Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

What makes Druitt a viable suspect?

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

  • Originally posted by PaulB View Post

    This is my final reply on this thread, through no fault of mine it has been hijacked.

    As best I recall, the only evidence against Feigenbaum was provided by Lawton after Feigenbaum had been executed in the United States. Lawton never made use of Feigenbaum's alleged statement during Feigenbaum's lifetime, not even when he tried to save him from execution by claiming he was insane, and Lawton's business partner, Hugh Owen Pentecost, disassociated himself from Lawton's story. Lawton shot himself a year later. Beyond Lawton's story, there is no evidence that Feigenbaum was in England in 1888.

    Yes there is, and it has been posted, Pentecost never had any direct dealings with Feigenbaum so how was he to know whether the story was true or false. He simply said he didnt believe it, but Lawton did because he states he took steps to obtain corroboration to what Feigenbaum said

    There is no evidence that Feigenbaum was in England in 1888, there's no corroboration of any sort that Feigenbaum confessed to the crimes to Lawton, Lawton never told his story when Feigenbaum was alive, not even when he tried to claimed Lawton was insane, Lawton's partner disassociated himself from the story, and Lawton committed suicide within the year. Apparently these don't constitute good reasons for doubting Lawton's story.
    But you are forgetting all the other evidence in support of Feigenbaum, which is far greater than that you seek to rely on to prop up Druitt

    In the legal profession there is such a thing as client confidentiality. I will explain that because you seem a bit slow on the uptake .

    What is said between a lawyer and his client is in confidence, and the lawyer is not allowed to disclose conversations or admission without the consent of the client. After Feigenbaums execution he would be free to do just that which he did.


    www.trevormarriott.co.uk

    Comment


    • Good evening Joshua,

      Originally posted by Joshua Rogan View Post
      It was Mac who proposed the Canonical Five ...
      Surely I am misunderstanding the intent of your statement. Please clarify. Because from memory I am recalling Robert Anderson requesting Dr Bond's opinion on exactly this matter, the question of the five murders, and similarities, if any. This was well before the secret memo of 1894.

      Roy



      Sink the Bismark

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Roy Corduroy View Post
        Good evening Joshua,



        Surely I am misunderstanding the intent of your statement. Please clarify. Because from memory I am recalling Robert Anderson requesting Dr Bond's opinion on exactly this matter, the question of the five murders, and similarities, if any. This was well before the secret memo of 1894
        Ahoy Mr Roy.
        My memory is a bit flaky these days, and I'm also slightly squiffy, so apologies if I've misremembered, but wasn't it Macnaghton who said there were five victims and no more, in his autobiography? Thus establishing the C5 as the only "true" Ripper murders out of all the Whitechapel murders.
        Yes, Anderson asked Bond to examine the five killings up to Kelly's murder, but he also looked at subsequent ones and concluded at least one was also by the same killer. If I recall correctly.
        Essentially, i was just making a little mischief as I'm slightly bored, but I do find it telling that Mac didn't think the Ripper struck on his watch, and also his favourite suspect happened to be dead by then too.

        Coincidence or magic? You decide.


        Comment


        • Originally posted by Simon Wood View Post
          Apropos Druitt, I've been reading in the A-Z and Ripperologist 124 the rocky history of the Macnaghten Memorandum and its siblings. Once again I ran into a blizzard of conjecture and opinion.

          The subject was previously discussed in 2008—

          https://forum.casebook.org/forum/rip...ing-memorandum

          As I ventured along the memorandum's rocky road, my eye was caught by reference to a framed "Dear Boss" letter which in 1950 was gracing the walls of Gerald Melville Donner's house in Madras.

          “Copy be damned,” Gerald said to his Christmas visitor, Philip Loftus, “that’s the original!”

          One of Donner's daughters saw several framed letters at his Madras house in 1954. This is believed to be the last time Donner’s Ripper material was seen for certain. Donner died in India in 1968.

          Time marched on.

          Ripperologist 124—

          "In November 1987 an anonymous package was sent to New Scotland Yard in an envelope postmarked ‘Croydon, Surrey’. It contained various official Ripper-related documents including ‘Dear Boss’, believed to be the letter written in red ink seen by Philip Loftus on Gerald Donner’s wall in 1950 . . ."

          Apparently, during those thirty-three years, "Dear Boss" had travelled five thousand miles from Madras to Croydon.

          I mention all this because, in 1987, prior to its return to Scotland Yard, I held the original "Dear Boss" letter in my hands.
          Looks like you're off on a tangent there Simon, almost a shame to interrupt....
          Regards, Jon S.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post

            Before you go and waste somebody elses time, perhaps you can prove that did not happen in the way I described. Because it is just as plausible an explantion, because there is nothing to show how MM came by his information or what the strength of it was.

            www.trevormarriott.co.uk
            Trevor,
            I have explained it several times, but you appear to be incapable of understanding it. Without going into any detail, Druitt was a real person who had no known connection with the Whitechapel murders, so there is no reason why anyone should ever have linked his name with the crimes. And yet somebody did. Why? Well, of course we don't know, but whatever the reason was (or the reasons were), Macnaghten found them persuasive. Macnaghten wasn't a fool and he was perfectly capable of distinguishing good from bad evidence, so his belief suggests that the evidence was pretty solid, and this conclusion appears to be supported by the fact that Macnaghten was happy to endorse Druitt as Jack the Ripper in a memoranda that was apparently intended for distribution among his superiors and senior members of the government. Why does this matter? It matters because Macnaghten was putting his reputation and credibility on the line, and possibly his prospects of promotion, if he'd been asked for clarification and been forced to admit it was because some bloke fdown the pub had told him.

            In short, if Macnaghten accepted that Druitt was the Ripper on nothing more than "someone probably saying in passing over a glass of sherry. "Oh the drowned doctor could have been the killer" then Macnaghten was not a perspicacious policeman, and, as far as I know, that doesn't accord with what we know of him. You would therefore have to prove that Macnaghten was a fool, and you haven't done that. Your passing remark over a glass of sherry suggestion therefore isn't plausible.


            Comment


            • Originally posted by Joshua Rogan View Post

              Ahoy Mr Roy.
              My memory is a bit flaky these days, and I'm also slightly squiffy, so apologies if I've misremembered, but wasn't it Macnaghton who said there were five victims and no more, in his autobiography? Thus establishing the C5 as the only "true" Ripper murders out of all the Whitechapel murders.
              Yes, Anderson asked Bond to examine the five killings up to Kelly's murder, but he also looked at subsequent ones and concluded at least one was also by the same killer. If I recall correctly.
              The letter from Bond to Anderson was dated 10th of November, 1888. So was prior to the murder of Rose Mylett, Alice Mackenzie and Frances Coles. I believe the wording was along the lines of 'these five are undoubtedly by the same hand', which doesn't exclude the other murders as being by the same hand, simply that they are less certain. Although, I've tried to find the exact letter, as the wording would be important.

              They definitely were police in 1888 who believed Martha Tabram was by the same hand. Druitt has an almost rock solid alibi for that week.

              I believe Macnaghten is the only explicit contemporary source for the canonical five, through the memorandum and his auto-biography. Unless someone can prove me to be mistaken?

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Joshua Rogan View Post

                Ahoy Mr Roy.
                My memory is a bit flaky these days, and I'm also slightly squiffy, so apologies if I've misremembered, but wasn't it Macnaghton who said there were five victims and no more, in his autobiography? Thus establishing the C5 as the only "true" Ripper murders out of all the Whitechapel murders.
                Yes, Anderson asked Bond to examine the five killings up to Kelly's murder, but he also looked at subsequent ones and concluded at least one was also by the same killer. If I recall correctly.
                Essentially, i was just making a little mischief as I'm slightly bored, but I do find it telling that Mac didn't think the Ripper struck on his watch, and also his favourite suspect happened to be dead by then too.

                Coincidence or magic? You decide.

                I know I should look this up first (famous last words...), but wasn't Bond requested to look into the series of murders (no number mentioned), in October?
                That is, before the Millers Court murder?
                Regards, Jon S.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Wickerman View Post
                  I know I should look this up first (famous last words...), but wasn't Bond requested to look into the series of murders (no number mentioned), in October?
                  That is, before the Millers Court murder?
                  I actually thought that too Jon, but couldn't be sure....so I fudged it.

                  Comment


                  • Ok, after receiving Dr. Bond's report (dated 10 Nov.), Anderson wrote to Warren mentioning the fact that he had enlisted Dr. Bond on 25th ulto. (October), to look into this series (no number) of murders.
                    Regards, Jon S.

                    Comment


                    • What we don't know is why Dr. Bond listed the four:
                      1. Bucks Row.
                      2. Hanbury Street.
                      3. Berner Street.
                      4. Mitre Square.
                      He involved himself in the Millers Court murder because he had not finished his task.

                      This list could be Mac's source for the five, but whether Bond was told to leave out Tabram & Smith is not known.
                      Regards, Jon S.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Wickerman View Post

                        The Whitechapel murders range from Emma Smith to Francis Coles, and include Rose Mylett & Pinchin St., in total 11. Whether you believe 4, 5, 6 or 7 were committed by the same hand is entirely up to you, but I fail to see how you can say Jack was responsible for all 11 cases.
                        This is why there is a distinction.
                        The trouble I have is that most approach the evidence from the angle of 'who was Jack the Ripper?'. If you approach it from the angle of 'why did the police investigation put these crimes in the same file?', you end up with a different set of questions.

                        I wasn't going to go too much into this within this thread as it seemed to veer away from the topic of Druitt and more towards the validity of the canonical five, but given Druitt was at Bournemouth Cricket Week from 4 - 11th of August, some points are relevant.

                        In 1888, after the murder of Martha Tabram literally about one block away from the site of the attack on Emma Smith, the police linked the two crimes and joined the investigation together. Incorrectly according to prevailing modern view, as the two crimes were completely unrelated. Although, surely we must admit that location, time, victim selection were very similar. Nonetheless, modern commentators are confident the two crimes were not related or at least had nothing to do with Jack the Ripper.

                        In August 1888 the police begin looking for a serial killer or killers. Yet, if the canonical five is correct they were wrong to do so. So, the bungling police start looking for a serial killer who didn't exist. Then, at the end of the very month they began looking for this phantom figure, an actual serial killer decides to start a series - with similar victim selection, timings and location. An astonishing coincidence, but when which seems widely accepted virtually unexamined, it seems.

                        If you believe that either Martha Tabram or Alice Mackenzie were Ripper victims, you must dismiss Druitt.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post

                          But you are forgetting all the other evidence in support of Feigenbaum, which is far greater than that you seek to rely on to prop up Druitt

                          In the legal profession there is such a thing as client confidentiality. I will explain that because you seem a bit slow on the uptake .

                          What is said between a lawyer and his client is in confidence, and the lawyer is not allowed to disclose conversations or admission without the consent of the client. After Feigenbaums execution he would be free to do just that which he did.


                          www.trevormarriott.co.uk
                          When Lawton allegedly questioned Feigenbaum, Feigenbaum described a serious mental instability. Lawton tried to save Feigenbaum from execution by pleading insanity, but he did not use Feigenbaum's admission. He may not have been able to because of client confidentiality, but why would Feigenbaum have withheld his permission for it to be used?


                          Comment


                          • Hi Jon,

                            I wish you had been there. Others were.

                            Then you wouldn't be quite so snarky and dismissive.

                            Regards,

                            Simon
                            Last edited by Simon Wood; 04-28-2019, 11:21 PM.
                            Never believe anything until it has been officially denied.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by seanr View Post

                              The letter from Bond to Anderson was dated 10th of November, 1888. So was prior to the murder of Rose Mylett, Alice Mackenzie and Frances Coles. I believe the wording was along the lines of 'these five are undoubtedly by the same hand', which doesn't exclude the other murders as being by the same hand, simply that they are less certain. Although, I've tried to find the exact letter, as the wording would be important.

                              They definitely were police in 1888 who believed Martha Tabram was by the same hand. Druitt has an almost rock solid alibi for that week.

                              I believe Macnaghten is the only explicit contemporary source for the canonical five, through the memorandum and his auto-biography. Unless someone can prove me to be mistaken?
                              We might assume Dr. Bond did not include Tabram because Anderson had enlisted him to assess the mutilations for surgical skill. As there were no mutilations or slices to Tabram, the mutilations began with Nichols, this is where he chose to begin.
                              Regards, Jon S.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by PaulB View Post

                                I bet he was told it by Feigenbaum! It's as likely as the rest of the nonsense.
                                Don’t speak to soon Paul.
                                Regards

                                Herlock




                                “ Herlock is the cleverest man that I’ve ever met.” - Stephen Hawking.
                                “ I wish that I could have achieved half as much as Herlock.”- Neil Armstrong.
                                “ What a voice Herlock has.” - Luciano Pavarotti.
                                “ I wish that I could dump Harry for Herlock.” - Meghan Markle.
                                “ I know that it’s not good to be jealous but I just can’t help it.” - John Holmes.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X