Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

What makes Druitt a viable suspect?

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

  • Hi Paul,

    Macnaghten was the sole reason for Ostrog's name being put forward as a suspect.

    In October 1894 someone may have asked him how, as Ostrog was in a French jail at the time of the WM, he became tagged as a suspect.

    Regards,

    Simon
    Never believe anything until it has been officially denied.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by mpriestnall View Post
      Hi Casebook, this is my first post on CB.
      I've been on JTRForums for a while. I am member of Whitechapel Soc. 1888.
      I have my own candidate which I have been researching since mid 2016.
      I've been lurking on here on CB and the other place since 2010.

      ++

      "What makes Druitt a viable suspect?".

      No evidence of any involvement.
      Apart from MM memo. No detail given, no evidence of MJD's guilt.
      Alleged destruction of records of which there is no evidence they existed.

      No matching description, partial or otherwise.

      No known motive.

      No known history of violence.

      No known evidence of any other misbehaviour.

      Fully functioning person on multiple fronts:
      Legal career, teaching, sporting/social.

      No known history of previous mental history.

      No concurrence from any other source other Sims/Griffiths who are merely repeating MM.

      Contradicted by other 'authorities' eg Anderson, Abberline.

      Am I missing something about Druitt's candidacy for JTR that I should know about?

      Martyn








      hi Priest
      welcome!

      whereas Druitt is not in my top tier of favored suspects, he must be considered valid.

      he was suspected by a senior official
      he was around at the time
      he did have mental issues
      his death would explain the cessation of the C5 murders
      he does (somewhat) fit the witness descriptions
      his father being a dr, he probably had some medical/anatomical knowledge

      now granted, mcnaughtens suspicion is wanting, but we cant discard the info, just because we don't know the specifics. Aparently it came from a very trusted source, if not directly from the family, probably someone close. many a time rumors are true. just my take.

      "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 PaulB View Post

        Not that Trevor ever listens, but Macnaghten wrote in a document intended for internal distribution among senior policemen and possibly politicians (as far as we know) who would have known about the 'private information' and Druitt as a suspect, or who would have probably made inquiries about them if they didn't. It therefore seems safe to say that Macnaghten was putting himself on the line if the information didn't exist or was less than it needed to be to justify Macnaghten's conclusion. So Macnaghten wasn't only a serviving police officer, and a senior one in a position to know if information had been received, he was also stating his opinion in an official document over which he could have been quizzed, not giving a newspaper interview from retirement years later.

        As said, though, none of it will matter to Trevor.
        You are right it will not matter to me because it is unsafe unreliable and third hand hearsay and if you or anyone else accept it as a proven historical document the you all need all reality checks.
        From an investigative perspective it has no evidential value accept it and move on

        www.trevormarriott.co.uk

        Comment


        • Originally posted by seanr View Post
          Both Druitt and Feigenbaum are terrible suspects.
          In most unsolved cases, the actual murderer appears to be a 'terrible suspect.'

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post

            You are right it will not matter to me because it is unsafe unreliable and third hand hearsay and if you or anyone else accept it as a proven historical document the you all need all reality checks.
            From an investigative perspective it has no evidential value accept it and move on

            www.trevormarriott.co.uk
            Your are talking rubbish, revealing absolutely no understanding of how to handle historical sources, but keep on ignoring everything you're told, and repeating the same thing over and over again. It saves you the problem of actually supporting your arguments.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Simon Wood View Post
              Hi Paul,

              Macnaghten was the sole reason for Ostrog's name being put forward as a suspect.

              In October 1894 someone may have asked him how, as Ostrog was in a French jail at the time of the WM, he became tagged as a suspect.

              Regards,

              Simon
              You are supposing that it was Macnaghten who alone suggested that Ostrog could have been Jack the Ripper?

              Wouldn't Macnaghten just have said that Ostrog's whereabouts weren't known when he wrote at the begining of the year?

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Simon Wood View Post
                Hi Jon,

                I would suggest that Lady Aberconway sent it to Scotland Yard.

                Regards,

                Simon
                You think it necessary for Mac. to write "confidential" at the head of a paper he only kept at home?
                Regards, Jon S.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by PaulB View Post

                  Your are talking rubbish, revealing absolutely no understanding of how to handle historical sources, but keep on ignoring everything you're told, and repeating the same thing over and over again. It saves you the problem of actually supporting your arguments.
                  The arguments and support for them have been put forward many times by others beside myself and are more valid than your belief in mm as being a reliable source when it has been proved he is not

                  www.trevormarriott.co.uk

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post

                    hi Priest
                    welcome!

                    whereas Druitt is not in my top tier of favored suspects, he must be considered valid.

                    he was suspected by a senior official
                    he was around at the time
                    he did have mental issues
                    his death would explain the cessation of the C5 murders
                    he does (somewhat) fit the witness descriptions
                    his father being a dr, he probably had some medical/anatomical knowledge

                    now granted, mcnaughtens suspicion is wanting, but we cant discard the info, just because we don't know the specifics. Aparently it came from a very trusted source, if not directly from the family, probably someone close. many a time rumors are true. just my take.
                    Probably the best summary here.
                    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 Simon Wood View Post
                      Hi Jon,

                      I would suggest that Lady Aberconway sent it to Scotland Yard.

                      Regards,

                      Simon
                      On the other hand, if the Aberconway version was the final draft, why would she send the other 'less than accurate' version?
                      Presumably, she would want the police to have his final thoughts?

                      Either way you look at it I think your theory needs a rethink
                      Regards, Jon S.

                      Comment


                      • Kosminsky was my favourite suspect, but just because Macnagten mentioned him, and along with Ostrog and Druitt, I realy started to have doubts of his viability as a suspect.


                        The Baron

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Wickerman View Post

                          Duly noted, yes. And, let us not forget the private school at Blackheath employed several females, some young ladies and a female cook.
                          Any 'serious offense' may well have involved Druitt with one of the female servants, but this possibility is never explored.

                          Thats certainly something that I’d never considered Wick. Another possible to add to the ‘why was Druitt sacked’ list.

                          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 The Baron View Post
                            Kosminsky was my favourite suspect, but just because Macnagten mentioned him, and along with Ostrog and Druitt, I realy started to have doubts of his viability as a suspect.


                            The Baron
                            His age at only 23 should have been your first clue....
                            Regards, Jon S.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post

                              You are right it will not matter to me because it is unsafe unreliable and third hand hearsay and if you or anyone else accept it as a proven historical document the you all need all reality checks.
                              From an investigative perspective it has no evidential value accept it and move on

                              www.trevormarriott.co.uk
                              Like it’s unsafe to rely on the uncorroborated statement of a lawyer given after the death of the person that he was talking about. You should try being less selective about your ‘criteria’ for what’s worthwhile or what’s not especially when you have no proof that the suspect was even in the country at the time of the murders. On what planet should Lawton be considered a more reliable source than Macnaghten?

                              Theres no need to waste time responding Trevor.
                              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 Herlock Sholmes View Post

                                Thats certainly something that I’d never considered Wick. Another possible to add to the ‘why was Druitt sacked’ list.
                                Hi Herlock.

                                If you look at the listing in post 1 of this link....
                                https://forum.casebook.org/forum/rip...e-full-listing

                                You will see how huge the staff assembly was in 1881, at the end of that post is a (partial?) listing for 1891, i'm wondering if Chris only posted those few names to show that Elizabeth Sims was present?
                                Precisely how large the staff was in 1888 is obviously not known, but these listings offer a fair idea of the extent of female servants, house maids, kitchen maids, housekeepers, cook, etc. were required to keep the school running.
                                Any suspicions should include more than just little boys.
                                Regards, Jon S.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X