Macnaughton naming Druitt

[pinkmoon]

Was it really fair for Macnaghten to name Druitt as been the killer without sharing his "private information".It's quite possible that all Druitt was guilty of was been mentally ill.

[lynn cates]

public consumption

Hello Jason. That's an interesting question.

Did Mac intend that for public consumption?

Cheers.
LC

[pinkmoon]

The question prompts more questions itself to put pen to paper even if it is not meant for publication and accuse someone of these awfull crimes without any evidence is quite an evil thing so could he have had evidence.Mr Mac seems to be a decent gentleman who was well thought of so why would he do this to Druitts reputation and also bring this horrible thing onto his family just isn't right.

[lynn cates]

convinced

Hello Jason. Thanks.

Different people count different things as evidence. I daresay he convinced himself that Monty was the ripper--in much the same was as Sir Robert convinced himself about a Polish Jew, possibly Kosminski.

Cheers.
LC

[pinkmoon]

Hello Jason. Thanks.

Different people count different things as evidence. I daresay he convinced himself that Monty was the ripper--in much the same was as Sir Robert convinced himself about a Polish Jew, possibly Kosminski.

Cheers.
LC

Hi Lynn,you've got to admit that if the content of this memo was every to become into the public domain then the consequences for Druitts family would have been horrific.It would have been bad enough having a relative as a mass murderer but to say that the family suspected him it would have been horrific for his family.So it's back to did Mr Mac have anything to back his claim up or was he just an awfully uncaring man with no regards for the consequences of his actions.

[lynn cates]

family

Hello Jason. Thanks.

HAD it become public--and there was nothing in it--surely the family would have wailed long and loud.

I am satisfied that Mac had something--but what?

Cheers.
LC

[pinkmoon]

Hello Jason. Thanks.

HAD it become public--and there was nothing in it--surely the family would have wailed long and loud.

I am satisfied that Mac had something--but what?

Cheers.
LC

Hi Lynn my dear,If he had something in the way of evidence in a case of this magnitude it would have been known amongst other high ranking police men surely .Also think how much money Druitts family could be awarded in a libel case.

[Graham]

I don't think that dragging a corpse out of The Thames, even though that corpse was identifiable and had a history, would in itself have suggested to MM that it was the body of Jack the Ripper. I'm sure that the 'private info' was what convinced him. Why on earth did he burn the documents relating to this?
There must have been a very sound reason for doing so.

I have also long been puzzled by the statement that the police were, sic, looking for M Druitt while he was still alive - this according to G R Sims who, of course, could have been totally wrong. Sims also wrote that the body of the man suspected by his friends and family and by the chiefs of Scotland Yard as being the Ripper was recovered from the Thames. Did Sims get this info from MM? There was also a (distant) family relationship between MM and the Druitts, and it's tempting to think that the 'private info' came via this link.

Albert Bachert of the Whitechapel Vigilance Committee said that he'd been told by the police prior to MM's arrival at Scotland Yard that the Ripper had drowned in the Thames.

All of the above is old and well-known information, but nevertheless interesting I think, given the subject of Pinkmoon's thread.

Graham

PS: Pinkmoon, Lynn Cates is a he.

[pinkmoon]

I don't think that dragging a corpse out of The Thames, even though that corpse was identifiable and had a history, would in itself have suggested to MM that it was the body of Jack the Ripper. I'm sure that the 'private info' was what convinced him. Why on earth did he burn the documents relating to this?
There must have been a very sound reason for doing so.

I have also long been puzzled by the statement that the police were, sic, looking for M Druitt while he was still alive - this according to G R Sims who, of course, could have been totally wrong. Sims also wrote that the body of the man suspected by his friends and family and by the chiefs of Scotland Yard as being the Ripper was recovered from the Thames. Did Sims get this info from MM? There was also a (distant) family relationship between MM and the Druitts, and it's tempting to think that the 'private info' came via this link.

Albert Bachert of the Whitechapel Vigilance Committee said that he'd been told by the police prior to MM's arrival at Scotland Yard that the Ripper had drowned in the Thames.

All of the above is old and well-known information, but nevertheless interesting I think, given the subject of Pinkmoon's thread.

Graham

PS: Pinkmoon, Lynn Cates is a he.

Hi Graham,my great grandparents lived in Whitechapel during "the autumn of terror" and my father was born in Shoreditch the same as his parents .The tale they have always told "is that after the murder of the women in the room the murderer who was well to do was fished out of the Thames".Can you imagine my excitement when many years ago I read about Druitt this story seems to have been about very soon after Mary Kelly's murder.If Mr Mac did have papers that he destroyed then other police men must have known about the papers.Also why destroy these papers if he was every challenged by druitts family he could say here's my proof.p.s sorry to assume lynn was a women we all make mistakes as the dalek send climbing of the dustbin no offence intended.

[lynn cates]

libel

Hello Jason. Thanks.

"If he had something in the way of evidence in a case of this magnitude it would have been known amongst other high ranking police men surely."

I think so. But his information may have come solely from Farqy. And how does one weigh the evidence?

"Also think how much money Druitts family could be awarded in a libel case."

Indeed. Provided:

1. It were in print for public consumption.

2. It could be proven he were not.

Cheers.
LC

[pinkmoon]

Wasn't the memo prepared to counter act against claims made by newspaper that cutbush was the killer? if so surely it was meant for publication.Even if it wasn't published the fact he put pen to paper and a copy was filed in police records would have put him at danger of libel if it every came to publics attention.I keep coming to the conclusion that he must have had something quite powerfull.

[lynn cates]

publication

Hello Jason. Thanks.

If it were meant for publication, why wasn't it published? It has been suggested that it was being kept just in case an explanation about the ripper were needed.

Cheers.
LC

[Graham]

I'm not sure if this was actually on the Statute Books in 1888, but a dead person cannot in law be libelled.

The precedent was set in 1887 when someone wrote a highly critical epitaph of a Mr Bachelor who lived in Cardiff. His family sued the writer for libel and lost the case.

Graham

[pinkmoon]

I'm not sure if this was actually on the Statute Books in 1888, but a dead person cannot in law be libelled.

The precedent was set in 1887 when someone wrote a highly critical epitaph of a Mr Bachelor who lived in Cardiff. His family sued the writer for libel and lost the case.

Graham

Hi Graham,I mean his family suing for libel by saying they suspected him of been killer.

[Graham]

Bloody hell, me keyboard is smoking....

No PM, I can't see how the Druitt family could have sued for libel, if what I said in my previous post is true. They could perhaps have applied for the legal retraction of a statement damaging to their reputation and gone after some kind of financial restitution or compensation, but not for libel because Monty Druitt was dead. And it is likely that the cost of bringing such a case against MM or anyone else would greatly exceed any payment awarded in the event of a verdict in their favour.

Graham