Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

What makes Druitt a viable suspect?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • I’m uncertain of timings here and I have no books with me but can anyone tell me when William arrived in London after being summoned due to his brothers prolonged absence? I’ve wondered why William himself didn’t go to Monty’s rooms? Maybe to look through his belongings for some clue as to his whereabouts? Could it have been because they had met up and that William suspected that Monty intended to commit suicide? William couldn’t have known the method that he’d chosen and so naturally his brother wouldn’t have wanted to have entered his room to find him slumped over his desk gun in hand.
    Regards

    Herlock






    "There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact!"

    Comment


    • The story goes that on or about Dec. 11th William learned that Monty had not been in his chambers for about a week.
      William was said to have gone to Monty's lodging's where he found suicide notes.

      Regards, Jon S.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Joshua Rogan View Post

        Only if he "discovered" the note after Monty was known to be dead. Was that the case?
        Only William need to have known he was dead.
        Regards, Jon S.

        Comment


        • Thanks Wick. For some reason I had it in my mind that someone had checked Monty’s room before William arrived.
          Regards

          Herlock






          "There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact!"

          Comment


          • Perhaps Montague was murdered by William in a manner intended to make it look like suicide, as opposed to having actually committed suicide.
            That is certainly much more likely to be true than the nonsensical notion that Montague was the ripper.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post
              Thanks Wick. For some reason I had it in my mind that someone had checked Monty’s room before William arrived.
              Yes, there is much that is unclear.
              The Acton & Chiswick press report of Jan. 5th, 1889, does lend itself to such an interpretation, where we read:
              "Witness had deceased's things searched where he resided, and found a paper addressed to him".
              Did William request someone to search the room, or did he do it himself?

              There is also an account in the Echo which mentions two letters, one addressed to William and one addressed to Mr. Valentine at the school. I don't have a full account of this Echo report with which to judge.
              Regards, Jon S.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Stacker View Post
                Perhaps Montague was murdered by William in a manner intended to make it look like suicide, as opposed to having actually committed suicide......
                The book by Howells & Skinner (The Ripper Legacy) had Monty being murdered by a conspiracy of his peers.
                There are a good number of important questions in this 'suicide' which remain unanswered. Solutions to which could easily lend itself to a suspicious death.

                Regards, Jon S.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Stacker View Post
                  Perhaps Montague was murdered by William in a manner intended to make it look like suicide, as opposed to having actually committed suicide.
                  That is certainly much more likely to be true than the nonsensical notion that Montague was the ripper.
                  Excellent post!

                  The Baron

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Wickerman View Post

                    Yes, there is much that is unclear.
                    The Acton & Chiswick press report of Jan. 5th, 1889, does lend itself to such an interpretation, where we read:
                    "Witness had deceased's things searched where he resided, and found a paper addressed to him".
                    Did William request someone to search the room, or did he do it himself?

                    There is also an account in the Echo which mentions two letters, one addressed to William and one addressed to Mr. Valentine at the school. I don't have a full account of this Echo report with which to judge.
                    That quote has a ring of familiarity to it. It would certainly be curious if William had someone search Monty’s room if William himself was already in London. Would he have wanted a stranger poking around in his brothers private property? Even if William hadn’t arrived yet he wouldn’t have been far away so what difference could a few hours have made? Could he have suspected that the searchers might have discovered his brothers body? Pure conjecture of course but mystery invites speculation.
                    Regards

                    Herlock






                    "There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact!"

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Stacker View Post
                      Perhaps Montague was murdered by William in a manner intended to make it look like suicide, as opposed to having actually committed suicide.
                      That is certainly much more likely to be true than the nonsensical notion that Montague was the ripper.
                      Unless of course william was the ripper.
                      "Is all that we see or seem
                      but a dream within a dream?"

                      -Edgar Allan Poe


                      "...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
                      quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

                      -Frederick G. Abberline

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Stacker View Post
                        Perhaps Montague was murdered by William in a manner intended to make it look like suicide, as opposed to having actually committed suicide.
                        That is certainly much more likely to be true than the nonsensical notion that Montague was the ripper.
                        So William kills Montague despite the fact that they’d recently done successful legal work together (on the same side) and there’s no evidence of a rift. Not only that he manages to kill him with absolutely no sign of violence or murder. He also makes sure that he’s dressed to the nines and that he has a return train ticket, a silver watch and the rough equivalent of £7000 in cheques on him. He then takes him to some part of the Thames and throws him in. And all this whilst William isn’t actually in London.

                        Yeah of course that’s more believable than a suspect named by the Assistant Commisioner Of The Met. And a suspect that cannot be exonerated by any known facts.
                        Regards

                        Herlock






                        "There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact!"

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by The Baron View Post

                          Excellent post!

                          The Baron
                          Your very easily impressed
                          Regards

                          Herlock






                          "There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact!"

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

                            So William kills Montague despite the fact that they’d recently done successful legal work together (on the same side) and there’s no evidence of a rift. Not only that he manages to kill him with absolutely no sign of violence or murder. He also makes sure that he’s dressed to the nines and that he has a return train ticket, a silver watch and the rough equivalent of £7000 in cheques on him. He then takes him to some part of the Thames and throws him in. And all this whilst William isn’t actually in London.
                            I was unaware of much of this when I posted my statement.
                            So I will admit that William could not have murdered Monty, but I still am willing to say that Druitt is 100% innocent, and that he very well could have been murdered by someone as opposed to having killed himself.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Wickerman View Post

                              Yes, there is much that is unclear.
                              The Acton & Chiswick press report of Jan. 5th, 1889, does lend itself to such an interpretation, where we read:
                              "Witness had deceased's things searched where he resided, and found a paper addressed to him".
                              Did William request someone to search the room, or did he do it himself?
                              Do we know where Druitt "resided"? If he had been dismissed from his post at the school, would he have been turfed out of his rooms there immediately, or allowed a grace period to find new accommodation? Or does it refer to his legal chambers (I'd assumed these were just offices and he didn't reside there).
                              Either way, it's unlikely that William would have had access to the rooms, so would have needed someone there to let him in, at least.

                              There is also an account in the Echo which mentions two letters, one addressed to William and one addressed to Mr. Valentine at the school. I don't have a full account of this Echo report with which to judge.
                              The Echo account is apparently reported by the Southern Guardian, and mentions one letter, to Mr Valentine;

                              Southern Guardian
                              England
                              Saturday, 1 January 1889*


                              SAD DEATH OF A LOCAL BARRISTER.
                              The Echo of Thursday night says : — "An inquiry was on Wednesday held by Dr. Diplock, at Chiswick, respecting the death of Montague John Druitt, 31 years of age, who was found drowned in the Thames. The deceased was identified by his brother, Mr. William Harvey Druitt, a solicitor residing at Bournemouth, who stated that the deceased was a barrister-at-law, but had lately been an assistant at a school at Blackheath. The deceased had left a letter, addressed to Mr. Valentine, of the school, in which he alluded to suicide. Evidence having been given as to discovering deceased in the Thames — upon his body were found a cheque for £60 and £16 in gold — the Jury returned a verdict of "Suicide whilst of unsound mind."

                              *strangely, both this site and the Ultimate JtR have this as "Saturday, 1 Jan", yet Jan 1 was a Tuesday, so presumably this should be "Saturday, 5 Jan"

                              https://www.casebook.org/press_repor...an/890101.html

                              Comment


                              • Where Druitt resided is an interesting question, plus the fact Anne Druitt (his mother) also died at Chiswick. Is that a coincidence?
                                David Andersen theorised that Monty might have been staying with the Tukes because of his friendship with the family, and their ability to treat mental illness. It was William who moved their mother to the Tukes before she died.
                                It has always been a mystery why Monty & his mother both died at Chiswick, what was the connection? - the Tuke family of doctors who treat mental illness?
                                Perhaps, Monty's "lodgings" were with the Tuke family since his dismissal from the school?
                                Regards, Jon S.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X