What makes Druitt a viable suspect?

[Wolf Vanderlinden]

When Abberline said a report was made to the H/O could he not have meant PC Moulson's report? Seems a stretch but Abberline says young Doctor and way beyond the truth. If Mac had informed him would he be saying that?

Macnaghten may not have informed Abberline personally. Abberline might just have been told to undertake an investigation into Druitt and did so. But if he did undertake an investigation, Macnaghten must have told someone about his private information.

On the 24^th of March, 1903, Abberline was interviewed by the Pall Mall Gazette. It was in this article that Abberline stated his belief that Klosowski/Chapman was the Ripper.

On the 29^th of March, 1903, George R. Sims, writing in his regular column in the Referee, stated that Abberline was wrong about Klosowski/Chapman:

…It is perfectly well know at Scotland Yard who "Jack" was, and the reasons for the police conclusions were given in the report to the Home Office, which was considered by the authorities to be final and conclusive.
How the ex-Inspector can say "We never believed 'Jack' was dead or a lunatic" in face of the report made by the Commissioner of Police is a mystery to me. … The genuine "Jack" was a doctor. His body was found in the Thames on December 31, 1888.

Back went the Pall Mall Gazette to get Abberline’s views on Sims’ rebuttal, which were printed on the 31^st of March, 1903:

Our representative called Mr. Abberline’s attention to the statement made in a well-known Sunday paper, in which it was made out that the author was a young medical student, who was found drowned in the Thames.
‘Yes’ said Mr. Abberline, ‘I know all about that story. But what does it amount to? Simply this. Soon after the last murder in Whitechapel the body of a young doctor was found in the Thames, but there is absolutely nothing beyond the fact that he was found at that time to incriminate him. A report was made to the Home Office about the matter, but that it was “considered final and conclusive” is going altogether beyond the truth.

The “Home Office report,” was the Macnaghten Memoranda. It also appears that it was the Pall Mall Gazette reporter who called the suspect “a young medical student” and that Abberline was responding to this characterization, possibly because he didn’t really remember the details. More importantly, Abberline obviously thinks very little of Druitt as a suspect and the memoranda as evidence. It seems unlikely from all this that Abberline ever undertook an investigation into Druitt.

Wolf.

[c.d.]

He was banned from his football team because they never won any game he played in. They always drew it...

I'll get me coat.

Hello Sam,

I don't think he was banned. It was simply that there were no positions available on the team. When he inquired as to openings he was told "we're full, Monty."

I'll get me coat.

c.d.

[rjpalmer]

The “Home Office report,” was the Macnaghten Memoranda.

That's what many people argue or assume, but is it a fact?

Abberline retired 8 February 1892. Macnaghten didn't write his memoranda until 23 February, 1894--slightly over two years later. Although Abberline claims he stayed in contact with Scotland Yard, is it customary for a retired employee to know about an internal memo sent from the Commissioner to the Home Office? It sounds like he is referring to something else. Nothing in the Home Office files has ever been located.

How the ex-Inspector can say "We never believed 'Jack' was dead or a lunatic" in face of the report made by the Commissioner of Police is a mystery to me. …

A strange statement. Sims is unaware that his old friend Macnaghten was not, nor ever would be, the Commissioner of Police? Henry had just taken over from Bradford when Sims penned those words. It was topical. Macnaghten had been Chief Constable for many years, but was only now being promoted. It would be a very strange way to refer to a Chief Constable's memo, which is not known to have been forwarded to the Home Office.

[Simon Wood]

Hi RJ,

My goodness, you're an old romantic, clinging to the dusty notion that the cops told the truth about the Ripper and that the Macnaghten memorandum was evidentially worthwhile.

Whatever next?

Regards,

Simon

[Darryl Kenyon]

Macnaghten might have been keeping the information to himself, but he could just have been saying that he'd destroyed all his papers, so as of 2 June 1913, or whenever he destroyed his papers, the information had gone. Personally, I think he was just deterring the journalist and other people who might have inquired. Whether or not he'd destroyed his papers is open to question.

Macnaghten may not have informed Abberline personally. Abberline might just have been told to undertake an investigation into Druitt and did so. But if he did undertake an investigation, Macnaghten must have told someone about his private information.

As Chief or earlier assistant Chief constable couldn't Macnaghten have had the power to undertake a somewhat clandestine operation on Druitt without giving too much away as why. " I want you to look into this drowned Doctor who was found in the Thames, report to me" sort of thing just to gather some info?
Maybe he had heard something, the private info? Also he did say that in his autobiography, certain facts were not in possession of the police until after he became a detective officer. Though I would imagine this would be before his famous memo
Regards Darryl

[Wickerman]

You have to bear in mind some of these senior officers were brought into the police service with no previous police experience, they had no practical policing experience and no previous investigative skills. They probably would have believed just about anything anybody said.

But isn't that demonstrably proven wrong by the fact there were dozens, if not hundreds of false accusations received by the police, yet Mac. was very critical in which stories he accepted and which he didn't.
I think the ability to rationalize fact from fiction is not a trait dependent on the number of years of service in the police department.

Thats why we have the real practical police officers who worked directly on the case having no knowledge of what these plastic police officers said in later years, as Abberline and Reid did just that in the press in later years.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Trevor, Abberline & Reid were not investigating this suicide. There was no suspicion attached to Druitt's suicide in 1888/9.

Why would you expect them to know what Mac. and other higher officials were talking about?
According to Mac. it doesn't seem to have been official business.

[Wickerman]

As Chief or earlier assistant Chief constable couldn't Macnaghten have had the power to undertake a somewhat clandestine operation on Druitt without giving too much away as why. " I want you to look into this drowned Doctor who was found in the Thames, report to me" sort of thing just to gather some info?
Maybe he had heard something, the private info? Also he did say that in his autobiography, certain facts were not in possession of the police until after he became a detective officer. Though I would imagine this would be before his famous memo
Regards Darryl

If we are to believe Mac's claim to have destroyed his papers, then the papers must have belonged to him, which in turn may suggest Mac. conducted his own enquiries, possibly via a private investigator. Someone outside the department.
The department are not likely to investigate a dead man.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Is it possible that the full suicide note contained incriminating evidence?

[PaulB]

If we are to believe Mac's claim to have destroyed his papers, then the papers must have belonged to him, which in turn may suggest Mac. conducted his own enquiries, possibly via a private investigator. Someone outside the department.
The department are not likely to investigate a dead man.

The Aberconway version of the memoranda was Macnaghten's personal paper, but it related to an official document, so we should be careful about any suggestion that his papers were distinct from his official work.

I think Scotland Yard would have made inquiries into a dead man if he was seriously suspected of having committed the Ripper murders. It would be important to be as certain as possible that the Ripper was dead and unable to kill again.

[PaulB]

As Chief or earlier assistant Chief constable couldn't Macnaghten have had the power to undertake a somewhat clandestine operation on Druitt without giving too much away as why. " I want you to look into this drowned Doctor who was found in the Thames, report to me" sort of thing just to gather some info?
Maybe he had heard something, the private info? Also he did say that in his autobiography, certain facts were not in possession of the police until after he became a detective officer. Though I would imagine this would be before his famous memo
Regards Darryl

I imagine he could do that, which is what I was suggesting, albeit having a subordinate tell Abberline to undertake the investigation.

[PaulB]

Hi RJ,

My goodness, you're an old romantic, clinging to the dusty notion that the cops told the truth about the Ripper and that the Macnaghten memorandum was evidentially worthwhile.

Whatever next?

Regards,

Simon

Sometimes the police did tell the truth about the Ripper. The difficulty is distinguishing the untruths from the truth.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Is it realistic or productive to set our default position to “all senior police officers are liars” Simon?

[Stacker]

Is it realistic or productive to set our default position to “all senior police officers are liars” Simon?

I am not Simon but here is my position:

The contemporary police officers were dealing with a murderer who had the skill and circumstances to commit at least 11 different murders (Tabram, Mackenzie, the C5, and the 4 Torso killings), and possibly even more than that without being caught in the contemporary circumstances of what said police officers were capable of, and that this murderer had the luck to never be placed on an official contemporary police list of who they suspected to be responsible for the crimes in such a way that would result in their behavior and actions being more closely scrutinized.

Using that description of the situation, Druitt could not have been the Ripper as he goes against not 1 but 3 critical details in my description.

I am willing to consider suspects where 1 of the details in my description need to be false for them to have been the ripper, but not those that require 2 details to be false, let alone 3.

The 4 details are highlighted in color.

The Green, Blue, and Yellow details need to be false for Druitt to be the Ripper. The Red detail can not be proven either way, but I will admit that it would probably be true in the case of Druitt.

[Trevor Marriott]

Is it realistic or productive to set our default position to “all senior police officers are liars” Simon?

Well wasnt it the most senior officers Anderson, MM, and Swanson.who were the ones who made statements or wrote memoirs which all conflict with each other all inferring that they knew the identity of the killer was known, did they lie, or did they have their own agendas for throwing suspect names into the mix.

As to agendas
MM was instructed to come up with some names to negate the sun article
Anderson wanted to boost his book sales and his ego
As to Swanson I am not convinced in the total authenticity of the marginalia

Its time to stop treating all of what these officers said as being the gospel because we can see that it is not

It should be noted that the most senior of all the officers Monro says the police didnt have a clue as to the identity of the killer and being in the position he was nothing would have gone on in this case without his having knowledge.

The commissioner would have no doubt had a daily briefing not just on this crime but many other important crimes. He would need to be kept in the loop for fear of the home secretary asking questions to which he did not know the anwers to, at that briefing would have been other more senior officers some previously mentioned. It is still the case today where daily briefings take place in similar situations.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Wolf Vanderlinden]

That's what many people argue or assume, but is it a fact?

Sims was certainly talking about the Macnaghten Memoranda, you only have to read what he says here, and have an understanding of Sims' writings on the Ripper murders, to see that this is true. Abberline is responding to what Sims wrote and he does so without any confusion. He obviously recognises the document Sims is talking about and dismisses it. As for the Memoranda, although we don't know its exact purpose it was likely prepared for use by the Home Secretary in case questions were raised in the House regarding the Sun's articles. If true it seems likely that a copy was sent to the Home Office but that it hasn't survived.

Wolf.