Druitt - A Link to the East End: The People's Palace

[Ben]

Criminologists need to back up their claims.I need evidence/quotes from them---its all utterly meaningless drivel otherwise Ben.

Or what? They're lying? I'm sorry, Norma, I continue to read on with mouth agape. I just assumed you knew all of this, given that you must have been interesed in this topic for quite a few years.

You're honestly trying to negate the fact that most serial killers (even the more brutal ones) are non-psychotic to the extent that you're dismissing it as "meaningless drivel"? Frankly, that's so unutterably outlandish I scarely know what to do or think other than scratch my head in disbelief.

Brutal Bundy was non-psychotic, nor was the far more brutal Andrei Chikatilo or Dennis Rader or Gary Ridgway or Gordon Cummins or Ivan Milat or John George Haigh or John Wayne Gacy or Jeffrey Dahmer etc etc etc. Now I could explain why in all cases, but could I respectfully and without antagonism suggest that you research the topic instead?

Hope I haven't offended. I guess I'm just very surprised more than anything...

Best regards,
Ben

[Natalie Severn]

It's completely wrong, Norma. 100% wrong. I can scarely digest what I'm reading here.

Ask any criminologist under the sun. Ask Keppel, Ressler, Douglas, Hazelwood, Canter. Any of them. Which psychiatrist is going around telling people that "most" serial killers "will travel a hundred miles to kill"? Which psychiatrist is going around telling people that most knife-serials are perpetrated by psychotics or those on a mission from God or the devil?

Cuz it's utter crap. All of it.

Criminologists need to back up their claims.I need evidence/quotes from them---its all utterly meaningless drivel otherwise Ben.

I can actually obtain the material evidence for MY CLAIM in approx two hours.My husband is in London and will dig it out for me once he gets in.
Meanwhile can you source those three assertions you made---p-l-e-a-s-e???

Regarding those paranoid schizophrenics who drive one hundred miles to kill.
Where I stay in Wales is near a beach.Some three years ago a chap drove up from Manchester[approx 100 miles] and frienzedly stabbed another man who was walking his dog.
The killer was on a "mission".The victim died instantly from his numerous stab wounds.The killer was a paranoid schizophrenic who was experiencing a psychotic episode and was under instruction from his "higher power".Normally he took his drugs and was not a danger to anyone when he did but on this occasion he didnt take them.Thats just one example from many I knopw of.

[Ben]

I beg your pardon ?The statement I made is totally sourced and from a leading light in psychiatry.

It's completely wrong, Norma. 100% wrong. I can scarcely digest what I'm reading here.

Ask any criminologist under the sun. Ask Keppel, Ressler, Douglas, Hazelwood, Canter. Any of them. Or just pop over to wikipedia! Which psychiatrist is going around telling people that "most" serial killers "will travel a hundred miles to kill"? Which psychiatrist is going around telling people that most knife-serials are perpetrated by psychotics and those on a mission from God or the devil?

Cuz it's utter crap. All of it. Honestly, how long have you been subscribing to the view that most serials are committed by paranoid schizophrenics?

[Natalie Severn]

I beg your pardon ?The statement I made is totally sourced and from a leading light in psychiatry.I cant today give the precise name,qualifications,medical text etc because I am in Wales but returning to London tomorrow when I will post the full details.

Back to my request from yourself please,Ben,dont try to duck out of it.
Can you answer a SINGLE ONE of my questions -with "SOURCE BACK UP" for your assertions or is it all a lot of made up hogwash?

[Ben]

Can you please answer some questions arising from your totally unsourced and unsubstantiated "opinions

Are you serious?

It wasn't me who came up with:

"The vast majority [still] of gruesome knife killings of the type carried out by the Ripper are by people suffering a psychosis.They usually are paranoid schizophrenics,will travel a hundred miles to kill"

That isn't just unsourced and uncorroborated. It's provably false.

a]What crime scene evidence are you talking about----SPECIFICALLY----?

I've told you: Most closely-clustered serial offences tend to be committed by local or locally-based agents, and in Whitechapel and Spitalfields, most of the local or locally based populace were working class. It really doesn't take a deductive genius to figure out what the most logical inference is to draw from these facts. Plus the fact that the killer headed East in the direction of the heart of the murder district after the Eddowes murder, not West towards the City and the West End.

By all means doubt me on all three counts if you wish...

Regards,
Ben

[Natalie Severn]

Hi Norma,

I'm afraid you have a great many things wrong here.



I don't know what "just as easily" means, but it certainly isn't "just as likely" - not by a long shot.

He was probably local. He was probably working class. Why? Because crime scene evidence, historical precedent and expert opinion (which, frankly, is neither of us) informs us as much. Most closely-clustered serial offences tend to be committed by local or locally-based agents, and in Whitechapel and Spitalfields, most of the local or locally based populace were working class. It really doesn't take a deductive genius to figure out what the most logical inference is to draw from these facts.



This isn't true either.

Most serial killers (even the "grusome" ones) do not suffer from psychosis or paranoid schizophrenia. Most serial killers do not "travel a hundred miles to kill". Most serial killers do not believe themselves to be on an assignment from God or the devil. Most of the things you're asserting with authority to be true are in direct contrast to what we know to be true about "most" serial killers.

Most serial killers suffer from a non-social personality disorder and are not psychotic. Bit of a bummer for me, I'll admit, since my "favourite" identified suspect was, in all probabilty, a sufferer of paranoid schizophrenia, but I'll have to grin and bear it and go where the evidence indicates.

There is no evidence that I'm aware of to suggest that either Druitt or his mother suffered from "paranoid schizphrenia", let alone of the order that manifested itself in violence.

All the best,
Ben

Lets start at the beginning shall we.
Can you please answer some questions arising from your totally unsourced and unsubstantiated "opinions":

a]What crime scene evidence are you talking about----SPECIFICALLY----?

b]Which "historical precedence"---when/what year/pertaining to whom exactly?

c]Whose "expert opinion" ?please state name and what qualifies these people as "experts "on the Jack the Ripper murders of 1888.

Its no good making these sweeping assertions without giving any sources.
They mean nothing at all stated as you have stated them.


When you have provided some factual evidence to back up your assertions I will be very happy to explain why Mrs Druitt was suffering from paranoia.Why most "grisly" type murders are committed by psychotic people.
Thanks
Norma

[Ben]

Hi Norma,

I'm afraid you have a great many things wrong here.

He could have been working class,thats true,but he could just as easily have been upper class or middle class.

I don't know what "just as easily" means, but it certainly isn't "just as likely" - not by a long shot.

He was probably local. He was probably working class. Why? Because crime scene evidence, historical precedent and expert opinion (which, frankly, is neither of us) informs us as much. Most closely-clustered serial offences tend to be committed by local or locally-based agents, and in Whitechapel and Spitalfields, most of the local or locally based populace were working class. It really doesn't take a deductive genius to figure out what the most logical inference is to draw from these facts.

They usually are paranoid schizophrenics,will travel a hundred miles to kill,are often clever enough to avoid being caught and believe themselves to be on an assignment from God or the Devil .

This isn't true either.

Most serial killers (even the "grusome" ones) do not suffer from psychosis or paranoid schizophrenia. Most serial killers do not "travel a hundred miles to kill". Most serial killers do not believe themselves to be on an assignment from God or the devil. Most of the things you're asserting with authority to be true are in direct contrast to what we know to be true about "most" serial killers.

Most serial killers suffer from a non-social personality disorder and are not psychotic. Bit of a bummer for me, I'll admit, since my "favourite" identified suspect was, in all probabilty, a sufferer of paranoid schizophrenia, but I'll have to grin and bear it and go where the evidence indicates.

There is no evidence that I'm aware of to suggest that either Druitt or his mother suffered from "paranoid schizphrenia", let alone of the order that manifested itself in violence.

All the best,
Ben

[Natalie Severn]

Regarding serial killers.Its a mistake in my view and that of many others to take the Ripper out of his social time and context.
We do not know what class he belonged to.
To say he could not have been Druitt because the Ripper was working class is absolutely ridiculous.He could have been working class,thats true,but he could just as easily have been upper class or middle class.
The vast majority [still] of gruesome knife killings of the type carried out by the Ripper are by people suffering a psychosis.They usually are paranoid schizophrenics,will travel a hundred miles to kill,are often clever enough to avoid being caught and believe themselves to be on an assignment from God or the Devil .
Not all paranoid schizophrenics are violent,let alone kill but that is the illness by far the most often associated with grisly killings such as the Rippers killings were.
Mrs Druitt,an upper Middle class lady suffered from the illness by all accounts.So did Supt Cutbush,who like Druitt committed suicide having had an exemplary career as a senior policeman.Neither was in the least violent to others as far as we know,but they shared the illness that can cause "comman killings". So did the Supt"s "nephew" ,Thomas Cutbush, whom the Sun" fingered as the Ripper,.All three believed people were out to kill them---they suffered from paranoia.All three came from comfortable middle class homes.
Kosminski also suffered from this illness.It is an illness that often affects generations within the same family.That is precisely why,ijn the case of Druitt in particular he committed suicide he said because he "feared he was going like Mother"!
Several of Druitt"s family members committed suicide like Supt Cutbush did.There was a history, in both these families of mental illness of the very type we are talking of.Fortunately only
sometimes does it cause an individual to become a gruesome killer.
The murderer could have come from any class,travelled as far as it took and been prepared to plan to the n"th detail, stalk, kill and mutilate his victims,usually believing himself to be carrying out the killings on command from a "higher power".
Best

[Ben]

ie he killed/ murdered a "series" of women.[just as Dr Shipman.

Yes, they are both serial poisoners. Did anyone dispute that?

The physical evidence - i.e. the ability to cause death from poison - naturally pointed in the opposite direction to a docker or costermonger or knacker. Serial poisoners tend to come from white-collar professions and backgrounds for obvious reasons.

Heath is trickier, because we only have evidence that he was responsible for two murders - the others are subject to speculation. He was, as far as we know, not a serial killer as the term defies. Again, that isn't my problem as the term you're appropriating was invented by Robert Ressler, not me.

Even if he was responsible for one or more murders in Egypt, that would mean he killed in London, Bournemouth, and Egypt. Hardly a local offender committing a string of murders within walking distance of eachother.

Best regards,
Ben

[Natalie Severn]

Yeah, I know Norma. Cream the poisoner. Had Cream never been identified, most discerning students of that case would probably still have fingered a generic suspect-type just like him, because that's where the evidence pointed. What's the argument?



"Believed" is no good. We only have evidence that he killed two women. What's the argument?

Ben,

a]Regarding Dr Cream.My point is that he prowled the redlight district of poverty stricken Lambeth,

This was in the 1880"s/early 1890"s.

He was therefore a Victorian Serial Killer-



ie he killed/ murdered a "series" of women.[just as Dr Shipman was a "serial killer"[ of some 250 -300 people"]and is always referred to as such---------WHY is that I wonder?
Do get your semantics right,Ben, p-l-e-a-s-e.Dr Cream was a "serial killer".I am talking here specifically of the "ACT OF KILLING/MURDERING" not gobbledegook about "generic killers" etc.

b]Neville Heath did not kill ONE WOMAN-----for certain but TWO within the space of A FEW WEEKS.HE WAS THEN CAUGHT because police flooded the district and he had left clues -in the hotel room of the first woman,and elsewhere near a beach with the second.So he was NOT a "ONE OFF killer" but a man who had killed two women in succession or "serially". in just a few weeks.
And please read the background to the case.He had just returned to England from WW2 during which time he was BEING SOUGHT in EGYPT for arrest on the suspected murder of several young people just before the war ended.They had been put to work as prostitutes in an house of ill repute ,specialising in S&M in Egypt.Thats good enough for me.If it isnt for you then its quite sad---or do the murders of his young Egyptian clients in Egypt not matter?


Gareth,
I am in Wales at the moment and do not have Sugden"s book.However I came across a quote from Abberline"s report on George Chapman[that being what he called himself in England].
Since this thread is about Druitt I will post his remarks on the thread for George Chapman aka Severin Klosowski.

[Ben]

Cream was a serial killer of some five prostitutes,He was hung for murder in 1892.

Yeah, I know Norma. Cream the poisoner. Had Cream never been identified, most discerning students of that case would probably still have fingered a generic suspect-type just like him, because that's where the evidence pointed. What's the argument?

In Egypt ,during the war,ie a couple of years before his trial,he is believed to have killed several young females and males .

"Believed" is no good. We only have evidence that he killed two women. What's the argument?

[Natalie Severn]

Gareth,
Well maybe Philip Sugden was wrong.I am very surprised I must admit,if this is the case,


Ben,
Cream was a serial killer of some five prostitutes,He was hung for murder in 1892.
Regarding Neville Heath.In England he may only have killed two women ----in succession----[as if that isnt enough for crying out loud]
In Egypt ,during the war,ie a couple of years before his trial,he is believed to have killed several young females and males .This was in a house of ill repute he used to visit, specialising in S&M.There had been an uproar ,during the times of his visits,about mysterious attacks that gone well beyond the usual,-well out of hand, causing a number of deaths.He was originally a suspect but it couldnt be proven,[they said].When he was arrested the cases were considered solved.He too was hung for murder in 1946 or 1948.

[Natalie Severn]

Hi Folks,
To me,particularly having read his bizarre religious tracts, Anderson, quite honestly, comes across later on in his life as a pretty deluded soul, given to "hearing voices" from "the other place"etc. Macnaghten ,though,appears to be a pretty normal,down to earth,urbane type of man .I find the writings of Macnaghten"s friend,the journalist Sims,to be thoughtful and compassionate too -in a Victorian sort of way, and I can picture the two deep in discussion about the ripper.I also find James Monro,[an even, more senior policeman] , to have finally shown himself to be a man of integrity,who did not wish to "continue to do wrong"---and therefore he left his job/security and every comfort in life , because his conscience would not allow him to stay any longer in a job that compromised him.In other respects,like Macnaghten , he too seems to have had both feet on the ground.We dont really know what he thought of Druitt as a suspect-and he must have read the Macnaghten memorandum.The only way he spoke of the Ripper- that we hear about anyway,is that the case was a "hot potato".Maybe he knew something but he didnt say so.

There were ,as Andy says,a large number who said they did not know----and this was years later.I happen to rate Major Smith actually.He spoke quite magnificently about Anderson"s wrong headed nonsense about the Jews and his Jewish suspect----I suspect the Major doesnt suit some of those who have taken Anderson at his word!

[aspallek]

Hello Ben,

Abberline was not in charge of the overall investigation nor was he a "senior police official." You are correct, however, in saying that he rejected a derivation of Macnaghten's theory but, again, this was long after he had left the force.

It does indeed make a great difference how many years later opinions were written down. This can clearly be seen from the way Macnaghten himself modified his views between 1894 and 1914. This was partly due to the passage of time and partly due to the fact that in his memoirs were public while his memorandum was not.

It is accurate to say that no senior police official left a record of agreeing with Macnaghten's theory about Druitt. However, many such senior officials left no record at all regarding their opinions on the case. We don't know, for example, whether Warren agreed or not with Macnaghten's opinion. Your argument is in large part (with the exception of a very few individuals such as Anderson) an argument from silence.

Your caution regarding Farquharson is well noted. However, this particular discussion is not about whether Druitt is guilty. It is about Macnaghten's credibility in suspecting him. If Druitt was already a suspect in the eyes of a member of Parliament from his district who knew him, Macnaghten can scarcely be criticized for suspecting him.

[Ben]

Now, Ben, I'm afraid this is an inaccurate statement. Do we have record of any other senior police official who put forward a suspect while still in office? Only Macnaghten. The others, like Anderson for example, were reflecting many years later.

It's not as inaccurate statement, Andy.

As far as we know, Macnaghten was the only police official of any seniority who favoured Druitt as the prime suspect. We know that the senior officials who were actually working the case at the time (i.e. not Macnaghten) were not sold on the theory, with Abberline explicitly stating that it amounted to no more than Druitt committing suicide at the "right" time. Personally, I don't find the suggestion that Macnagthen withheld information (info which could potentially sway the others to favour Druitt) from the likes of Anderson and Swanson to be very credible. More likely, it was shared and ajudjed to carry little weight as evidence.

Abberline was a senior official to the extent that he had overall charge of the investigation "on the ground".

It doesn't really matter how long after the event they were writing. If the Kosminski identification occured in 1891, for example, it would appear than Anderson subscribed to his theory just as early (if not earlier) as Macnaghten subscribed to his. It seems likely that Swanson agreed with his boss, or else he'd hardly have highlighted the detail that "no similar murder was committed again in London" (paraphrasing) after Kosminski's incarceration.

Farquharson, almost certainly a Druitt acquaintance, was already talking about him as the suspect in early 1891.

I know, and an interesting find on your part. Unfortunately, we know very little about Farquarson as a source, and the nature of his suspicions may or may not hint at something especially incriminating.

Best regards,
Ben