What makes Druitt a viable suspect?

[Herlock Sholmes]

Hi Herlock.

If you look at the listing in post 1 of this link....

https://forum.casebook.org/forum/ripper-discussions/suspects/druitt-montague-john/1296-eliot-place-in-1881-the-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.

Hello Wick,

Thanks for that.

Im way behind on ripper research so I have to ask what the significance of Elizabeth Sims was that Chris Scott would want to verify her presence?

[The Baron]

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

Martyn

Not in the in the slightest

You just need to add he was dead when Mckenzie was murdered.

Very good first post!


The Baron

[Wickerman]

One connection Chris Scott found between Druitt and the East End was with a local mission for those in need. It was called The Peoples Palace, and had an address in Mile End Rd.
The Times (1 Apr. 1886) published a list of donors that included Montague J. Druitt esq. who donated a £1.00.
At that time The Peoples Palace had temporary offices in Toynbee Hall at 28 Commercial Street East (Between Wentworth & Whitechapel Road). Right in the centre of the badlands.

By the way, the retail value of a £1.00 in 1886 today would be £107.00

https://www.measuringworth.com/calculators/ukcompare/result.php?year_source=1886&amount=1&year_result=2019

[GUT]

Hello Wick,

Thanks for that.

Im way behind on ripper research so I have to ask what the significance of Elizabeth Sims was that Chris Scott would want to verify her presence?

I think two issues

She was still there 10 years later

??? Related to George R?

[Wickerman]

I think two issues

She was still there 10 years later

??? Related to George R?

Right, I think both Sims families can be traced to Clerkenwell, beyond that the trail runs cold....

[Herlock Sholmes]

Cheers GUT/Wick

I suspected that it was ‘George’ related but I didn’t know.

[PaulB]

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

You see, you don't pay attention. The question put to you is whether or not there was 'private information' implicating Druitt. You stated that you weren't saying that the 'private information' wasn't real, so what are you saying? Do you accept that the 'private information' was real? Because you are saying that the information was 2nd or 3rd hand, so you evidently accept that the 'private information' existed. But nobody knows what that information was, but, despite that, you confidently assert that it was 2nd or 3rd hand and is unreliable.

On top of that, Macnaghten expressed his belief that Druitt was the murderer in a document intended for internal distribution among senior officers. Why do you think Macnaghten would have done that if no such information existed or, more crucially, it was 3rd hand and baseless? Tell me, what evidence do you have that Macnaghten was such a dolt that he'd do that? What is your evidence, Trevor?

Finally, get it into your head: I am NOT saying that Macnaghten is a reliable source. However, YOU are saying that he's an unreliable one. There is only one of us venturing a conclusion here, and that is you. And, like everyone who wants to be taken seriously, you must be able to counter objections to your thinking. That means answering them. And I don't see you doing that.

[GUT]

I think she was the only one still there come ‘91.

[Trevor Marriott]

You see, you don't pay attention. The question put to you is whether or not there was 'private information' implicating Druitt. You stated that you weren't saying that the 'private information' wasn't real, so what are you saying? Do you accept that the 'private information' was real? Because you are saying that the information was 2nd or 3rd hand, so you evidently accept that the 'private information' existed. But nobody knows what that information was, but, despite that, you confidently assert that it was 2nd or 3rd hand and is unreliable.

Lets make this clear once and for all MM states he received private information, that we cant prove to be true or false, He received it through an unknown third party, who may or may not have been a reliable source, and who it would seem received it through a member of the Druitt family, as to who that was, again we do not know. So how strong was the information, again we do not know. But by the time it got to MM it was third hand. I have to question was it relayed verbally to MM just as it had been relayed verbally to the third party, did anything get lost or embellished in the different hands it passed through? This is quite possible. As to what the information was we do not know, but as it seems no action was taken and there is no other mention of this or Druitts viability as a suspect anywhere else we can in my opinion rightly assume that it was nowhere near as strong as is being made out by some on here and you also.

On top of that, Macnaghten expressed his belief that Druitt was the murderer in a document intended for internal distribution among senior officers. Why do you think Macnaghten would have done that if no such information existed or, more crucially, it was 3rd hand and baseless? Tell me, what evidence do you have that Macnaghten was such a dolt that he'd do that? What is your evidence, Trevor?

But it was third hand, and that is proven in MM`s own words its there for all to see in the MM.

The most logical and right and proper thing for MM to do in such an important case, as would be the case today in such circumstances would be to pass the information on for it to be investigated. Even if Druitt were dead such information would be worth following up, after all the first line of inquiry would be family members, and then close acquaintances, and then those he worked with. There would be no need for MM to disclose his source, the police might have discovered the source from any investigation they might have conducted.

Why did he not do that, why did he just sit on it?

Finally, get it into your head: I am NOT saying that Macnaghten is a reliable source. However, YOU are saying that he's an unreliable one. There is only one of us venturing a conclusion here, and that is you. And, like everyone who wants to be taken seriously, you must be able to counter objections to your thinking. That means answering them. And I don't see you doing that.

Whether MM himself is an unreliable source is really irrelevant, we are looking at the MM as a reliable source which he wrote, and we see to many errors to safely say that all of what he wrote is safe to rely on.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[The Baron]

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

So was Ostrog for that matter, and this senior official didn't do the slightest of investigations into him

he was around at the time

His cricket schedule suggests otherwise

he did have mental issues

This is only speculations, was his mother a serial killer too? Do you think Depression is a rare phenomenon Abby? or was Druitt the only soul who committed sucide at the time?! Or do serial killers regret their crimes and kill themselves?!

his death would explain the cessation of the C5 murders

But not Mckenzie

he does (somewhat) fit the witness descriptions

Macnaghten too fit somewhat the witness descriptions!

his father being a dr, he probably had some medical/anatomical knowledge

Did he take his son and show him how to rapidly cut a woman's throat, or how to extract a kidney in total darkness? Did you hear of any medical serial killer who mutilated people on the open streets, let alone a son of a doctor?!

At least Feigenbaum was a murderer, but what was Druitt Abby?! You tell me.


The Baron

[Phil Carter]

Hello all

I apologise for the length of the next post. Some may find something interesting amongst this, names especially.

I do not know if ALL of MJ Druitt's games have been shown here in such detail before.

I used the latter mantioned cricket archive, and from my former collection of Wisden yearbooks, sadly no longer a part of my home.




1) 8th June 1876. Winchester College v MCC(Marylebone Cricket Club), played at Winchester College Ground. Druitt played for Winchester.
1 day game. 2 innings per side.Winchester batted first. 11 players per side. 4 balls per over.

Winchester 1st innings 121 all out (Druitt 17 not out, batting No. 10)
MCC 1st innings 75 all out (Druitt took 2 of the 10 wickets)
Winchester 2nd innings 57 all out (Druitt 9 not out, batting No.10)

MCC needed 104 runs to win
MCC 2nd innings 108 for 2 wickets. (Druitt did not take a wicket in this innings)

MCC won by 8 wickets


2) 23rd and 24th June 1876. Winchester College v Eton College, played at Winchester College Ground. Druitt played for Winchester.
2 day game. 2 innings per side. Eton batted first. 11 players per side. 4 balls per over.

Eton 1st innings 240 all out (Druitt took 2 wickets) His bowling figures were:- 48 overs 15 maidens 67 runs 2 wickets. He bowled two wides.
Winchester 1st innings 74 all out (Druitt batting at No.10, was run out, and scored 10 runs)
Winchester followed on, 166 runs behind.
Winchester 2nd innings 68 all out (Druitt, batting at No.10, was bowled after having scored 2 runs)

Eton won by an innings and 98 runs.

For the cricket enthusiast, an interesting player in the Eton side was IFW (Ivo) Bligh, the first England captain that brought back the "Ashes" from Australia in the early 1880's.
In this game, he scored 73 runs in Eton's 1st (and only) innings. Ivo Bligh (later the 8th Earl of Darnley) was the uncle of the Reverend Henry Bligh who was President of Hampton Hill CC
1883-87, 1889-90 and 1893. Hampton Hill is where we find during the 1880's the figure of George Morris, resident in Pantile Close, Hampton Common (renamed Hampton Hill in 1890), he of
Mitre Square fame. One E.J. Ruggles-Briseplayed for E.Hirst's XI. A surname familiar with our genre.


3) 6th July 1876. Winchester College v I Zingari, played at Winchester College Ground.Druitt played for Winchester.
1 day game. 1 innings per side. 11 players per side. I Zingari batted first. 4 balls per over.

I Zingari 1st innings 204 all out (Druitt did not take a wicket)
Winchester 1st innings 121 all out (Druitt batted at No. 9. He was out caught. He scored 0 runs)

I Zingari won by 83 runs.

Two names of note here. Viscount Lewisham played for I Zingari, as did one W.H.Grenfell, a relation of the famous comedienne and actress Joyce Grenfell.

4) 27th and 28th April 1877. H.E.Fowler's XI v E.Hirst's XI, played at Magdelen Ground, Oxford. This was the Oxford University Freshman's trial game. Druitt played for H.E.Fowler's XI.
2 day game. 2 innings per side. 13 players per side. 4 balls per over. E.Hirst's XI batted first.

E.Hirst's XI 1st innings 56 all out (Druitt took 1 wicket) His bowling figures were:- 8 overs ? maidens 5 runs 1 wicket.
H.E.Fowler's XI 1st innings 65 all out (Druitt batting at No. 11, was bowled after having scored 2 runs)
E.Hirst's Zi 2nd innings 82 all out (Druitt took 5 wickets) His bowling figures were:- 31 overs ? maidens 30 runs 5 wickets
H.E.Fowler's XI needed 74 runs to win
H:E:Fowler's XI 2nd innings 79 for 3 wickets. (Druitt batting at No. 3, was bowled after having scored 11 runs)

H:E:Fowler's XI won by 9 wickets.

Again E.J. Ruggles-Brise played against Druitt, this time for E.Hist's XI.

5) 4th and 5th May 1877. Oxford University v Oxford University Next XVI played at Magdalen Ground, Oxford. Druitt played for Oxford University next XVI.
2 day game. 2 innings per side. Oxford University 11 players, Oxford Unversity Next XVI 16 players. 4 balls per over. Oxford University Next XVI batted first.

Oxford University Next XVI Ist innings 122 all out (Druitt batting at No. 13, was bowled after having scored 2 runs)
Oxford University Ist innings 246 for 9 wickets. (Druitt took 1 wicket) His bowling figures 19 overs ? maidens 31 runs 1 wicket

Match drawn.

E.J. Ruggles-Brise played with Druitt in the same team.

6) 5th and 6th May 1879. H.Fowler's XI v A.Pearson's XI. Played at Magdalen Ground, Oxford. This was the Oxford university Seniors game. Druitt played for H.Fowler's XI.
2 day game. 2 innings per side. 12 players per side. 4 ball over. A.Pearson's XI batted first.

A.Pearson's XI 1st innings 55 all out. (Druitt took 3 wickets) His bowling figures were:- 14 overs ? maidens 20 runs 3 wickets
H.Fowler's XI 1st innings 216 all out (Druitt batting at No. 10, was bowled having scored 28 runs)
A.Pearson's XI 1st innings 109 all out (Druitt did not take a wicket) His bowling figures were:- 10 overs ? maidens 38 runs 0 wickets

H. Fowler's XI won by an innings and 52 runs

(Roger Heavens for providing this scorecard which was first published in Arthur Haygarth's Cricket Scores and Biographies Volume 16)

7) 15th, 16th and 17th May 1879. Oxford University v Oxford University Next XVI played at Magdalen Ground, Oxford. Druitt played for Oxford University next XVI.
3 day game. 2 innings per side. Oxford University 11 players, Oxford Unversity Next XVI 16 players. 4 balls per over. Oxford University batted first.

Oxford University 1st innings 94 all out. (Druitt did not take a wicket) His bowling figures were:- 18 overs ? maidens 27 runs 0 wickets.
Oxford University Next XVI Ist innings 191 all out. (Druitt batting at No. 15, was bowled after having scored 6 runs)
Oxford University 2nd innings 146 all out. (Druitt took 1 wicket) His bowling figures were:- 27 overs ? maidens 35 runs 1 wickets
Oxford University Next XVI 2nd innings36 for 0 wickets (Druitt did not bat in this innings)

Oxford University Next XVI won by 16 wickets.

Note:- E. Hirst, H. Fowler and A. Pearson, all from the above games, were all in the Oxford University team.

(Roger Heavens for providing this scorecard which was first published in Arthur Haygarth's Cricket Scores and Biographies Volume 16.)

8) 30th and 31st of July 1879. Gentlemen of Dorset v Gentlemen of Devon played at Sherborne School. Druitt played for the Gentlemen of Dorset.
2 day game. 2 innings per side. 11 players per side. 4 balls per over. Gentlemen of Dorset batted first.

Gentlemen of Dorset 1st innings 85 all out(Druitt batting at No. 11, was bowled after having scored 4 runs)
Gentlemen of Devon 1st innings 262 all out(Druitt did not bowl in this innings)
Gentlemen of Dorset 1st innings 113 all out(Druitt batting at No. 11, was not out after having scored 13 runs)

Gentlemen of Dorset won by an innings and 64 runs

(Roger Heavens for providing this scorecard which was first published in Arthur Haygarth's Cricket Scores and Biographies Volume 16.)


9) 1st and 2nd August 1879. Dorset v Somerset played at Sherborne School. Druitt played for Dorset.
2 day game. 2 innings per side. 11 players per side. 4 balls per over. Somerset batted first.

Somerset 1st innings 155 all out (Druitt did not bowl in this innings)
Dorset 1st innings 321 allout (Druitt batting at No. 9, was out caught after having scored 6 runs)
Somerset 2nd innings 84 for 5 wickets (Druitt did not bowl in this innings)

Match drawn.

NB. Neither Somerset nor Dorset, although fielding a County XI, were First Class Cricket Counties at this time. Somerset later became a first class team. Dorset are still not regarded as a First Class Cricket County.

10) 26th, 27th and 28th April 1880. C.E.Horner's XI v R.L.Knight's XI played at Magdalen Ground, Oxford. Druitt played for C.E.Horner's XI.
3 day game. 2 innings per side. 12 players per side. 4 balls per over. R.L.Knight's XI batted first.

R.L.Knight's XI 1st innings 213 all out (Druitt took 3 wickets) His bowling figures were:- 35 overs 19 maidens 43 runs 3 wickets
C.E.Horner's XI 1st innings 389 for 10 wickets declared (Druitt did not bat in this innings)
R.L.Knight's XI 2nd innings 229 for 8 wickets(Druitt did not bowl in this innings)

Match Drawn

NB. Note that Druitt neither batted nor bowled again in the match after the first innings, which indicates he was unable to bat or bowl on days two and three of this match. Reason is unknown but indicates an injury. This possibility is also strengthened by the fact that in the 2nd innings of R.L.Knight's XI, a substitute fielder was used.

11) 22nd and 23rd August 1881. Wiltshire v Dorset played at Trowbridge Cricket Club Ground, Trowbridge, Wiltshire. Druitt played for Dorset.
2 day game. 2 innings per side. 11 players per side. 4 balls per over. Dorset batted first.

Dorset 1st innings 70 all out.(Druitt batting at No. 9, was bowled after having scored 11 runs)
Wiltshire 1st innings 52 all out. (Druitt did not bowl in this innings)
Dorset 2nd innings 93 all out. (Druitt was run out having scored 27 runs)

Match abandoned due to rain.

Wiltshire are still not classed as a First Class Cricket County to this day.

NB On the second day owing to heavy rain during the night, a fresh wicket was used for the third innings but at 3 o'clock the match was abandoned owing to the downpour.
This match was not published in any sporting papers.
As a professional played on both sides it was not it is perceived a match between the gentlemen of the counties, but between the whole county.
(note from Arthur Haygarth's Scores and Biographies)

12) 9th August 1882. Devon v Dorset played at The Fortfield, Sidmouth, Devon. Druitt played for Dorset.
2 day game. 2 innings per side. 11 players per side. 6 balls per over. Dorset batted first.

Dorset 1st innings 110 all out (Druitt batting at No. 2, was out caught after having scored 17 runs)
Devon 1st innings 229 all out (Druitt took 3 wickets)
Dorset 2nd innings 81 all out (Druitt batting at No. 2, was out caught after having scored 0 runs)

Devon won by an innings and 38 runs.

NB J.S.Udal played for Dorset. The Udal name will be familiar with cricket followers as Sean Udal, the Ex England player is related to this man. Another co-incidence is that 3 more name relatives of Sean Udal played for Hampton Hill CC in the 1960's and 1970's, the same club as mentioned over in game No. 2. in connection with I.F.W. Bligh, Henry Bligh and George Morris.

13) 1st and 2nd August 1883. Dorset v Devon played at Sherborne, Dorset. Druitt played for Dorset.
2 day game. 2 innings per side. 11 players per side. 6 balls per over. Devon batted first.

Devon 1st innings 118 for 9 wickets declared (Druitt took 4 wickets)
Dorset 1st innings 43 all out (Druitt batting at No. 1, was out caught after having scored 13 runs)
Devon 2nd innings 96 all out (Druitt took 4 wickets)
Dorset needed 172 runs to win

Dorset 2nd innings 72 for 3 wickets (Druitt did not bat in this innings)

Match drawn.

14) 10th and 11th August 1885. Wiltshire v MCC (Marylebone Cricket Club) played at Trowbridge Cricket Club Ground, Trowbridge, Wiltshire. Druitt played for MCC.
2 day game. 2 innings per side. 11 players per side. 4 balls per over. MCC batted first.

MCC 1st Innings 266 all out (Druitt batting at No. 9, was out caught after having scored 0 runs)
Wiltshire 1st innings 79 all out (Druitt did not bowl in this innings)
Wiltshire 2nd innings 61 all out (Druitt did not bowl in this innings either)

MCC won by an innings and 126 runs

NB. Here are are in with some big names. The W.G.Grace played in this match foir the MCC. He batted as No.1, scored 53, and took 5 wickets and 7 wickets whilst bowling for MCC.
In addition, the great W.Gunn (Nottinghamshire), W.G.Gilbert, G.F.Hearne, J.R. Painter, R.J.Pope, W.A.Woof and W.Mycroft played for the MCC.
The name Mycroft is said to be the inspiration for the name of Sherlock Holme's brother in the books written by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle.
Judging from his score of 0, the quality of his teammates and the fact that he didn't get a bowl, Druitt is in a league of players above his ability here.

15) 10th June 1886. Harrow School v MCC (Marylebone Cricket Club) played at Harrow School Cricket Ground, Harrow, Middlesex. Gruitt played for MCC.
1 day game. 1 innings per side. 12 players per side. 4 balls per over. MCC batted first.

MCC first innings 175 all out(Druitt batting at No. 5, was out caught after having scored 10 runs)
Harrow first innings 118 all out (Druitt did not bowl in this innings)

MCC won by 57 runs.

16) 29th, 30th and 31st August 1887. Bryn-y-Neuadd v Incogniti played at Bryn-y-Neuadd, Llanfairfechan, Wales. Druitt played for Incogniti.
3 day game. 2 innings per side. 11 players per side. 4 balls per over. Bryn-y-Neuadd batted first.


Bryn-y-Neuadd 1st innings 179 all out (Druitt took 6 wickets)
Incogniti 1st innings 184 all out (Druitt batting at No. 5, was out stumped after having scored 7 runs)
Bryn-y-Neuadd 2nd innings 154 all out (Druitt took 3 wickets)
Incogniti needed 150 runs to win
Incogniti 2nd innings 120 all out (Druitt batting at No. 5, was out caught after having scored 0 runs)


Bryn-y-Neuadd won by 29 runs.


17) 3rd and 4th August 1888. Bournemouth v Parsees, played at Dean Park, Bournemouth. Druitt played for Bournemouth.
2 day game. 2 innings per side. 11 players per side. 4 balls per over. Bournemouth batted first.

Bournemouth 1st Innings 56 all out (Druitt batting at No.5, was bowled having scored 12 runs)
Parsees 1st innings 61 all out (Druitt took 5 wickets)
Bournemouth 2nd innings 41 all out (Druitt batting at No.5, was out caught having scored 0 runs)
Parsees needed 37 runs to win
Parsees 2nd innings 37 for 4 wickets (Druitt did not bowl in this innings)

Parsees won by 6 wickets.

18) 8th September 1888. Blackheath v The Christophersons, played at the Rectory Field, Blackheath. Druitt played for Blackheath.
1 day game. 1 innings per side. 10 players per side. 5 balls per over. Blackheath batted first.

Blackheath 1st innings 115 all out (Druitt batting at No.4, was caught out having scored 2 runs)
The Christphersons 1st innings 93 all out (Druitt took 3 wickets) His bowling figures were:- 16 overs 4 maidens 38 runs 3 wickets

Blackheath won by 22 runs.

NB. All 10 members of "The Christophersons" were actually named Christopherson.
(Listed as Stanley, Sidney, Douglas, Derman, Derman jun, P, K, C, M, H.)

And as if we needed an extra little twist in the oddities.. one G.R. Hutchinson played for Blackheath, scoring 44 not out.


The following is listed in cricket archive under Montague John Druitt

Full name:	Montague John Druitt
Born:	15th August 1857, Wimborne, Dorset, England
Died:	4th December 1888, Brentford, Middlesex, England
Education:	Winchester College; New College, Oxford
Biography:	Barrister, Inner Temple (1885)
Relations:	Brother: Edward Druitt

Please note the date and place of death.

According to the same source, Druitt's younger brother, Edward, played 28 registered games for 7 different teams 1875 to 1881.

The following list is a list of all persons with this name registered in the cricket archive (http://cricketarchive.com/cgi-bin/pl...s_results1.cgi)

H.Druitt's only game is from 1875, and at Oxford in a Freshman's trial, for A.J.Webbe's XI v H.J.B.Hollings' XI. I suspect this may well possibly be M.J.Druitt. Also in this game, by coincidence, is one G.S.Marriott playing for the opposition. Grenfell, mentioned above, plays in the same team as Druitt.


Edward Druitt played from 1875-1881
E.J.Druiit's only game is registered from 1911, for Downside School v King's School, Bruton

W.A.H. Druitt's only game is registered from 1926, playing for Edinburgh Acadamy v Trinity College, Glenalmond
W.H.Druitt's only game is registered from 1873, playing for Clifton College v Royal Agricultural College.
James Druitt is a current player, playing for Copdock and Old Ipswichonians 2006-2011.


An interesting little collection, I think.

MJ Druitt was not a high quality player, certainly not County class. At best, a capable club player, at times.



Phil

[Sam Flynn]

NB. All 10 members of "The Christophersons" were actually named Christopherson.
(Listed as Stanley, Sidney, Douglas, Derman, Derman jun, P, K, C, M, H.)

I presume that this is Derman Junior's son, and that Derman Junior was the vicar of Plumstead referred to in the second sentence below:

"Sir Derman Guy Christopherson, OBE FRS FREng (6 September 1915 – 7 November 2000) was a British engineering science academic. He was born the son of a clergyman, Derman Christopherson, the vicar of Plumstead in southeast London, and Edith Frances Christopherson."

More at Wikipedia, here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derman_Christopherson

If I've got my timelines right, "Derman Junior Junior" would have been a pupil at Sherborne School the same time as Alan Turing, albeit Turing was a couple of years younger. </trivia>

[Herlock Sholmes]

At least Feigenbaum was a murderer, but what was Druitt Abby?! You tell me.


The Baron

Druitt was provably in England at the time of the murder unlike Feigenbaum Feigenbaum has become a ‘suspect’ because a lawyer, Lawton, made an uncorroborated statement after Feigenbaum died. I’m at a loss to know Lawton is more believable or reliable than Macnaghten or do we simply apply different standards to them both?

How many times have we all (including yourself) seen items on the news where a reporter is interviewing someone in a very normal street outside a very normal house and they say something like: “we just can’t believe it. He was such a nice guy. He was a regular at church and did loads of charity work....” And they’re saying this just after the police have dug up two bodies from his back yard. The fact that we can’t show that Druitt was a murderer prior to the Whitechapel series or that he was in anyway violent counts for very little. His sacking from the Blackheath School might have been due to violence for all we know?

[seanr]

When Alice MacKenzie was murdered, the investigating officers considered seriously that the perpetrator was same killer as the previous Whitechapel murders. Whether you think they were right to do so, is by the by, it is clear at the time the investigation did not seriously believe the Ripper was dead.

The so-called 'canonical five' was a post-rationalisation of a failed investigation. The MM is a report prepared by a senior officer for other senior officers, with the express intention of identifying potential suspects, and likely explaining away the reasons for the investigation failing.

With the benefit of hindsight, we can see that policing at the time simply was not up to an investigation of this kind. In the century and a bit since, there have been many advances both scientific and data handling which have improved detective investigations in crimes of this kind. None of the reasons given by the contemporary senior police match up with this (from our modern perspective) very obvious point. After the Whitechapel Murders investigation, policing seems to have miraculously avoided the kind of critique which led to the Byford Report after the (ultimately successful) Yorkshire Ripper investigation. Why so? - perhaps a different culture, in a different era.

In the absence of serious consideration of police and detective capabilities in the 1880s and 1890s, what do we see from the senior police at the time. In the MM, two examples of the reasons giving are 'those tricky Jews closed ranks and stopped us getting him (Kosminski)' and with Druitt we have 'the outrage at 13 Miller's Court finally sent the perpetrator so mad he destroyed himself' (this is a psychologically implausible proposition in the first place).
That the Ripper died after murdering Mary Kelly is a post-rationalisation resting on the canonical five post-rationalisation.

The senior officers had every reason to mislead their superiors, to save their careers and reputations and also every reason to mislead themselves, to save their own egos. That their given opinions are treated as so sacrosanct and their dubious suspects are treated as the only plausible perpetrators, is a deep flaw in the way this case discussed and approached by historians/ Ripperologists.

[seanr]

Druitt was provably in England at the time of the murder unlike Feigenbaum Feigenbaum has become a ‘suspect’ because a lawyer, Lawton, made an uncorroborated statement after Feigenbaum died. I’m at a loss to know Lawton is more believable or reliable than Macnaghten or do we simply apply different standards to them both?

How many times have we all (including yourself) seen items on the news where a reporter is interviewing someone in a very normal street outside a very normal house and they say something like: “we just can’t believe it. He was such a nice guy. He was a regular at church and did loads of charity work....” And they’re saying this just after the police have dug up two bodies from his back yard. The fact that we can’t show that Druitt was a murderer prior to the Whitechapel series or that he was in anyway violent counts for very little. His sacking from the Blackheath School might have been due to violence for all we know?

Therefore when someone is living on a normal street in a normal house, being nice and attending church, this is evidence they are a crazed murderer? - This is a terrible argument.