What makes Druitt a viable suspect?

[rjpalmer]

Macnaghten's only mention of Druitt's [wrong] age— [41] —was in the Aberconway version, written some time after 1894, so goodness knows from where he got his "private information."

Simon - this has been gone over before, no doubt, with various explanations, but, in general, no normal person estimates someone's age as '41' or 'about 41.' It's too specific to be an estimation. Considering MJD's age was 31, doesn't it appear to have been either a bone-headed math error (based on seeing the drowning victim's birth year on some document) or a transcription error from someone having misheard '31' and recording it as '41'?

Which, in turn, suggests Mac was working from a report of some kind in which this error was made?

I'll have to go back to Deconstructing and review your arguments as to why the Aberconway post-dates the MM, as I personally suspect that it was t'other way round. Regards.


P.S. I came across the following yesterday:

"I would not attack the faith of a heathen without being sure I had a better one to put in its place." --Harriet Beecher Stowe.

I thought it an apt rebuttal to the Farquharson doubters.

[Simon Wood]

Hi RJ,

In his February 1894 memorandum, Melville Macnaghten did not express a particular preference for any of his three “more likely” suspects. He wrote—

“A much more rational theory is that the murderer’s brain gave way altogether after his awful glut in Miller’s Court, and that he immediately committed suicide, or, as a possible alternative, was found to be so hopelessly mad by his relations, that he was by them confined in some asylum.”

This suggests the suspect may have been either Druitt or Kosminski. Yet in his supposed “draft version,” in which he gave Druitt's age as 41, he made up his mind and wrote—

“I enumerate the cases of 3 men against whom Police held very reasonable suspicion. Personally, after much careful & deliberate consideration, I am inclined to exonerate the last 2 [Kosminski and Ostrog], but I have always held strong opinions regarding no. 1 [Druitt], and the more I think the matter over, the stronger do these suspicions become. The truth, however, will never be known, and did indeed, at one time lie at the bottom of the Thames if my conjections be correct” [my brackets and italics].

It bears the hallmarks of a subsequent version.

Regards,

Simon

[Wickerman]

Hi Simon.

I think it is more beneficial to investigate the how, when & where Macnaghten got his details from, than to take the lazy route and say he made it all up. In my view the former is the more academic approach, the latter is of no value to anyone.
In this case we can safely assume Moulson made a report, as was his duty. Whether the estimated age of the body was included in his report is not known. What is known is the press had a source for that detail, be it the constable, the waterman or the doctor. As Mac. included this estimate in his report it had to come from an official source, and this source was available before the inquest.

We could argue that Mac searched back through six-year old newspapers. Drownings were mostly in local papers not national, so where does he begin to look?
Then he just happened to find one press report from around Chiswick which gave an erroneous estimate for a body in the Thames, as opposed to the many correct newspaper reports available.
To me, that is an impractical scenario.

Or, we could say he just guessed an age which just happened to be the same age as was estimated at the time - of all the reasonable ages between 20 & 60?, he just happened to get it right?, as before, not a very practical solution.

Mac. certainly had access to official police records, an internal report is the path of least resistance.
More interesting to me is where Mac. got the impression the body was that of a doctor, ie; "said to be a doctor". Which means his source was not certain.
We shouldn't dismiss what he wrote, we should try identify potential sources.

[Simon Wood]

Hi Jon,

If ifs and buts were candies and nuts we'd all have a Merry Christmas.

Is yours a last ditch attempt to rehabilitate Macnaghten?

Regards,

Simon

[Wickerman]

Hi Simon.

I don't feel Mac. need rehabilitating, not for his memorandum at least. We have found genuine deficiencies, yes, but where we have open questions (more about Druitt than anything) I think the problem rests with our inadequate knowledge, not any failing on behalf of Macnaghten himself.
Memoirs are a different matter, written long after the principal was on the force, not to be relied on in my view. The Memorandum was written while Mac. was still on the force so carries more weight in my view.

Given the variety of different suspects harbored by various police officials, I find it telling that they are outnumbered by a common? consensus of prominent officials & well connected individuals who have all written that the murderer put an end to himself shortly after the Millers Court murder.
This can only be Druitt.

[Simon Wood]

Hi Jon,

Your staunch defense of Macnaghten is noted.

Yes, he certainly did have access to official police records.

It's to his shame that he didn't properly consult them.

Regards,

Simon

[Wickerman]

Hi Simon.

Yes, he relied on his memory and it wasn't as good as he thought it was.

But with respect to this 'doctor' issue. Sims (to name only one source) wrote about the suicide of a doctor shortly after the last murder, and Abberline appears to agree with him. He knew about it, "but what did it amount to?" he responded.
Fair to guess, Sims perhaps was using Mac. as his reference, but what was Abberline's reference?
Abberline appears to know about this suicide of a doctor shortly after the Millers Court murder, implying it was not related to the murders.

"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 the time to incriminate him."
Abberline, Pall Mall Gazette, 1903.

If there was no doctor suicide, wouldn't we expect Abberline to have made that clear?

[The Baron]

Hi Simon.

Yes, he relied on his memory and it wasn't as good as he thought it was.

But with respect to this 'doctor' issue. Sims (to name only one source) wrote about the suicide of a doctor shortly after the last murder, and Abberline appears to agree with him. He knew about it, "but what did it amount to?" he responded.
Fair to guess, Sims perhaps was using Mac. as his reference, but what was Abberline's reference?
Abberline appears to know about this suicide of a doctor shortly after the Millers Court murder, implying it was not related to the murders.

"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 the time to incriminate him."
Abberline, Pall Mall Gazette, 1903.

If there was no doctor suicide, wouldn't we expect Abberline to have made that clear?

After the last murder in Whitechapel.

Was Kelly the last murder in Whitechapel?!


The Baron

[Darryl Kenyon]

Macnaugten - Said to be a Doctor, Abberline - Young Doctor, Sims - doctor was found in the Thames, Griffiths - He also was a Doctor.

If Druitt had been investigated thoroughly and properly they would have said Young barrister, Teacher found in the Thames etc. The fact that they don't speaks volumes to me.
Regards Darryl

[PaulB]

Hi Simon.

Yes, he relied on his memory and it wasn't as good as he thought it was.

But with respect to this 'doctor' issue. Sims (to name only one source) wrote about the suicide of a doctor shortly after the last murder, and Abberline appears to agree with him. He knew about it, "but what did it amount to?" he responded.
Fair to guess, Sims perhaps was using Mac. as his reference, but what was Abberline's reference?
Abberline appears to know about this suicide of a doctor shortly after the Millers Court murder, implying it was not related to the murders.

"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 the time to incriminate him."
Abberline, Pall Mall Gazette, 1903.

If there was no doctor suicide, wouldn't we expect Abberline to have made that clear?

If there was 'absolutely nothing' to incriminate the drowned man other than when he was found, why did Macnaghten believe he was the murderer? Why did he prefer him to 'Kosminski', around whom there were 'many circs' that made him a good suspect? I am prepared to accept that Macnaghten's memory was crap, I am prepared to listen to those good people who think he preferred Druitt because he was the one who had received the private information (if he was in fact the one), and I will even give a little houseroom to the possibility that Macnaghten may not have had any qualms about dismissing his boss's suspect in a report his boss would have had to approve, but I find it hard to believe that Macnaghten was such a total dolt that he would accept that someone was Jack the Ripper just because of the coincidental date that he drowned in the Thames.

[The Baron]

No one had investigated Druitt throughly, and Nothing since has appeared to connect Druitt to those murders, and the fact that some want us to believe he is one of the best suspect in the case, is mind blowing.


The Baron

[PaulB]

No one had investigated Druitt throughly, and Nothing since has appeared to connect Druitt to those murders, and the fact that some want us to believe he is one of the best suspect in the case, is mind blowing.


The Baron

Why? Macnaghten was there, he was a senior policeman, he was in a position to know, and he knew what the private information was and was convinced by it. Whatever else he was, Macnaghten wasn't an idiot who was incapable of judging the quality of received information and forming an intelligent opinion based on it. Why is it so surprising that anyone would put Druitt up there among the best suspects?

[barnflatwyngarde]

"Why? Macnaghten was there, he was a senior policeman, he was in a position to know, and he knew what the private information was and was convinced by it. Whatever else he was, Macnaghten wasn't an idiot who was incapable of judging the quality of received information and forming an intelligent opinion based on it. Why is it so surprising that anyone would put Druitt up there among the best suspects?"


Yep, I pretty much agree with all of that.

Druitt as a suspect, simply will not go away!

[The Baron]

Why? Macnaghten was there, he was a senior policeman, he was in a position to know, and he knew what the private information was and was convinced by it. Whatever else he was, Macnaghten wasn't an idiot who was incapable of judging the quality of received information and forming an intelligent opinion based on it. Why is it so surprising that anyone would put Druitt up there among the best suspects?

You didn't address any of my points.

Just repeating the same old reasoning, Macnaghten was in a position to know... etc.

Druitt had not been investigated throughly, otherwise Macnaghten would have known his career, age, date of death .. etc.

And nothing since has surfaced to connect Druitt to those murders.


Besides: Druitt was dead when Mckenzie was murdered.


The Baron

[Darryl Kenyon]

Why? Macnaghten was there, he was a senior policeman, he was in a position to know, and he knew what the private information was and was convinced by it. Whatever else he was, Macnaghten wasn't an idiot who was incapable of judging the quality of received information and forming an intelligent opinion based on it. Why is it so surprising that anyone would put Druitt up there among the best suspects?

Paul, If the private info was compelling surely he would have shared it with overs, or else it would have been a complete dereliction of duty. He thought that five women had been slaughtered by the same hand, do they not count? Justice for them against the reputation of a family he barely/or didn't know? And of course the police Force and their failure to capture the killer. Plus the reputation of one of his colleagues was severely on the line with criticism abounding, anti semetic etc when he said that Jack was a polish Jew. Could he not have had a private word with Anderson or Swanson for that matter telling them he had this private info which more or less proved Druitt was the killer.
To my mind the private info was rumours of Druitt,s sexuality, history of mental illness within the family, the fact that he could have had some surgical training and finally that someone in his family may have harboured suspicions. Timing of suicide, Macnaughten said himself that the killer in all probability would do away with himself after the last murder. And Macnaughten has his suspect.
Regards Darryl