Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

What makes Druitt a viable suspect?

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

  • Hi Jon,

    You can't justify Macnaghten's claims, and I have never claimed that the US didn't land on the moon.

    Move on.

    Get a better argument.

    Regards,

    Simon
    Never believe anything until it has been officially denied.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by GUT View Post

      but to be fair, im not sure how much contact people would think I had with my siblings if they looked back in even 20 years from now, let alone 130.
      Yes, but communication today, even 20 years ago was a great deal simpler over long distances than it was in the late 19th century. Montie would have to write or send a telegram, perhaps phone?, but unless he directly confessed to something the family are not likely to form suspicions that he was the infamous Jack the Ripper.
      We can only judge based on what we know.
      Regards, Jon S.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post

        You eyesight is as bad as your belief in Druitt as a suspect

        www.trevormarriott.co.uk
        I don't recall there being any dispute whether Druitt was a suspect.
        Regards, Jon S.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Simon Wood View Post
          Hi Jon,

          You can't justify Macnaghten's claims, and I have never claimed that the US didn't land on the moon.

          Move on.

          Get a better argument.

          Regards,

          Simon
          Simon, you still cannot justify an argument against Mac's claim.
          Regards, Jon S.

          Comment


          • Hi Jon,

            Of course I can.

            Just look at what Macnaghten wrote.

            I explained it's contradictions.

            The man couldn't make up his mind.

            It's BS.

            Regards,

            Simon
            Never believe anything until it has been officially denied.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Simon Wood View Post
              Hi Jon,

              Of course I can.

              Just look at what Macnaghten wrote.

              I explained it's contradictions.

              The man couldn't make up his mind.

              It's BS.

              Regards,

              Simon
              Hi Simon.

              Lets look at one example then, your recent post #984.

              No particular order but you mention Druitt being placed in an Asylum as opposed to him being found in the Thames.
              Yet you overlook the fact his suicide was close to an asylum, and one run by a family friend.
              No-one has yet provided a satisfactory reason why Druitt would kill himself at Chiswick.

              You also seem to assume the Aberconway version replaced the Memorandum, so any theory resulting from this assumption must be mere speculation.

              If one source claims Druitt was sexually insane, and another source claims it was alleged he was sexually insane. It would be normal to ask if the allegation was confirmed at some point between the two sources being committed to writing.
              Isn't that a reasonable question?
              This would imply the Memorandum followed the Aberconway version, which I think only serves to confirm the popular interpretation.

              The same question can be posed as to whether there was an attempt to place Druitt under Tuke's care at Chiswick, then Mac. finding that this attempt was confirmed, however briefly.
              We do not have any records for voluntary residents in the period in question.

              So, it seems much of your argument is the result of speculation, not the result of investigation. There are still too many open questions about this suicide.
              Regards, Jon S.

              Comment


              • Hi Jon,

                If you're suggesting that the Aberconway version preceded the 1894 memorandum, you may like to take note of a certain progression within Macnaghten's jottings.

                24th February 1894 Memorandum—

                "The last murder is the only one that took place in a room, and the murderer must have been at least 2 hours engaged."

                Aberconway Version [date unknown]—

                "The last murder is the only one which took place in a room, and the murderer must have been at least 2 hours over his hellish job."

                Days of My Years [1914]—

                ". . . the doctors who were called in to examine the remains, averred that the operator must have been at least two hours over his hellish job."

                Regards,

                Simon
                Never believe anything until it has been officially denied.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Simon Wood View Post
                  Hi Herlock,

                  At best, Macnaghten's case against Druitt was nothing but conjecture and shifting opinion.

                  1894 memorandum—

                  "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."

                  "He was sexually insane and from private information I have little doubt but that his own family believed him to have been the murderer."

                  Aberconway—

                  "A much more rational and workable theory, to may way of thinking, is that the 'rippers' brain gave way altogether after his awful glut in Millers Court and that he then committed suicide, or, as a less likely alternative, was found to be so helplessly insane by his relatives, that they, suspecting the worst, had him confined in some lunatic asylum."

                  "From private information I have little doubt but that his own family suspected this man of being the Whitechapel murderer; it was alleged that he was sexually insane."

                  Macnaghten goes from Druitt being sexually insane, to it being alleged that he was sexually insane. Alleged by whom? He goes from committal to an asylum being a possible alternative, to it being a less likely alternative.

                  As Druitt was pulled from the Thames, why bother offering committal to an asylum as an alternative fate?

                  It's all horsefeathers.

                  Regards,

                  Simon

                  Great post Simon!

                  Thats why Druitt belongs to the history side of the case, not to the suspects, he didn't do anything to suspect him of being the ripper, we have enough theories on the subject to relay just on a theory made by a not experienced officer who didn't do the simplest investigations before accusing people.

                  Not to mention he was dead when one of the ripper murders took place


                  The Baron

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Wickerman View Post

                    I don't recall there being any dispute whether Druitt was a suspect.
                    And History is there to be challenged just like anything else in life and in this case when all the content of the MM is looked at there can only be one conclusion, and that is that it is unsafe to rely on, and the contents not readily accepted as being accurate. What MM seeks to rely on is third hand hearsay without corroboration then and now.

                    The only police officers I would put any faith in with regards to honesty and integrity is Inspector Reid and Insp Abberline, they were front line officers directly involved and if anyone knew anything it would likley have been them. Even Monro and Major Smith in later years were honest enough to admit they had no ideas as to the identity of the killer. So if all those resources from 1888 didn't have a clue and come up with a prime suspect what chance does anyone have 130 years later with what is at at our disposal.

                    The mystery has been done to death, all we now see here is sabre rattling with everyone defending their own suspect theory. When someone new to casebook joins and starts to engage with the resident band of posters on their own preferred suspect the sabre rattling starts all over again.

                    www.trevormarriott.co.uk

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post

                      And History is there to be challenged just like anything else in life and in this case when all the content of the MM is looked at there can only be one conclusion, and that is that it is unsafe to rely on, and the contents not readily accepted as being accurate. What MM seeks to rely on is third hand hearsay without corroboration then and now.

                      The only police officers I would put any faith in with regards to honesty and integrity is Inspector Reid and Insp Abberline, they were front line officers directly involved and if anyone knew anything it would likley have been them. Even Monro and Major Smith in later years were honest enough to admit they had no ideas as to the identity of the killer. So if all those resources from 1888 didn't have a clue and come up with a prime suspect what chance does anyone have 130 years later with what is at at our disposal.

                      The mystery has been done to death, all we now see here is sabre rattling with everyone defending their own suspect theory. When someone new to casebook joins and starts to engage with the resident band of posters on their own preferred suspect the sabre rattling starts all over again.

                      www.trevormarriott.co.uk

                      Agree completely.


                      Thank you.


                      The Baron

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Wickerman View Post

                        Hi Jeff.

                        If you notice the first & second post in the second link, Andy Spallek located a few near contemporary sources where the term "Sexually Insane" was used.
                        - The Medico-pharmaceutical critic and guide, 1911.
                        - How to Help One's Self, 1914.
                        -
                        The Medical Herald, 1895.

                        In all cases the term was used in a heterosexual context.
                        And, in the first source you'll notice Spallek wrote:

                        "Sexually insane" here clearly does not mean "homosexual." It appears to refer to someone with an overactive hetero-sexual appetite. In fact, this meaning would make perfect sense in Macnaghten's report re: Druitt."

                        There has never been any cause to think of Druitt as homosexual. The whole idea sprouted from the fact he taught at a boys school, not unusual for the 19th century. Yet modern theorists suggest "what if" Druitt was homosexual?......and the notion has taken on a life of its own.
                        It's a "what if", and was nothing more than a suggestion. It takes up too much space for something that originated from nothing.
                        I agree, there's nothing in the evidence to suggest that Druitt was homosexual. That's what I was sort of trying to exemplify with presenting the idea of pornographic post-card collection too. There's no evidence for that either, but I could spin a tale if I wanted to, and if my tale includes a large collection, scattered about the room when his suicide note was found, maybe a few in his desk at school (hence his firing) and some of the more disturbing shown to McNaughton (and so being part of the "private information" he received, and was able to later destroy as he says he did), then it's just as good a tale as him being homosexual, or a pedophile, etc. Anything that one can make up could fill that gap.

                        And, anything that one makes up just now is just as good as anything made up a few years ago - because we have no idea what the private information was other than it seems to have led McNaughton to allege Druitt was sexually insane, which he later revised to a more definite statement (for reasons we do not know), and that McNaughton was led to believe that Druitt's family may have suspected MJD of being JtR. And just as we occasionally take off on flights of fancy to fill in gaps, MJDs family too may have as well trying to come to terms with his suicide so it may very well be that their suspicions of sexual deviance and murderous activities were based on nothing more substantial than my hypothetical dirty postcards. And yes, even if that were the case, that would still count as McNaughton being given private information, and if those rumors just sat with him over the years (because the information was not evidence, but innuendo and suspicion), it still may have convinced him he was onto something and just didn't have the evidence to prove it (how often does that happen in this case after all?)

                        - Jeff

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by rjpalmer View Post
                          I've never "bought in" to the notion that the Victorians were so sexually naïve as to believe that mere homosexuality could be equated with the hatred of women, let alone with someone capable of hacking women to pieces. Hell, Macnaghten went to Eton...an all boy's school. He and his contemporaries would have known better.

                          It's a modern notion, and not a very good one. Darryl K is quite right to return to the source material for a definition of sexual mania: Macnaghten himself.
                          Except that sexual mania is a specific form of sexual insanity, the latter is an umbrella term that would include, but not be limited to, sexual mania. JtR would be argued to be afflicted with sexual mania. And if one believes that "if you have one form of sexual insanity, you are more likely to have another", and your McNaughton and have some suspect (i.e. MJD) who is alleged to be sexually insane in someway, that could lead him to believe he was more likely to also have sexual mania. Not in a way that would be evidence, but in a way that might make his belief grow as time went on. The memorandum does indicate his belief grew over time, and that sounds like he had something that was an interesting idea, that took root, and convinced him despite there being no real evidence behind it. This happens all the time, we convince ourselves based on the same information we originally felt was no more than a possible lead, simply because it's all we've got.

                          I doubt Victorians thought homosexuality was automatically linked to hatred of women, but they did view it as deviant and illegal. It could be overlooked if the person had sufficient standing, but if push came to shove, they went to prison (as in Oscar Wilde). So, while it wouldn't be an automatic suspicion, I would not be surprised if it a suspect was found to be homosexual that the idea of "this specific person might have a hatred of women" would not more easily rise to consideration (as it seems to have for Tumblety, for example). While I don't think it's a correct line of reasoning, I do think it's one that is, and has been, presumed true for quite a long time.

                          - Jeff

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by The Baron View Post


                            Great post Simon!

                            Thats why Druitt belongs to the history side of the case, not to the suspects, he didn't do anything to suspect him of being the ripper, we have enough theories on the subject to relay just on a theory made by a not experienced officer who didn't do the simplest investigations before accusing people.

                            Not to mention he was dead when one of the ripper murders took place


                            The Baron
                            Utter crap. But do keep trying.
                            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 Trevor Marriott View Post

                              You eyesight is as bad as your belief in Druitt as a suspect

                              www.trevormarriott.co.uk
                              Don’t think so. For some reason I place more weight in the word of Sir Melville Macnaghten that some dodgy American lawyer and his uncorroborated ‘confession.’
                              Regards

                              Herlock






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

                              Comment


                              • The mystery has been done to death, all we now see here is sabre rattling with everyone defending their own suspect theory. When someone new to casebook joins and starts to engage with the resident band of posters on their own preferred suspect the sabre rattling starts all over again.
                                Check the dictionary for the word ‘’irony.’’
                                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