entrenched conventional wisdom since 1959 is that Sir Melville had a dodgy memory (in his own time his memory was supposed to be miraculous) and that is why the un-named Druitt began resurfacing as a middle-aged doctor in his cronies' writings.

Are you now agreeing with me and coming over to the Dark Side that whenever 'Aberconway' was written Mac communicated its contents to Griffiths and Sims knowing that he was peddling a mixture of fact and fiction to discreetly protect everybody concerned?

[Roy Corduroy]

the deeply entrenched conventional wisdom since 1959

Now I'm in a cabal. That was easy.

coming over to the Dark Side

I've always liked your theory, Jonathan, but, no I'll just settle for the free Cloak and Dagger Club tie pin if its OK with you.

Roy

[RivkahChaya]

I've always liked your theory, Jonathan, but, no I'll just settle for the free Cloak and Dagger Club tie pin if its OK with you.

Roy

There's a pin? well, now I want to be a member. Do they take girls?

[Jonathan H]

Sorry, can't help you guys.

The only club I belong to is the League of Existentialist Neo-Pagans (the LXN) who combine the teachings of Buddha, the commitment to service inspired by the Historical Jesus and who worship the Goddess Athena.

Though the LXN began in London ...

[ChrisGeorge]

Farquharson's information about his opponent was essentially correct, just used as slander because the opponent had been a victim of sexual assault and not expelled as a perpetrator.

Plus you think Mac would not have known the values and limitations of a source like that Tory bruiser, a fellow card-carrying member of the ruling elite: the Old Boy Network?

The MP consistently claims that the un-named Druitt killed himself the same evening as the final murder. It is why his 'strange story' seems so convincing.

In his memoirs, Macnaghten shows that he knew this was not true, which means that his investigation of Montie had to extend beyond the loose-lipped politician. He tiptoed away from the double-bang timeline, ruining the MP's 'doctrine'

Duh?

Is that right Roy?

You accept that the MP's suspect tale was rebooted in disguised form?

Careful pal, because the deeply entrenched conventional wisdom since 1959 is that Sir Melville had a dodgy memory (in his own time his memory was supposed to be miraculous) and that is why the un-named Druitt began resurfacing as a middle-aged doctor in his cronies' writings.

Are you now agreeing with me and coming over to the Dark Side that whenever 'Aberconway' was written Mac communicated its contents to Griffiths and Sims knowing that he was peddling a mixture of fact and fiction to discreetly protect everybody concerned?

Hi Jonathan

With due respect, that Macnaghten changed his story from the way he expressed it in his 1894 Memorandum to the way he expressed it in his memoirs of two decades later may be either, as you contend, because he did research or because he had forgotten the way he wrote about it years earlier. In any case, Jonathan, in The Days of My Years, he still says that he believes that the man "committed suicide on or about the 10th of November 1888. . ." That isn't much different from saying that he committed murder on the same night as the murder, neither of which matches the facts of Druitt's suicide which occurred weeks later. So how much research did he do, if any?

Best regards

Chris

[mklhawley]

Funny you should pick up on that Lynn. I had wrote "and the best of the rest might be Tumblety", but then I erased it.
I included him initially only because of Littlechilds letter.

Tumblety is still too much of a long shot for me, charlatan, poser, wanna-be?, absolutely, viscous murderer?, I don't think so.

Regards, Jon S.

'requiring leaps of faith'? It wasn't just Littlechild. He was only recalling what Anderson and company were doing about Tumblety in Nov/Dec 1888.

...and we have tons of evidence that Druitt and Kosminski were viscous murderers? One of the problems, Jon, is that there are still too many Tumblety misconceptions and you're stuck on Tumblety's public persona and comparing that with your image of who JtR was.

Sincerely,

Mike

[Robert]

I like Tumblety because he's got legs. By that I mean, there is still plenty to find out about him, and indeed plenty has been found out about him in recent years, by Joe Chetcuti and others.

[Jonathan H]

24 hoursis enough time ...

To Chris Goerge

I think that is a significant counter-point you raise.

For it can be argued that Macnaghten still does not realise that Druitt killed himself a full three weeks later.

That he believes in his culpability because he was a tormented wreck after Kelly, and therefore does not know -- and never did know? -- that Druitt was in court, at school, and playing cricket, his eventual suicide inexplicable in the 1889 sources, but in no way overtly linked to the Whitechapel horrors.

On the other hand, if we step back and compare the memoirs to what the MP was blabbing to people, and what he informed Griffiths and Sims then we see the significance of extending the gap even by just twenty-four hours.

We can see that Mac is likely moulding the data to suit the moment, as is shown by other examples.

For example, in the Major's book the three week interrugnum is mentioned, but supposedly the doctor was wandering about in a distressed state, missing from his home and friends.

There's the three weeks. Mac knew about it.

Then the Vicar appears and says he had time to confess -- and that meant however tormented he could function to do this.

A few days later Sims bobs up and now the three weeks are gone and the self-murder takes place immediately -- or for as long as it takes to stagger to the river from Miller's Ct. and of course the police are about to arrest the chief suspect.

That represents a return to the MP's timeline, to his 'evidence' against Montie -- it all happened the same evening.

In 1914, Macnaghten ruined the Farquharson-Sims version by conceding that it was not the same night/morning.

He writes that he killed himself 'soon after', the exact words of the Vicar.

He concedes the police were not in hot pursuit, also the implication of the Vicar's tale.

In conceding that he fled from Miller's Ct. he is conceding that he functioned and was found to be 'absented' by 'his own people' (his brother was searching for him). He does not say he was found raving and shrieking near the river.

If he functioned then he could confess to somebody -- to his own people? -- after all.

It meant the river detail had to go because the MP/Sims story did not alloew for a gap, now did not make practical sense -- and it is dropped.

Yet we know that Mac knew that is where and how Druitt killed himself.

Plus, he cannot say he killed himself on Dec 1st because that drops the Drutts right back in it, and would tip off grown up graduates of the school that their tragic teacher killed himself on exactly the same date and in the same place as the Ripper.

What a coincidence!?

Plus he cannot baldly tip off Sims that he had been misleading Tatcho for ffiteen years.

(Mac does say it was after Warren had been knocked out which did not take effect until the 30th, and he always said that Druitt killed himself six months before he started on the Force which is Dec 1st -- but they are oblique references.)

The point is 'on or about ...' means it might have been the 10th, or the 11th, or the 12th, or the ...