What makes Druitt a viable suspect?

[APerno]

Has anyone put together a list of suspects based on being an unpopular/unwanted relative?

No doubt Druitt fits in that category, so does Kosminski at some level, I believe Scotland Yard was fed several more names by non-loyal family members, but the details escape me.

[Wickerman]

Neither Druitt, nor Kosminski, nor Ostrog, nor Tumblety, nor anyone else you care to name could have been the Jack the Ripper, because there was no Jack the Ripper. All we know for a fact is that there were five murders, an unknown number of perpetrators and a lot of official shenanigans.....

Hello Simon.

Aside from the fact the 'nom de plume' was creative license, isn't it just as speculative, lacking just as much by way of evidence, for you to claim there was no Jack the Ripper?

[Wickerman]

It ususally works the other way the officers on the ground seek out the information and channel it upwards !!!!!!!!!!

Can you see MM or Monro or anyone else of high rank going out on the streets of Whitechapel doing house to house enquiries ?

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

I had the impression Mac. obtained some of his information via some old Eaton connections, or perhaps over some claret & an after dinner cigar.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Oh boy, do I appreciate you pointing that out. I could not make that fact sink in with one casebook member, conspicuous by his absence in recent months. Much appreciated Paul.

I wonder who you’re talking about Wick?

[Herlock Sholmes]

Well that shows you have finally lost the plot

You never had the plot in the first place.

[Simon Wood]

Hi Jon,

Not at all.

We have been fed the "done one, done 'em all, but nobody's sure who he was" scenario since 1888, which we have swallowed unquestioningly, hook, line and sinker. And over the ensuing 131 years we have not come up with a single piece of evidence or proof of guilt against any one of the endless cavalcade of "suspects" with whom we have been presented. We can't even be certain as to the identities of all the alleged "Ripper" victims.

I have posited a scenario which makes sense in the light of one of Ripperology's most sacred but untrustworthy documents—the Macnaghten memorandum, wellspring for Druitt, Robert Anderson's Polish Jew and the decidedly suspicious Swanson marginalia.

As I said to RJ in another post—

Perhaps if we took a breath and stopped trying to identify the man who never was, we might discover what was actually going on in Whitechapel.

We're wasting our time trying to pin the tail on a non-existent Ripper.

Regards,

Simon

[Trevor Marriott]

I agree, but you are conveniently ignoring what I said about information received from from foreign and provincial forces, Special Branch, government agencies, the upper-classes.... That didn't come the way of the bobby on the beat.

No but any information relative to the investigation obtaing in the ways you suggest would have been channeled back to those on the ground to investigate and report back to their superiors.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Trevor Marriott]

That's probably because the victim came from Ireland, and her murder was so extreme. A tour of Miller's Court would have had infinitely more cachet than surveying a railway arch with its resident weeing tramps.

But how would they have known Kelly came from Ireland at that time ? 130 years later and all the work done in between we still dont know for sure where she came from

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Trevor Marriott]

Fair enough, Trevor. Yet in support of your beliefs, you chose to quote Sir Edward Bradford, a 'palatial officer' who was not even at the Met in 1888 and 1889!

Bradford knew bugger all about the Whitechapel Murder investigation, and his Feb 15th 1891 quote about Coles was probably meant to be a 'home run ball' slapped over the fence to the detriment of one James Thomas Sadler.

As soon as he found out Sadler wasn't in the UK at the time of the Tabram, Nichols, and Chapman murders, he was undoubtedly whistling a different tune!

Now doesn't all of that mirror MM making his sweeping statement about his MM suspects without bothering to check the accuracy of what he was provided with? and then having to beat a hasty retreat and make good his errors by exonerating two of them

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Sam Flynn]

But how would they have known Kelly came from Ireland at that time ?

The police would have known that Kelly was born in Ireland - or claimed she was - as soon as Joe Barnett made his statement.

[Trevor Marriott]

The police would have known that Kelly was born in Ireland - or claimed she was - as soon as Joe Barnett made his statement.

Yes but when was that taken. The door to Kelly`s room wasn't forced until 1.30pm several hours after the body was first discovered at 10.45am, and after Barnett had identified the body whatever time that was

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Wickerman]

We know how he became a suspect, MM received information from someone who had been told by a family member of Druitt that they, the family suspected him of being the killer. From that MM formed an opinion that the family could have been right in their belief-- Wow thats real hard evidence to work with

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

There was one character by the name of John Henry Lonsdale, if we could only interview him he might be able to answer a few of our questions.
Who informed William that Montie was missing?
Who was so close to the Druitt family, yet be on a par with Macnaghten?
What was the source of the rumour at Blackheath that the Ripper lived there?

Andy Spallek wrote of John Henry Lonsdale:

"This raises a very interesting possibility. While John Henry Lonsdale was a barrister at 1 KBW he moved his residence from KBW to 5 Eliot Cottages, Blackheath, literally a stone's throw from Valentine's school. Lonsdale boarded there with Alexander Lee, a law clerk. I don't know where Lee clerked but KBW would be a logical guess. One wonders if it might not have been Lee who contacted William, or at least Lee who contacted a friend of William's. And might that friend have been Lonsdale himself, who was at the time curate at Wimborne Minster? We don't know for certain that Lonsdale knew William but we do know that he was friends with Rev. Charles Druitt, William's (and Montague's) cousin. Now, if Lonsdale was the friend who contacted William this would have been exactly one week prior to his (Lonsdale's) wedding at the Minster. All of this might explain why there appears to have been no Druitts at the Lonsdale wedding, i.e. they may have been occupied with searching for Montague and not interested in attending a wedding under the circumstances even had they been invited."
https://forum.casebook.org/forum/rip...0177#post90177

And again:

"If Lee were indeed in a position to know that Druitt was neither at Valentine's nor at his chambers then the obvious person he would have contacted would have been Lonsdale, who was in touch or could easily get in touch with the Druitt family. He could then ask Lonsdale whether perhaps Druitt had shown up at his family home of Wimborne Minster. It's all very interesting and it fits together very, very neatly but unfortunately there is absolutely no way of verifying it. It would involve Lonsdale at yet another key juncture of the Montague Druitt saga. Remember that Lonsdale is the one person who seems to be in the middle of everything. He knows the Druitts. He is a classmate of Macnaghten's at Eton. He almost certainly knows Farquharson. He knows Harry Wilson. He is potentially a key figure."
https://forum.casebook.org/forum/rip...0204#post90204

[The Baron]

Hi Jon,

I have posited a scenario which makes sense in the light of one of Ripperology's most sacred but untrustworthy documents—the Macnaghten memorandum, wellspring for Druitt, Robert Anderson's Polish Jew and the decidedly suspicious Swanson marginalia.

"The grass is always greener on the otherside"

Thats why we always see meek researchers still want to believe Macnaghten must have known something, must have some sort of clue.. etc.


The Baron

[harry]

Show me the evidence that proves Druitt killed anyone,and i'll shake everyones hand Herlock. If no evidence exists, that is enough in itself to accept innocense.the situation doesn't require proof.It is also the case for suspect status.If no evidence or proof exists,one cannot be considered suspect.That is the case with Druitt,and even MM himself can be quoted as writing there was no proof against anyone..What more do posters want? I do not accept that Trevor or myself write in a style or jargon that is not easily understood.If no one understands, why are there replies to our posts?,and it's an insult to the many viewers who do not post,to insinuate, without cause,their inability to understand.
Druitt's family had suspicions.Fine.I have suspicions.Neither their suspicions or mine carry weight.Theirs apparently went uninvestigated.Me, i'm too lazy to research,so in each case there is no right to consider guilt,and no right to class anyone a suspect,and I don't.

[PaulB]

No but any information relative to the investigation obtaing in the ways you suggest would have been channeled back to those on the ground to investigate and report back to their superiors.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Not necessarily, Trevor. You are well aware that confidential investigations took and take place for all sorts of reasons, especially in the class-riddled 19th century.