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.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
What makes Druitt a viable suspect?
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View PostThanks Wick. For some reason I had it in my mind that someone had checked Monty’s room before William arrived.
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 PostPerhaps Montague was murdered by William in a manner intended to make it look like suicide, as opposed to having actually committed suicide......
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 PostPerhaps 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.
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.Regards
Sir Herlock Sholmes.
“A house of delusions is cheap to build but draughty to live in.”
Comment
-
Originally posted by Stacker View PostPerhaps 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."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 PostPerhaps 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.
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
Sir Herlock Sholmes.
“A house of delusions is cheap to build but draughty to live in.”
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.
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?
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.
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"
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
Comment