Druitt.

[Trevor Marriott]

It might be ‘hearsay’ to us but it doesn’t mean that it was hearsay to Macnaghten. Hearsay means: “information received from other people which cannot be substantiated.”

Well you got that right it is hearsay evidence at the time it was received

If, for example, Druitt had been out on the night of the murders and that he’d come home one night with blood on him. Or he’s spoken in derogatory ways about women in general or specifically prostitutes. We know that none of these things would have been proof of his guilt but they could all have been substantiated as true. Therefore to Macnaghten they wouldn’t have been hearsay. They would have been facts which had been substantiated by family or colleagues or friends.

But what you quote is conjecture, there is no corroboration past or present as to what MM writes in the Memo and no corroboration to the scenarios you suggest other than the fact Druitt committed suicide so what MM writes about Druitts suspect viability will always be nothing more than hearsay.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

If, for example, Druitt had been out on the night of the murders and that he’d come home one night with blood on him.

I suppose next you will be suggesting that he was in London on the night of the first murder and that his cricketing colleagues saw him come back to Dorset with blood on him.

Or that prior to his cricket match on 8 September, his teaching colleagues or pupils saw him return to his home with blood on him from Hanbury Street.

If Mcnaghten was in possession of substantiated facts about and against Druitt, why could he not even get right basic facts about him, such as his age, occupation, and approximate date of death?

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

druitt ... was in the area

There is no evidence that he was in London around the time of the first murder.

There is evidence that he was on the English coast around the time of the first murder.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

It might be ‘hearsay’ to us but it doesn’t mean that it was hearsay to Macnaghten.

There is one rule for everyone.

Mcnaghten cannot have his own definition of hearsay.

Just as Anderson cannot have his own definition of a definitely ascertained fact.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

I have not made up anything.

The evidence which you say I don't have is in the statements made by the three men.

Two of them claimed that Druitt killed himself immediately after the murder of Mary Kelly, which is obviously not true.

The third claimed that he committed suicide in order to escape justice.

It was also claimed - but now I can't remember exactly by whom - that the police were closing in on Druitt and that that is why he committed suicide.

That is also completely untrue.

If it were true then inspector Abberllne would not have dismissed the case against Druitt.

You have once again accused me of making things up and of stating opinion as fact.

You have once again made untrue allegations about me.

And by the way, that claim - that the police were closing in on Druitt and that that is why he committed suicide - was also made against Charles Luard and Mungo Ireland.

All three left suicide notes that contained no reference to the murders they have been accused of having committed, and no evidence against them has ever been produced.

[Herlock Sholmes]

I have not made up anything.

The evidence which you say I don't have is in the statements made by the three men.

Two of them claimed that Druitt killed himself immediately after the murder of Mary Kelly, which is obviously not true.

This is nitpicking PI. Druitt killed himself not long after Kelly’s murder.

The third claimed that he committed suicide in order to escape justice.

Which is an assumption of course but it’s an assumption which might have been true. If someone believed that Druitt was the ripper then it would have appeared a reasonable possibility that it explained his suicide.

It was also claimed - but now I can't remember exactly by whom - that the police were closing in on Druitt and that that is why he committed suicide.

That is also completely untrue.

Of course there’s no record of this being the case but perhaps Druitt believed that they were ‘on to him?’

If it were true then inspector Abberllne would not have dismissed the case against Druitt.

Response above.

You have once again accused me of making things up and of stating opinion as fact.

You have once again made untrue allegations about me.

This maybe your intention PI but I close to ignoring your posts due to your constant complaining.

I’ll illustrate my point. I’m state that Druitt didn’t have an alibi. You repeatedly state that he does. Therefore you are accusing me of making an untrue statement.

The difference is that I respond to the evidence without constantly claiming to be offended. Just stick to discussing the case PI and stop moaning.

[Herlock Sholmes]

HS objected that I was assuming that it was a three-day trip, when it could have been much longer, and now you're objecting to my treating it as a single trip!

We don’t know the length of the trip.

[Herlock Sholmes]

I think it is obvious from the surviving scorecards.

You clearly know nothing about cricket PI. The scorecards say nothing about what type of bowler Druitt was. Some described him as a fast bowler but, at amateur level (and I played for years, the term ‘fast’ is nothing like ‘fast’ for a professional cricketer. You also get current professional cricketers like Jimmy Anderson and Stuart Broad called ‘fast bowlers’ in conversation by commentators but those commentators would tell you that they aren’t actually ‘fast’ bowlers.

Rather than argue with me on this point PI (which I doubt you’ll be able to resist doing because it would mean admitting error on your part) please ask someone else who is also a cricket fan.

There is absolutely no reason to assume that, simply due to cricket, Druitt would have had to have been tall. He certainly doesn’t look short though.

[Herlock Sholmes]

But what you quote is conjecture, there is no corroboration past or present as to what MM writes in the Memo and no corroboration to the scenarios you suggest other than the fact Druitt committed suicide so what MM writes about Druitts suspect viability will always be nothing more than hearsay.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

And you are twisting language. Hearsay is something that isn’t corroborated. So whatever facts were placed fore Macnaghten might have been corroborated by a family member for all that we know. So it might not have been hearsay to Macnaghten….and that fact that he clearly took it seriously makes it likely. It doesn’t mean that Druitt was guilty of course but it could have been the case the the evidence that he was given was proven genuine.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

This maybe your intention PI but I close to ignoring your posts due to your constant complaining.

I’ll illustrate my point. I’m state that Druitt didn’t have an alibi. You repeatedly state that he does. Therefore you are accusing me of making an untrue statement.

The difference is that I respond to the evidence without constantly claiming to be offended. Just stick to discussing the case PI and stop moaning.

I can tell you that some people are close to ignoring your posts, due to your constant personal attacks on them.

Your statement, 'Therefore you are accusing me of making an untrue statement' obviously does not follow from what you wrote in the preceding two sentences.

I would be surprised if you could find anyone who genuinely agrees with you on that point.

It is true, however, that you have frequently made untrue statements about me, and I have given plenty of examples of your doing that.

Unfortunately, you have shown time and again that you are not prepared to discuss any case without making personal attacks on me.

[Herlock Sholmes]

I suppose next you will be suggesting that he was in London on the night of the first murder and that his cricketing colleagues saw him come back to Dorset with blood on him.

Or that prior to his cricket match on 8 September, his teaching colleagues or pupils saw him return to his home with blood on him from Hanbury Street.

If Mcnaghten was in possession of substantiated facts about and against Druitt, why could he not even get right basic facts about him, such as his age, occupation, and approximate date of death?

You should read posts more closely PI. I said “if, for example…” I was speculating. Nothing that I’ve said is less bizarre than your ‘well he might have had an alibi for all that we know,’ point!

[Herlock Sholmes]

There is no evidence that he was in London around the time of the first murder.

There is evidence that he was on the English coast around the time of the first murder.

‘Around the time’ isn’t good enough PI.

Q. Did he have a confirmed alibi or not.

A. No

I realise that this fact annoys you greatly PI but you really should take personal feeling out of the discussion and try and remain impartial.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

You clearly know nothing about cricket PI. The scorecards say nothing about what type of bowler Druitt was. Some described him as a fast bowler but, at amateur level (and I played for years, the term ‘fast’ is nothing like ‘fast’ for a professional cricketer. You also get current professional cricketers like Jimmy Anderson and Stuart Broad called ‘fast bowlers’ in conversation by commentators but those commentators would tell you that they aren’t actually ‘fast’ bowlers.

Rather than argue with me on this point PI (which I doubt you’ll be able to resist doing because it would mean admitting error on your part) please ask someone else who is also a cricket fan.

There is absolutely no reason to assume that, simply due to cricket, Druitt would have had to have been tall. He certainly doesn’t look short though.

You clearly do not know how to reply to another poster without being gratuitously condescending.

I started watching Test cricket before my teens.

Druitt is known to have been a fast bowler.

The scorecards show him taking the wickets of opening batsmen, which is entirely consistent with his having been a fast bowler.

I do not need to ask the opinion of 'someone else who is also a cricket fan'.

I am a lifelong cricket fan.

[Enigma]

I've got to jump in here. Firstly I do NOT think Druitt was JtR. Certainly height is a big advantage for a fast bowler. However, Harold Larwood who was without doubt express pace was of average height at 5ft 8 ins or 1.73 m. Herlock is correct in saying a score card gives no indication of what a bowler's pace is. Perhaps the only clue can be gained from the fall of wickets column where an early dismissal MAY indicate a fast bowler in action at the beginning of the innings.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

‘Around the time’ isn’t good enough PI.

Q. Did he have a confirmed alibi or not.

A. No

I realise that this fact annoys you greatly PI but you really should take personal feeling out of the discussion and try and remain impartial.

I could not care less whether you think what I wrote is 'good enough'.

I made two points.

They stand on their merits.

You can quibble about alibis if you wish, but I did not make any statement about an alibi.

I would just add that I do not know how you yourself could claim to be impartial when you are prepared to accept hearsay against a so-called suspect.