What makes Druitt a viable suspect?

[Herlock Sholmes]

Does (either..or) in my post means: accept two propositions, for you Herlock?

Pointless nitpicking. You said that if one accepts either Tabram or Mackenzie as victims then Druitt is eliminated. Well I don’t. What’s your point?

"only accepted by a very small minority"

Those who believe either Tabram or Mckenzey was a ripper victim are (only accepted by a very small minority) Thats what you think Herlock?

The so-called Canonical Five are not set in stone of course. But yes, I’d say that the majority of those interested in the case would go for 5 victims. I cant see why this is controversial in any way. Of course anyone can disagree and some do. It doesn’t change the fact that most agree though.

Again, there is nothing more going for him than

Nonsense.

(Macnaghten was very good friends with Sir Vivian Majendie who was related to the Druitt family by marriage)

.. thats why he thought Druitt was a doctor, 41 years old, who killed himself right away after the last murder, didn't he

It’s been a while since I read Hainsworth’s book on Druitt but he gives reasons why Macnaghten might have deliberately put an incorrect age and profession. In any case it doesn’t follow that because he got the age and profession wrong that Druitt couldn’t have been guilty. Criminals worldwide would love your viewpoint Baron. Imagine someone’s solicitor saying “my client can’t have been guilty because you got his age and job wrong.

The Baron

I don’t really see why Druitt’s candidature should annoy you so much Baron? To compare Druitt with Ostrog is ludicrous. Whether you like it or not Druitt remains a suspect and a better one that 95% of the dross that have been named so far.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Even the nearest murder site was a mile and a half away, Herlock, clear across the city. That's half an hour at my (average) walking pace, and over 50 minutes to Buck's Row. While clearly not impossible, it's hardly a handy pier a terre that he could quickly access to
clean up. If that was his aim, why head to Whitechapel and not a closer district?
Although as it happens, there was a (different) Dorset Street and a George Yard within two minutes walk of his offices.

None of that is an issue for me Joshua I have to admit. I’ve never understood why we should assume that the ripper lived at the heart of the area. What’s the saying about not doing on your own doorstep? He might have had a room in the area. If it’s ok to suggest this for Tumblety then why not for Druitt?

[Herlock Sholmes]

Would we be looking at Druitt as a suspect if Macnaghten hadn't mentioned him in his memorandum?

The same could be said for Kosminski.

We wouldn’t be looking at any suspects Simon if no one had ever mentioned them.

[Roy Corduroy]

Quite so, Sholmes

Originally posted by Simon Wood
Would we be looking at Druitt as a suspect if Macnaghten hadn't mentioned him in his memorandum?

The same could be said for Kosminski

Hi Simon,

No of course not.

Further, if Lady Aberconway had not shared the memorandum with Daniel Farson, and Tom Cullen not stole Farson's briefcase and published his own book introducing Druitt. And then ... well, you get the idea.

Oops, sorry, I left out Robin Odell, who discovered the Scotland Yard version of the Macnaghten memorandum in the police files.

But never mind Aberconway and the boys, nor Odell.

* No MacMemo naming suspects, period. That is your original idea in it's essence Simon.

A fascinating idea, Simon, to imagine that in reply to the Sun articles implicating (the unnamed) Thomas Cutbush as Jack the Ripper, Melville Macnaghten did not write a memorandum. Or if he did write a memo, he did not name any suspects in it.

Okay, we'll let's see, McCormick, 1959 The Identity of Jack the Ripper, featuring his Dr. Pedachenko theory came first. So there would be his book anyway.. But with no Cullen book, and no Farson either, who was next? Aha! Knight! Which you debunked. Okay, next. Did Fido take up the mantle? Who are we to say he would have.

It's like The Boys from Brazil, isn't it.

Did Tom Cullen's book get people thinking? I would think so. McCormick's book got people thinking, and none other than Stewart Evans has told us as much. If SPE had not read McCormick's book, where would Ripperology be today?

Roy

[Roy Corduroy]

Simon, I think I've figured out your position.

Yes McCormick wrote his book but Stewart Evans didn't read it, so Stewart Evans need not detain us. Then there was a twenty year gap until Stephen Knight wrote Jack the Ripper: The Final Solution which you promptly debunked. And that was it. There were no more books no movies, no websites, etc. It all just stopped. Over forty years ago it ended. Nullification.

Roy

[The Baron]

... Druitt remains a suspect

Why ?! Why is he a suspect ?! let alone better than your 95% statics of other suspects.


The Baron

[Simon Wood]

Hi Roy,

I'm not quite certain where you got this "NoMacMemo" idea.

It certainly wasn't from me.

Regards,

Simon

[The Baron]

He might have had a room in the area.

Sure, he might have had a room, then he is a suspect!


The Baron

[Herlock Sholmes]

Why ?! Why is he a suspect ?! let alone better than your 95% statics of other suspects.


The Baron

He is a suspect because he has been named as one and you cannot unname a suspect. You also cannot produce one single piece of evidence which eliminates him.

[The Baron]

He is a suspect because he has been named as one and you cannot unname a suspect. You also cannot produce one single piece of evidence which eliminates him.

Ok, then Ostrog is a suspect too. you cannot unname a suspect.


The Baron

[Herlock Sholmes]

Sure, he might have had a room, then he is a suspect!


The Baron

Do you read sentences as individual entities? You would be much better of reading them in the context of the surrounding sentences.

Joshua raised the point that Druitt was based between 30 to 50 minutes away from the murder sites. I said that, for me, that wasn’t an issue. I also stated that he might have had a room in the area (giving him somewhere close to go and change/dispose of body parts etc.)

He wasn’t a suspect because he might have had a room.

but...

He is a suspect and he might have had a room.

Hope this is clear.

[The Baron]

Do you read sentences as individual entities? You would be much better of reading them in the context of the surrounding sentences.

Joshua raised the point that Druitt was based between 30 to 50 minutes away from the murder sites. I said that, for me, that wasn’t an issue. I also stated that he might have had a room in the area (giving him somewhere close to go and change/dispose of body parts etc.)

He wasn’t a suspect because he might have had a room.

but...

He is a suspect and he might have had a room.

Hope this is clear.

I still want to know why he is a suspect.

Let's face it, you don't know, you don't have a clue.


The Baron

[Wickerman]

I still want to know why he is a suspect.

Let's face it, you don't know, you don't have a clue.


The Baron

Do you mean you want to know why Mac. listed Druitt as a suspect?
J. J. Hainsworth covered this theory in his Jack the Ripper - Case Solved 1891. Where the author presents the story of the West of England M.P. and the confession of a West Country Vicar.

[Herlock Sholmes]

I still want to know why he is a suspect.

Let's face it, you don't know, you don't have a clue.


The Baron

I really don’t understand why the attitude problem Baron?

Hes a suspect because he was named as one by the Assistant Commissioner of the Met. You appear to be saying that because he got his age and profession wrong then he should be dismissed as a suspect? Should we therefore dismiss Tumblety because his name was often spelled incorrectly? Do you believe that Macnaghten was a liar and if so on what grounds do you base that assertion? Druitt has been mentioned by others too (Sir Basil Thomson I believe?). From memory I seem to recall Bachert being told that police numbers had been reduced because the killer committed suicide by drowning in the Thames so Druitt wasn’t a name mentioned just by Macnaghten and then ignored by everyone else.

Can you prove that he couldn’t have been the ripper? All you appear to have is Tabram and Mackenzie. Two women who aren’t considered victims of the ripper by the majority of those interested in the case. And I still don’t see how Tabram excludes Druitt?

We have a man in the right age range.
We have a man whose description could be said to resemble some potential witnesses.
The phrase ‘shabby genteel’ would describe Druitt in old clothes.
He was physically fit and strong.
He was based within walking distance of the crime scenes.
He committed suicide after Kelly which gives a reason for the cessation of the murders.
His mother was in an asylum and in his note he said that he was going the same way. Mental illness.
He could easily have acquired anatomical knowledge from his father.
He was named by The Assistant Commissioner Of The Metropolitan Police as a suspect.
The same man said that he had private information that his Druitt’s family suspected him of being the ripper.
Could Macnaghten have had access to private information - Yes his good friend Vivian Majendie.
Then there’s the confession of the West Country Vicar (as mentioned by Wickerman.)

Am I saying that Druitt was the ripper? - no. But I’ll reiterate that he has far more going for him than 95+% of the named suspects. I really don’t see why it bothers you so much when I state this. If I’d said that Druitt was guilty - case closed then I could understand. Druitt is a suspect.

[Simon Wood]

Hi Herlock,

What is it, aside from Macnaghten's mention in his memorandum, that makes you believe Montague John Druitt was a Ripper suspect?

Macnaghten's "private inf" absolved the police from any such suspicions.

Regards,

Simon