Druitt.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

This for me is the biggest hurdle for Druittist , but I've discussed this already at length previously on another Druitt thread .

There was a excellent podcast recently on this site that all but put the nail in the Druitt coffin , I did suggest to one poster to take his stance about Druitt up with one of the participants on that podcast who has a reputation for her brutal responses if you disagree with her point of view.

Needless to say there was never any discussion on the topic .

Can you please clarify what you consider to be the biggest hurdle?

[Wickerman]

This for me is the biggest hurdle for Druittist , but I've discussed this already at length previously on another Druitt thread .

There was a excellent podcast recently on this site that all but put the nail in the Druitt coffin , I did suggest to one poster to take his stance about Druitt up with one of the participants on that podcast who has a reputation for her brutal responses if you disagree with her point of view.

Needless to say there was never any discussion on the topic .

I don't blame them, if a theorist cannot control their emotions then why would anyone choose to become embroiled in a pointless vociferous exchange?
(pft, listen at me talk )

That aside, nothing new has surfaced to contest Druitt's potential culpability, the 'cricket' schedule has been done to death numerous times over the decades, but still does not rule him out. One of the traits of a serial killer is their ability to conduct a radical change, be it mood or location, or both. This is what a split personality is and it is well known that some of our serial killers portray that trait.
What is needed is direct evidence to rule him out, and scores of theorists have looked for it. Some because they want to know he is a valid suspect, others because they hate the fact he was ever a suspect in the first place.
We did not make him a suspect, so we cannot unmake him. It is a 'fact' he was named as a suspect, we may never know why (Hainsworth aside), all we can do is keep looking for something that rules him out - he is already in.

[Observer]

Druitt was playing cricket in Bournemouth on 3, 4, 10, and 11 August 1888.

He may have been in Bournemouth continuously from 3 to 11 August

He May well of been, this being Bournemouth cricket week. It also poses problems for those who believe Tabram to have been a victim of JTR who was murdered on the 7th August.

Druitt is a very poor suspect in my opinion.

[FISHY1118]

Can you please clarify what you consider to be the biggest hurdle?

Just everything we know about his movements .

As I said I've discussed this at length already on another thread.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

He May well of been, this being Bournemouth cricket week. It also poses problems for those who believe Tabram to have been a victim of JTR who was murdered on the 7th August.

Druitt is a very poor suspect in my opinion.

Another murder occasionally included among the Ripper cases is that of Martha Tabram, who was viciously stabbed to death on 7 August 1888. Her death coincided with the middle of Bournemouth Cricket Week, 4–11 August, in which Druitt was heavily involved, and was during the school holidays which Druitt spent in Dorset.^[113] In the words of one of his biographers, "It scarcely left time for a 200-mile round dash to fit in a murder."^[114]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montague_Druitt

[FISHY1118]

I don't blame them, if a theorist cannot control their emotions then why would anyone choose to become embroiled in a pointless vociferous exchange?
(pft, listen at me talk )

That aside, nothing new has surfaced to contest Druitt's potential culpability, the 'cricket' schedule has been done to death numerous times over the decades, but still does not rule him out. One of the traits of a serial killer is their ability to conduct a radical change, be it mood or location, or both. This is what a split personality is and it is well known that some of our serial killers portray that trait.
What is needed is direct evidence to rule him out, and scores of theorists have looked for it. Some because they want to know he is a valid suspect, others because they hate the fact he was ever a suspect in the first place.
We did not make him a suspect, so we cannot unmake him. It is a 'fact' he was named as a suspect, we may never know why (Hainsworth aside), all we can do is keep looking for something that rules him out - he is already in.

Only for the sake of keeping him in as a suspect would one take this stance regarding druitt.

Question to Druitt supporters who believe he should be left a suspect

Was he in their opinions JTR yes/ No ?

Again probability ( virtually zero) comes into play based on what is known about Druitt.

[FISHY1118]

On the issue of Druitt being named a "suspect" is also debatable, he was only compared to another suspect as being ""more likely" to have committed the crime .

The police at the time to the best of my knowledge did not ever name Druitt as a suspect or man of interest in the investigation .

[Herlock Sholmes]

I pointed out some time ago that in his spare time, Druitt played hockey.

Someone challenged me; he hadn't heard anything about the hockey.

I haven't heard anything about him visiting Whitechapel.

We're talking about someone who taught at a boarding school, practised as a barrister, played a great deal of cricket in his spare time, and also played hockey.

We know that at university Druitt played cricket, rugby and fives. I may have forgotten but I can recall no evidence that he’d played hockey. If I have forgotten this fact could you provide the source please so that I can refresh my memory?

As a fast bowler, he was probably much taller then any of the suspects described by witnesses.

’Probably’ or ‘possibly’ isn’t good enough. As I’ve said before and as has been explained numerous times, witnesses can misjudge characteristics like height. This isn’t my opinion…it’s a researched and proven fact.

We are being asked to believe that he committed the first murder during a trip to Dorset, by commuting between London and Dorset during the trip.

You can believe or disbelieve what you want PI. My criteria for assessing suspect isn’t predicated on what your assessment is. The only relevant question is…is there anything from the evidence that we have which meant that Druitt returning to London would have been either impossible or difficult? The answer is a conclusive no.

When I pointed out that this meant that he was being alleged to have used the trip as a cover to commit the murder - in other words, to create an alibi - someone retorted that that wasn't so.

Why would someone go on a trip to Dorset and during that trip commit a murder in London, unless to provide himself with an alibi?

Again, you are speculating and assuming that you must be correct. As I’ve suggested numerous times he could have had a meeting in London. And more importantly you are on the thinnest of ice if you try to claim that you know how a serial killer would or wouldn’t act. You can’t possibly know this but you appear to think that you do.

The case against him is so farfetched and yet whenever I point this out, the reaction is that I'm somehow being unreasonable.

You are.

I pointed out before that another completely innocent man, Mungo Ireland, was indirectly accused by a leading policeman of committing a series of similar brutal murders.

Incorrectly of course but that policeman didn’t just pluck his name out of thin air as Macnaghten is implausible accused of doing. That police officer was simply wrong, as I (viewing the situation fairly and without bias) have accepted that Macnaghten could have been.

The idea that if a leading policeman makes an accusation against someone, there must be something in it, is obviously a flawed one.

And an invented one (again!) I haven’t said this….all that I’ve said is that Macnaghten must have felt that there was something in it (rightly or wrongly)

It should be abundantly clear to anyone looking at Druitt's activities that he spent his spare time playing sports - not stalking prostitutes.

That last claim isn’t worthy of a response PI.

[Herlock Sholmes]

On the issue of Druitt being named a "suspect" is also debatable, he was only compared to another suspect as being ""more likely" to have committed the crime .

The police at the time to the best of my knowledge did not ever name Druitt as a suspect or man of interest in the investigation .

MacNaghten maintained Druitt as the likeliest suspect at least until he’d retired and then wrote his memoirs and we have no evidence that he ever altered his opinion.

Id add Farquaharsen a full 3 years before the memorandum.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Only for the sake of keeping him in as a suspect would one take this stance regarding druitt.

Question to Druitt supporters who believe he should be left a suspect

Was he in their opinions JTR yes/ No ?

So every suspect that can’t be proven should be dismissed?

Again probability ( virtually zero) comes into play based on what is known about Druitt.

I notice that, as per the question in a previous thread Fishy, not one single person stood up to say that they would dismiss Druitt as a suspect before they dismissed one of the worst suspects imaginable….the joke that is Sir William Gull.

Druitt is a serious suspect mentioned by a very senior police officer. Gull is just the ripperological version of a comic interlude.

A sense of proportion would be nice.

[Herlock Sholmes]

And for the poster who mentioned Tabram….one of the side results of the cricket research that was done recently is that we now know that Druitt didn’t have an alibi for Tabram either. He has no alibi for any of the murders.

[The Baron]

We did not make him a suspect, so we cannot unmake him. It is a 'fact' he was named as a suspect, we may never know why (Hainsworth aside), all we can do is keep looking for something that rules him out - he is already in.

There is zero nill zilch nix zot nada evedance that Druitt had ever set a foot in Whitechapel, let alone him being the WM, he is already in, only in the imagination of a tee merchant who had zero nill zilch nix zot nada experience and didn't make the slightest of investigations about Druitt.


The Baron

[Trevor Marriott]

I don't blame them, if a theorist cannot control their emotions then why would anyone choose to become embroiled in a pointless vociferous exchange?
(pft, listen at me talk )

That aside, nothing new has surfaced to contest Druitt's potential culpability, the 'cricket' schedule has been done to death numerous times over the decades, but still does not rule him out. One of the traits of a serial killer is their ability to conduct a radical change, be it mood or location, or both. This is what a split personality is and it is well known that some of our serial killers portray that trait.
What is needed is direct evidence to rule him out, and scores of theorists have looked for it. Some because they want to know he is a valid suspect, others because they hate the fact he was ever a suspect in the first place.
We did not make him a suspect, so we cannot unmake him. It is a 'fact' he was named as a suspect, we may never know why (Hainsworth aside), all we can do is keep looking for something that rules him out - he is already in.

Inspector Frederick Abberline, who was the leading investigative officer in the case, appeared to dismiss Druitt as a suspect on the basis that the only evidence against him was the coincidental timing of his suicide shortly after the fifth murder. He states in the Pall Mall Gazette 1908

"I know all about that story. But what does it amount to? Simply this. Soon after the last murder in Whitechapel the body of a young doctor was found in the Thames, but there is absolutely nothing beyond the fact that he was found at that time to incriminate him. A report was made to the Home Office about the matter, but that it was ‘considered final and conclusive’ is going altogether beyond the truth."

Mcnaghten supposedly received this private information but there is no indication of who gave him the info. This was probably nothing more than rumour and opinion

MM did not join the Met until 1889 and that info was never disclosed or it seems followed up on. MM could have been simply another person who was given the name of a suspect just like the multitude of likely suspects who had been suggested by the public at the time of the murders, and the inaccuracy of how he describes Druit suggests just that, and it was nothing more than hearsay

And not forgetting that the later murders of Coles and McKenzie were treated as ripper victims so if they were that definitely rules him out

The MM penned by MM is unsafe to rely on there are too many discrepancies within it to be treated with any credibility

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Herlock Sholmes]

Inspector Frederick Abberline, who was the leading investigative officer in the case, appeared to dismiss Druitt as a suspect on the basis that the only evidence against him was the coincidental timing of his suicide shortly after the fifth murder. He states in the Pall Mall Gazette 1908

"I know all about that story. But what does it amount to? Simply this. Soon after the last murder in Whitechapel the body of a young doctor was found in the Thames, but there is absolutely nothing beyond the fact that he was found at that time to incriminate him. A report was made to the Home Office about the matter, but that it was ‘considered final and conclusive’ is going altogether beyond the truth."

Mcnaghten supposedly received this private information but there is no indication of who gave him the info. This was probably nothing more than rumour and opinion

MM did not join the Met until 1889 and that info was never disclosed or it seems followed up on. MM could have been simply another person who was given the name of a suspect just like the multitude of likely suspects who had been suggested by the public at the time of the murders, and the inaccuracy of how he describes Druit suggests just that, and it was nothing more than hearsay

And not forgetting that the later murders of Coles and McKenzie were treated as ripper victims so if they were that definitely rules him out

The MM penned by MM is unsafe to rely on there are too many discrepancies within it to be treated with any credibility

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Abberline had retired by then so his opinion is close to worthless.

Your “probably nothing more than rumour and opinion,” is beyond weak. You can’t know that, it’s just an unfounded assumption.

That some considered Mackenzie and Coles is also beyond weak. Almost no one today accepts Coles as a victim and only a few believe Mackenzie to have been. Either way we can’t know so we can’t dismiss someone on an unknown. That’s if we’re being fair of course.

To dismiss the MM on a couple of trivial errors is a tool of convenience.

That Macnaghten simply picked Druitt out of thin air is laughable.

[Ms Diddles]

Only for the sake of keeping him in as a suspect would one take this stance regarding druitt.

Question to Druitt supporters who believe he should be left a suspect

Was he in their opinions JTR yes/ No ?

Again probability ( virtually zero) comes into play based on what is known about Druitt.

Hi Fishy,

I'm not sure that I would refer to myself as a "Druitt Supporter", but I do believe that his inclusion in the MM and the time of his death etc do warrant him remaining on the list.

I'm aware of the issues with the MM, but I'm inclined to agree with Herlock that Druitt seems such a weird, incongruous choice to include, that it makes me wonder about the content of the "private information".

Do I think he was the Ripper?

Nope!

I doubt it was any of the named suspects, personally.