Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

What makes Druitt a viable suspect?

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

  • Originally posted by Wickerman View Post

    This I also find difficult to accept. Druitt was not a difficult figure to find. The police cannot have been looking for him in 1888, he was right there in plain sight in court on the 27th of November, roughly 3-5 days before his suicide.



    Well, he got it wrong, for whatever reason.
    Not necessarily, Wick. What about the span between November 28th and the date W.H. Druitt puts on his brother's tombstone, December 4th? Or what about the second span, between December 2-4th, when he went missing from Blackheath, until he was finally fished out of the Thames on December 30th?

    Why is it impossible that police didn't hear something that made them want to interview him, and then they ultimate found out he was dead? That's what Sim is saying. I have no idea what he means, or if he is even accurate, but I see nothing in the case evidence that tells me he is wrong.

    Indeed, I know of at least three modern murder cases where the police finally found a man they wanted to question...dead as a doornail, having taken his own life. It didn't prove he was the killer, but it made him a 'person of interest.' Didn't that even happen in the Jack the Stripper case? Regards.

    Comment


    • Hi RJ,

      A minor point.

      Kosminski didn't live in the area circumscribed by Swanson during the 1888 house-to-house search.

      And neither did Druitt.

      Regards,

      Simon
      Never believe anything until it has been officially denied.

      Comment


      • Hi Simon.

        Hindsight is 20/20; there used to be considerable debate over where Kosminski was living in 1888. And anyway, it is merely one possibility among dozens of scenarios.

        Why is my suggestion so outlandish?

        There was a 'cold case' awhile back where the old retired coppers located some blood evidence that was believed to have been lost. Thanks to advances in DNA and a large data base, they linked blood at the crime scene to a bloke who was now serving time for an unrelated offense down in Georgia or Mississippi, or wherever it was.

        Curious, they then went back and studied the original case notes and the same dude's name came up on a list of maybe 70 sex offenders that they had checked out briefly but dismissed for lack of evidence. He was merely a name on a list. Nothing more.

        I don't like to make assumption when I have no data, and I am not saying that something similar was true in Druitt's case, but why couldn't it have been?

        You consider it all humbug, of course, which is your business, but, if Macnaghten did receive "private information" in 1891 or thereabouts, wouldn't his first reaction have been to find out if anyone had heard of Druitt, or if his name had turned up in 1888? Of course; it's the natural reaction.

        And what if it had? It could have been entirely minor...a rumor of a young lawyer who liked to flog girlies in Notting Hill. They finally traced him to Blackheath, only to find he was missing. A few days later Valentine informs them he found a suicide note. Nothing comes of it, because Druitt ends up being found dead, but a report is filed. He is then forgotten until 1891.

        I have zero evidence this happened, but I also am in no position to say Sims is lying when he stated the police were "looking for [MJD] alive when he turned up dead."

        Isn't some strange detail like this in the old reports precisely the sort of thing that might have convinced Macnaghten? Otherwise, it would have been just another rumor among the many that you and others have chronicled. But, as you say, I'm a romantic...

        Thanks for posting your photo of Fido and Company. It is depressing news for me; I'd been listening to his "murder after midnight" broadcasts off and on over the past few months. Take care.
        Last edited by rjpalmer; 04-06-2019, 04:00 AM.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by rjpalmer View Post

          Not necessarily, Wick. What about the span between November 28th and the date W.H. Druitt puts on his brother's tombstone, December 4th? Or what about the second span, between December 2-4th, when he went missing from Blackheath, until he was finally fished out of the Thames on December 30th?
          Hi RJ.

          I guess it's also possible to include all of December.
          The police might have began looking for him after he jumped in the Thames, that's why they couldn't find him?
          I couldn't see how a person like Druitt could be difficult to find, in his small social circle, between Blackheath & Kings Bench Walk. However, if he had already jumped in the Thames then this could be why the police couldn't find him. Though wouldn't we expect William to have known the police were looking for him?

          Also, wouldn't an officer be present at the inquest if Druitt had been on some 'wanted' list? The law would be as interested as anyone in the reason why he committed suicide. They would want to hear what turns up that might help them with their enquiries.
          All things considered, Sim's account is a bit of a stretch. Either something occurred in those 3-5 days towards the end of November, or Sim's has got something wrong, in my opinion.
          Regards, Jon S.

          Comment


          • Hi RJ,

            I'm glad you liked the photograph of Martin Fido & Company.

            It was quite a night.

            Regards,

            Simon
            Never believe anything until it has been officially denied.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by rjpalmer View Post

              Not necessarily, Wick. What about the span between November 28th and the date W.H. Druitt puts on his brother's tombstone, December 4th? Or what about the second span, between December 2-4th, when he went missing from Blackheath, until he was finally fished out of the Thames on December 30th?

              Why is it impossible that police didn't hear something that made them want to interview him, and then they ultimate found out he was dead? That's what Sim is saying. I have no idea what he means, or if he is even accurate, but I see nothing in the case evidence that tells me he is wrong.

              Indeed, I know of at least three modern murder cases where the police finally found a man they wanted to question...dead as a doornail, having taken his own life. It didn't prove he was the killer, but it made him a 'person of interest.' Didn't that even happen in the Jack the Stripper case? Regards.
              What Simms says should be treated with caution. the same caution that all other newspaper reports etc from 1888 should be treated, to much emphasis has been put on what he has said over the years, what he reports is nothing more than hearsay, and again lacking in corroboration.

              www.trevormarriott.co.uk

              Comment


              • Yes, Trevor, we know all that. We've known it since grammar school. Meanwhile, it's equally incautious to assume Sims is a 'blow hard,' especially since he is obviously getting his information from a police source. It's not optimal, to be sure--it's sorely lacking in many respects---but one doesn't get to pick and chose one's sources; one can only theorize using the frustratingly vague and problematic materials that have survived. But it doesn't mean we have to treat those sources in a partisan and obviously biased way in order to dismiss them as quickly and easily as possible. To me, that's just as incautious, and even worse: it is tediously boring, and could quite possibly be misguided.

                To Wick: I have long accepted Paul B's observation that Macnaghten was aware of Moulson's report of the inquest. I can't see how this contradicts anything Sims is staying other than the "medical student/doctor" anomaly.

                I also believe William Druitt himself contacted the police in London. Why wouldn't he? His brother is missing. He has gone to London to find him. Why wouldn't he contact the police? There is no reason to assume that at this point --early December--that William's suspicions have already been aroused or that he suspects his brother is a murderer. Those beliefs, if they ever existed (and Macnaghten came to believe they did) could have developed over the following few days, as William conducts his own inquiries during the "missing month." He could have discovered distressing details that led him to suspect the worst; there is no reason to believe he would have subsequently shared those suspicions with the police.

                Meanwhile, we all know that police work can be sloppy. There are two different police forces in London, and Druitt is keeping two addresses, one in the City and one in Blackheath. Reports are not filed. PS Jones in X Division, doesn't pass on the report to PS Smith in Y Division. PS Williams in Z Division is blissfully unaware that the man he is investigating for a sex violation is the same man the City of London police are casually looking for in a suspected suicide case. Dots aren't connected until weeks or months or years later, when someone else starts looking into it. Why couldn't the "police where looking for him alive, when he turned up dead" not be something that was finally realized years later, if Macnaghten began to poke around in the files? A light bulb finally came on. This is the same bloke that both X and Y were investigating, unknown to one another.

                I have no empirical evidence for any of it. Admitted. I am merely trying to reconcile the problematic statements we do have. I'm just not convinced that it all evaporates as easily and neatly as Wolf and Trevor and the average man on the street believes. We all theorize from a position of ignorance; some of us are simply more worried about that fact than others.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Joshua Rogan View Post

                  King's Bench Walk is on the other side of the City, Jon, near The Temple. Wasn't it Druitt's cousin's medical practise (which some have theorised he might have used) that was in The Minories?

                  https://maps.nls.uk/geo/explore/#zoo...layers=163&b=1
                  You beat me to it. It's a mile and a half away from the nearest murder which would be Eddowes.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by rjpalmer View Post

                    Funny you should ask, Wick. The following statement appeared on Howard Brown's site this morning, quoting Drew Gray, who is evidently writing a book on the Ripper:

                    "This
                    fits the profile of the man Andy Wise and I think responsible for the Whitechapel series of murders between 1887 and 1891. A man we think hid in plain sight and melted away into the alleys and courts of the East End which knew like the back of his hand."

                    Not that we've necessarily found "Observer, for this highly questionable observation is made by every second or third poster on the internet.

                    What Gray and similar "Observers" fail to understand is that this is not how street prostitution works. The killer (or just the everyday punter) does not need to know the local geography. He only needs to walk down the main drag. If prostitutes can't be located by the punters, they starve; that's why they hang out on street corners under lamps. And once found, the women do the rest.

                    See Inspector Henry Moore for details, who, I dare say, knew a little more about East London than modern theorists:

                    "What makes it so easy for him" - the inspector always referred to the murderer as "him" - "is that the women lead him, of their own free will, to the spot where they know interruption is least likely. It is not as if he had to wait for his chance; they make the chance for him."

                    Note: "the women led him."

                    Kelly, Eddowes, Nichols, were experts in the local geography and the local police beats, the blind-alleys, etc. The Ripper needed no such knowledge.

                    But, we waste our breath. Ten years from now it will still be argued that the Ripper was an expert on local geography, knowing this complex network of streets "like the back of his hand."


                    Hi RJP

                    Whoever the Whitechapel murderer was, he had no control over the location the women chose to prostitute themselves That doesn't say that he was not a local, and did not have an extensive knowledge of the area in which the murderers took place. What is certain from the evidence is should Stride be a Ripper victim, then the killer knew exactly where he needed to be in order to kill Eddowes. Further, after killing Eddowes he was completely capable of fleeing the scene, and the evidence shows he headed back into Spitalfields. Theses two examples, in my opinion, show that he had a good working knowledge of the area. So, with regard to Druitt we have two scenarios, that is, Druitt took time out to walk the East End and aquatint himself with the area, and rented a room in the heart of the killings. Or alternatively, a local man who had lived and possibly worked in that area for some time was responsible. I know who my money would be on. I have no doubt that the killer had an extensive knowledge of the topography of the area.

                    Comment


                    • This to RJP

                      I take it you agree that there was a serial killer at work in the East End of London in 1888? If so, where do you believe the killer operated from?



                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Wickerman View Post

                        Yes, thankyou, my apologies (to Observer), I confused the two.
                        No worries Wick. By the way, it's 650 yards from Mitre Square to 140 The Minories the home of MJ Druitt's cousin Dr Lionel Druitt. If he was using that address why then head in the opposite direction into Spitalfields after he killed Eddowes?

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Observer View Post

                          Hi RJP

                          Whoever the Whitechapel murderer was, he had no control over the location the women chose to prostitute themselves That doesn't say that he was not a local, and did not have an extensive knowledge of the area in which the murderers took place. What is certain from the evidence is should Stride be a Ripper victim, then the killer knew exactly where he needed to be in order to kill Eddowes. Further, after killing Eddowes he was completely capable of fleeing the scene, and the evidence shows he headed back into Spitalfields. Theses two examples, in my opinion, show that he had a good working knowledge of the area. So, with regard to Druitt we have two scenarios, that is, Druitt took time out to walk the East End and aquatint himself with the area, and rented a room in the heart of the killings. Or alternatively, a local man who had lived and possibly worked in that area for some time was responsible. I know who my money would be on. I have no doubt that the killer had an extensive knowledge of the topography of the area.
                          Exactly observer
                          IMHO only a local man could have pulled off the night of the double event. Heading back into the heart of the district after the edowes murder. And what was monty doing in the hour after she was murdered and the bloody apron discovered?

                          no, the killer more than likely did live in the area and did know the maze of streets and alleyways like the back of his hand. And he more than likely went to his bolt hole nearby to get cleaned up before heading out again to deposit the apron.
                          Last edited by Abby Normal; 04-06-2019, 02:57 PM.
                          "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 Observer View Post

                            No worries Wick. By the way, it's 650 yards from Mitre Square to 140 The Minories the home of MJ Druitt's cousin Dr Lionel Druitt. If he was using that address why then head in the opposite direction into Spitalfields after he killed Eddowes?
                            Why assume he was done?
                            What is the basis for that assumption?
                            Isn't it equally rationale to assume he was done after the first one?, yet that assumption would also be wrong.

                            He has the police chasing shadows south of Commercial Road, now he has them running around like headless chickens in the West, the city, so he heads East, away from the activity in the south & the west, to do what?
                            Last edited by Wickerman; 04-06-2019, 03:03 PM.
                            Regards, Jon S.

                            Comment


                            • Honestly, I feel that another rather serious problem with Druitt being the Ripper is that the people who argue in favor of such theories have failed to even prove that Druitt ever stepped foot in Whitechapel at any point during the autumn of terror whatsoever. No definitive evidence exists that places him in the general vicinity of the murder area at any point in the general time frame of the murders in any capacity, let alone in the exact murder locations or in the exact nights of the murder.

                              Comment


                              • I canít really see how the fact that we cannot prove that Druitt was ever in Whitechapel is fatal to him being a suspect? Of course the burden of proof is with the proposer but at a distance of 130 years itís hardly surprising that we canít. How many people living just outside of Whitechapel would have been regular visitors for whatever reason and if we examined there lives now we would find no evidence of them ever going there? Especially as it would have been unlikely that Druitt would have gone there for legitimate reasons.
                                Regards

                                Herlock






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

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X