What makes Druitt a viable suspect?

[The Baron]

Most commonly 'his people' meant immediate family

Exactly

why is it wrong to postulate that Macnaghten meant the people with whom he was living?

Because Herlock intoduced the School element, which Macnagten didn't know since he thought Druitt was a doctor.

So the first meaning of 'his People' as his family is the logical one.


The Baron

[Wickerman]

A question (and just because I’m curious and don’t know the answer)

At a Victorian Inquest, If a witness mentioned being given some important information would it have been normal procedure for the Coroner to have asked for the identity of the source of that information so that it could have been entered into the record?

Seeing as nobody answered yet, I'll just raise a few points.

We need to remember the Coroner chooses the witnesses from the wide range of statements taken by the police.
So, if the witness told the police he was given important information, likely the police would have chased that down - assuming they thought it to be equally important. And there might be a statement taken from this source for the Coroner to read along with all the rest of the statements.

However, if the issue came up at the inquest, the Coroner might allow the witness to share that info with the court even though it is hearsay, or take the witness aside to hear for himself 'in camera' (in private) so the Coroner can then decide whether to adjourn the inquest until this 'source' can be located and summoned to appear so this source can give his own testimony.

Given that an inquest is not a trial, the type of testimony that can be accepted is more flexible.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Seeing as nobody answered yet, I'll just raise a few points.

We need to remember the Coroner chooses the witnesses from the wide range of statements taken by the police.
So, if the witness told the police he was given important information, likely the police would have chased that down - assuming they thought it to be equally important. And there might be a statement taken from this source for the Coroner to read along with all the rest of the statements.

However, if the issue came up at the inquest, the Coroner might allow the witness to share that info with the court even though it is hearsay, or take the witness aside to hear for himself 'in camera' (in private) so the Coroner can then decide whether to adjourn the inquest until this 'source' can be located and summoned to appear so this source can give his own testimony.

Given that an inquest is not a trial, the type of testimony that can be accepted is more flexible.

Thanks for that Wick. I just thought that it was a bit strange that the person that informed William that Monty had gone missing remained ‘unnnamed.’ It seems unlikely that he’d have contacted William anonymously, though not impossible of course. And if he had contacted William anonymously then why would he withhold his name? On the other hand, if he hadn’t contacted William anonymously why would William have withheld his name from the Coroner?

[Herlock Sholmes]

Because Herlock intoduced the School element, which Macnagten didn't know since he thought Druitt was a doctor.

So the first meaning of 'his People' as his family is the logical one.


The Baron

Irrelevant as ever.

When Macnaghten said that he was staying with his own people the location wasn’t mentioned. The fact that ‘own people’ most often means family it doesn’t mean that it meant that in this case.

All this aside.....what are you saying? I’d be interested to hear.


Are you saying that Mac just lied about Druitt and his own private info?

or

Are you saying that someone in the Druitt family made up a story about Monty being the ripper and told Mac?

or

Are you saying that Monty did something that, whilst not being murder, caused the family to mistakenly believe that he was Jack The Ripper?

or

Are you saying that a 41 year old doctor called Druitt was fished out of the Thames on December 31st and Mac suspected him of being Jack. He then confused him with Monty and then made up the part about the private info?

or

Are you suggesting that Mac was a victim of False Memory Syndrome. And that he just had some vague memory of a man called Druitt being fished out of the Thames and thought “”he must have been Jack The Ripper.””

[Abby Normal]

Because Herlock intoduced the School element, which Macnagten didn't know since he thought Druitt was a doctor.

So the first meaning of 'his People' as his family is the logical one.


The Baron

doctors don't go to school?

[Wickerman]

Yes indeed, it rules him out clearly.

Druitt went missing for more than a week and the family didn't know anything until someone told them.

Except the name, it is as if Macnaghten and Sims were talking about someone else completely.


The Baron

Not really.

What the full quote says is:
"...nor do I believe that he had ever been detained in an asylum, nor lived in lodgings. I incline to the belief that the individual who held up London in terror resided with his own people ; that he absented himself from home at certain times, and that he committed suicide on or about the 10th of November 1888,..."

All Mac seems to be doing is comparing living accomodations. Mac didn't think the killer lodged with others, he thought he lived at home, among his own kind, middle class, respectable.
Didn't Anderson make a similar comment, only in that instance he was talking ethnicity - he was a Jew living among the Jews.
Perhaps that interpretation is what leads you to think the way you do?
Mac likely did not know about the school at Blackheath, or the Law Chambers at K.B.W. - he was only generalizing, but in both cases Druitt was still among his own kind, even though not at home.

[The Baron]

MacNaghten didn't took his information directly from Druitts family.

From private information. Third hand hearsay full of errors, and he didn't do nothing to investigate it further.

The [resided with his own people; that he absented himself from home at certain times] is just one of many errors in the MM.



The Baron

[The Baron]

he thought he lived at home, among his own kind, middle class, respectable.

Mac likely did not know about the school at Blackheath, or the Law Chambers at K.B.W. - he was only generalizing, but in both cases Druitt was still among his own kind, even though not at home.

At home or not at home, thats the question!

Not consistent, sorry.


The Baron

[Herlock Sholmes]

MacNaghten didn't took his information directly from Druitts family.

From private information. Third hand hearsay full of errors, and he didn't do nothing to investigate it further.

The [resided with his own people; that he absented himself from home at certain times] is just one of many errors in the MM.



The Baron

Firstly, where did you get the information that Macnaghten didn’t get his information directly from the Druitt family? All that he says is that it was private information. It’s only an assumption that he didn’t hear it directly from the family. You cannot know that for certain.

Secondly, we don’t know exactly when he received the information or from whom. But if, in the time between hearing the information and writing up the Memorandum, he got Monty’s profession and age wrong, this doesn’t mean that he couldn’t have been correct about Druitt being a likely suspect. As has been pointed out before, on this thinking every book that has a couple of errors should be dismissed as being completely untrustworthy. Which is nonsense.

Thirdly, you didn’t answer my question. How did all of this happen?

[Herlock Sholmes]

At home or not at home, thats the question!

Not consistent, sorry.


The Baron

No, the question is: was Sir Melville Macnaghten talking about Montague John Druitt or someone else?

Answer: Yes, he was very obviously talking about Montague John Druitt because he states MJ Druitt. It’s actually very simple.

And even when he retired he was still talking about Montague John Druitt.

You can say that you don’t think that Druitt is a likely suspect. You cannot say that Macnaghten was getting Druitt mixed up with someone else. It’s nonsense. You are reduced to nitpicking.

[The Baron]

No, the question is: was Sir Melville Macnaghten talking about Montague John Druitt or someone else?

Answer: Yes, he was very obviously talking about Montague John Druitt because he states MJ Druitt. It’s actually very simple.

And even when he retired he was still talking about Montague John Druitt.

You can say that you don’t think that Druitt is a likely suspect. You cannot say that Macnaghten was getting Druitt mixed up with som
eone else. It’s nonsense.

Maybe he was talking about Druitt, maybe not, what clear is that his "private informations" was based on hearsay, and we wouldn't have been debating Druitt today had he investigated him professionally, instead of just repeating what he had heared.

Thats why we cannot grant Druitt the suspect status based on the MM.



The Baron

[The Baron]

Firstly, where did you get the information that Macnaghten didn’t get his information directly from the Druitt family?

Macnaghten said: (From private information I have little doubt but that his own family suspected him)

Was he going to have any doubt if he heared it directly from the family Herlock ?!!!!



The Baron

[Sam Flynn]

Firstly, where did you get the information that Macnaghten didn’t get his information directly from the Druitt family?

Actually, Herlock, it's a fair bet that he didn't. Otherwise, why "said to be a doctor" and not "was a lawyer/teacher"?

[harry]

What I have written,in no way implies I believe MM was lying.It is simply that the information he writes of does not make Druitt a suspect.It is hearsay,and only suggests a family belief of guilt.Further there is no information that the family's belief was investigated and proven to be fact,so as evidence against Druitt it is wortless.In no other way can Druitt be associated with the Ripper murders,on the basis of information,so no matter how much interest is shown in the MM memorandum,it contains no proof Druitt killed anyone.
I wasn't aware that one persons alledged knowledge and superiority over that of another person was a deciding factor,Herlock,in a case where that superiority is not proven.
So you see,proof does mean something.There is a need for it.

[Wickerman]

At home or not at home, thats the question!

Not consistent, sorry.


The Baron

Baron, all I'm concerned with is interpreting what Mac. may have meant.
Convincing others, or winning someone over is not going to happen on Casebook.