Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

What makes Druitt a viable suspect?

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

  • Well firstly was it not shown he was playing cricket out of town on the day of one of the murders and it was virtually impossible to get back in time?
    secondly the obvious truth that with the evidence we have on any suspect Kaminsky is far the stronger candidate
    also Druit does not fit the profile of a Whitechapel killer as far as I can see more like a gentleman thief type

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Wickerman View Post
      Thanks Wick. Just bought it.
      Regards

      Herlock






      "Crime is common. Logic is rare. Therefore it is upon the logic rather than upon the crime that you should dwell.”

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Tonylondon View Post
        Well firstly was it not shown he was playing cricket out of town on the day of one of the murders and it was virtually impossible to get back in time?
        secondly the obvious truth that with the evidence we have on any suspect Kaminsky is far the stronger candidate
        also Druit does not fit the profile of a Whitechapel killer as far as I can see more like a gentleman thief type
        Nothing in the timing of his cricket matches make it impossible he killed, caught a train and arrived in time to play cricket.
        G U T

        There are two ways to be fooled, one is to believe what isn't true, the other is to refuse to believe that which is true.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Tonylondon View Post
          Well firstly was it not shown he was playing cricket out of town on the day of one of the murders and it was virtually impossible to get back in time?
          secondly the obvious truth that with the evidence we have on any suspect Kaminsky is far the stronger candidate
          also Druit does not fit the profile of a Whitechapel killer as far as I can see more like a gentleman thief type
          Firstly, no it wasn’t. There are no physical circumstances that preclude or come close to precluding Druitt as the ripper.
          Secondly, I certainly don’t think so but I agree that Kosminski is a legitimate suspect.

          As for the profile, I’d say that would the killer have to conform exactly to a profile? He was the right age range. He fitted some of the witness descriptions. He was physically fit. It’s plausible that he could have had anatomical knowledge. He might reasonably be assumed that he had mental health issues. If you accept the c5 then his suicide explains their cessation. He was mentioned by the number two PO in the country. We also have the killer being described as a son of a surgeon who drowned himself in the Thames after the murder of Kelly three years before Macnaghten’s memorandum.
          Regards

          Herlock






          "Crime is common. Logic is rare. Therefore it is upon the logic rather than upon the crime that you should dwell.”

          Comment


          • All present have heard of Dan Farson, but not all may be familiar with Professor Francis Camps, who gave evidence at the trial of John Christie of 10 Rillington Place fame.
            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_Camps

            Farson spoke with Prof. Camps, who remarked:
            "Murderer's of this sort don't stop,....sadistic killers of this type do not 'burn out' or 'retire' - hence the person involved after the perpetration of the last murder must have been out of circulation. There are only a limited number of ways in which this can happen - death, emigration, or incarceration either in prison or mental hospital".
            (As for Druitt)..."This is the type of person you're looking for", Professor Camps told Farson. "He wouldn't have stopped had he lived".
            Jack the Ripper, Farson, 1973, p.131.

            Prof. Camps was also the first professional who deduced in modern times that Jack the Ripper might have strangled his victims first. The last time this suggestion had been raised was by Dr. Brownfield in 1888 when commenting on the Chapman murder.
            Regards, Jon S.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Wickerman View Post
              All present have heard of Dan Farson, but not all may be familiar with Professor Francis Camps, who gave evidence at the trial of John Christie of 10 Rillington Place fame.
              https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_Camps

              Farson spoke with Prof. Camps, who remarked:
              "Murderer's of this sort don't stop,....sadistic killers of this type do not 'burn out' or 'retire' - hence the person involved after the perpetration of the last murder must have been out of circulation. There are only a limited number of ways in which this can happen - death, emigration, or incarceration either in prison or mental hospital".
              (As for Druitt)..."This is the type of person you're looking for", Professor Camps told Farson. "He wouldn't have stopped had he lived".
              Jack the Ripper, Farson, 1973, p.131.

              Prof. Camps was also the first professional who deduced in modern times that Jack the Ripper might have strangled his victims first. The last time this suggestion had been raised was by Dr. Brownfield in 1888 when commenting on the Chapman murder.
              Whenever people talk about Serial Killers who did stop, I think of the first part of your quote..

              ”Murderer‘S of “this sort” don’t stop”.
              Last edited by GUT; 03-24-2019, 10:24 PM.
              G U T

              There are two ways to be fooled, one is to believe what isn't true, the other is to refuse to believe that which is true.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Wickerman View Post
                All present have heard of Dan Farson, but not all may be familiar with Professor Francis Camps, who gave evidence at the trial of John Christie of 10 Rillington Place fame.
                https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_Camps

                Farson spoke with Prof. Camps, who remarked:
                "Murderer's of this sort don't stop,....sadistic killers of this type do not 'burn out' or 'retire' - hence the person involved after the perpetration of the last murder must have been out of circulation. There are only a limited number of ways in which this can happen - death, emigration, or incarceration either in prison or mental hospital".
                (As for Druitt)..."This is the type of person you're looking for", Professor Camps told Farson. "He wouldn't have stopped had he lived".
                Jack the Ripper, Farson, 1973, p.131.

                Prof. Camps was also the first professional who deduced in modern times that Jack the Ripper might have strangled his victims first. The last time this suggestion had been raised was by Dr. Brownfield in 1888 when commenting on the Chapman murder.
                And why did the man who murdered Mckenzey stop ?!

                Did he committed suicide too ?!

                Was he fond of the Druitt, and wanted this flame to stay ?!

                Did he wanted to feel the exciting of being a Ripper ?!



                The Baron

                Comment


                • Originally posted by The Baron View Post

                  And why did the man who murdered Mckenzey stop ?!

                  Did he committed suicide too ?!

                  Was he fond of the Druitt, and wanted this flame to stay ?!

                  Did he wanted to feel the exciting of being a Ripper ?!



                  The Baron
                  Because if he only killed McKenzie he wasn’t a serial of any sort, let alone ‘This type”
                  G U T

                  There are two ways to be fooled, one is to believe what isn't true, the other is to refuse to believe that which is true.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by The Baron View Post

                    And why did the man who murdered Mckenzey stop ?!

                    Did he committed suicide too ?!

                    Was he fond of the Druitt, and wanted this flame to stay ?!

                    Did he wanted to feel the exciting of being a Ripper ?!



                    The Baron
                    As GUT said, not all killers are serial killers. We might even add ‘’what if Mackenzie’s killer also killed Coles?’’ ‘What if he killed again but was never caught?’’ ‘ ‘What if he killed Mackenzie then died of an illness or in an accident?’’

                    Simple really.
                    Regards

                    Herlock






                    "Crime is common. Logic is rare. Therefore it is upon the logic rather than upon the crime that you should dwell.”

                    Comment



                    • A common perception has always been that Monty's suicide was coincidence with the end of the C5 murders, that his death is the only justification for him being a suspect.

                      Why isn't Richard Brown, aged 36 a suspect? He committed suicide on 16th Nov. 1888, in Hyde Park by revolver. Why wasn't he a suspect?

                      Why isn't Charles Terry, aged 39 a suspect?, He committed suicide on 4th Dec., on a Woolwich tramcar by cutting his own throat, why isn't he a suspect?

                      If we just check the press reports for suicides between 10 Nov & 31st Dec, there are dozens of suspects to choose from.
                      So why Druitt?
                      There had to be more than just his suicide
                      I forgot comment on this excellent post. For me this is the important question. Why did Mac ignore the wealth of choices that he had of men that he could have offered as a suspect alongside Kosminski and Ostrog. We can also add a large ‘store room’ of asylum inmates from which to select a bogeyman. But no, in this rigidly class conscious society where ‘’no English gentleman could have committed these crimes...’’ Mac, archetypal Tory and fully paid up member of the old boys network, selects a Barrister and School teacher, son of a respected Surgeon, formerly of Oxford University.

                      As Wickerman said,

                      “There had to be more than just his suicide.”

                      And so, those that constantly say of Druitt as a candidate ‘there’s only the fact that he committed suicide,’ are firstly incorrect, it’s not all there is. And secondly they have to answer Wickerman’s question.
                      Regards

                      Herlock






                      "Crime is common. Logic is rare. Therefore it is upon the logic rather than upon the crime that you should dwell.”

                      Comment



                      • Said to be a Doctor tick, sexually insane tick, suspected by his family tick, disappeared at the time of the millers court murder tick. These are all Macnaughten's words regarding Druitt, not mine. I wonder how many of these are preconceived ideas of his [ including suicide ], of what the ripper may well be like? And I wonder how many of these points fit other suicide victims around that time frame. And that's of course assuming that Macnaughten had knowledge of all the other suicides and their personnel histories.
                        Last edited by Darryl Kenyon; 03-25-2019, 05:40 PM.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Darryl Kenyon View Post
                          Said to be a Doctor tick, sexually insane tick, suspected by his family tick, disappeared at the time of the millers court murder tick. These are all Macnaughten's words regarding Druitt, not mine. I wonder how many of these are preconceived ideas of his [ including suicide ], of what the ripper may well be like? And I wonder how many of these points fit other suicide victims around that time frame. And that's of course assuming that Macnaughten had knowledge of all the other suicides and their personnel histories.

                          And he was dead when Alice Mckenzie was murdered. tick.


                          The Baron

                          Comment


                          • And of course you’ve forgotten to mention the newspaper article written in 1891 ( three years before the memorandum) and the story of the West Country M.P. (Henry Richard Farquharson) who claimed that the ripper had committed suicide after Kelly and that he was the son of a surgeon.

                            I suppose that the authorities were always fishing sons of surgeons from the Thames?
                            Regards

                            Herlock






                            "Crime is common. Logic is rare. Therefore it is upon the logic rather than upon the crime that you should dwell.”

                            Comment


                            • Hi Herlock,

                              And three days after Farquharson's letter Frances Coles was murdered, and the police thought the Ripper had struck again, arresting Sadler and putting him in front of Lawende, the witness who had seen a person in Duke Street just prior to the Eddowes murder.

                              Six days before the murder of Coles, Kosminski had been sent to Colney Hatch. So he couldn't have been the Ripper.

                              And two and a bit years earlier Druitt had drowned himself in the Thames. So he couldn't have been the Ripper either.

                              The madness continues.

                              Regards,

                              Simon
                              Never believe anything until it has been officially denied.

                              Comment


                              • We also have the killer being described as a son of a surgeon who drowned himself in the Thames after the murder of Kelly three years before Macnaghten’s memorandum.
                                I suppose that the authorities were always fishing sons of surgeons from the Thames?
                                In point of fact, nowhere does it state that the suspect drowned himself in the Thames (or anywhere else for that matter) only that the "son of a surgeon" committed suicide. Also, the Farquharson article said the suicide occurred "on the night of the last murder" but doesn't say that this was the Kelly murder. It could have been the McKenzie or Pinchin Street torso murder. As well, the article states that the suspect was wearing "blood stained clothes" when he killed himself. This was not likely to have been Druitt.

                                Druitt can be made to fit Farquharson's theory but only by ignoring what Farquharson, apparently, actually said.

                                Wolf.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X