Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

What makes Druitt a viable suspect?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Harry D
    started a topic What makes Druitt a viable suspect?

    What makes Druitt a viable suspect?

    Have to admit, Druitt has never really appealed to me as a suspect. I'm just wondering what it is about him that leads certain Ripperologists to hang their hat on him being the Ripper? Prima facie, it comes down to the Macnaghten memo and the time of his death. But Macnaghten gets even the most basic details about Druitt wrong, so how much stock can be put in his words? Does Druitt fit any of the witness descriptions? Did he even possess the kind of skill required for the murders? Can he be placed at Whitechapel when the killings took place?

  • harry
    replied
    While there may be only two of us,Herlock.posting in support of using police practices,there may be numerous readers who accept this as a sensible view to take,accepting that it was only police that were empowered to investigate murder.Again, while it may be true others support your way,it is only two of you that appear to insist it be used.I do not insist on my way,I simply believe it is the best.
    It wouldn't affect the boards at all if the word suspect was dropped.There is an alternate expression,and it is widely used today,and because the police investgating the ripper crimes,state there were no suspects,much preferable in my opinion.By the way,against who,out of all the persons named,do you claim the word suspect should be used? You claim Mac used it against Druitt.Show where this is stated,and on what grounds.
    You know that the crimes are historical.What a great revelation.I know that the crimes are historical,so what?,but I asked what made them historical to you.
    You state you were not aware of the remarks used against me.Either that is true,or it's an indication you do not read the posts carefully.So why should I believe anything you post?
    I am not indiginant against personnel remarks.I welcome them.It gives me an opportunity to reply in kind.I took the remarks as faction based,so to me anyone opposed to my posts were fair game.

    Leave a comment:


  • Wickerman
    replied
    Originally posted by Darryl Kenyon View Post

    Because if there was very good evidence linking Druitt to the murders [as I disagreed with in my last post], experienced officers like Anderson and Swanson would not have disagreed with Mac and seen the worth of said evidence.
    I'm not sure what you mean by 'good evidence'. I think we've been over this several times, the evidence was more circumstantial, Mac. said himself that there was no proof.

    I am not saying Druitt is not a suspect and I believe Mac's sincerity but I personally believe it is more of what he perceived the killer to be. Why else mention "Said to be a Doctor" for instance, without being sure?
    Well, I don't think that issue is resolved yet.
    But if I had to speculate I'd say because obviously, Mac. did not know Druitt personally.
    If you recall, the Farquharson letter from Feb. 1891 claimed the killer was 'the son of a surgeon'. Sim's then wrote in Mar. 1891, that the Home Office Archives contained the identity of the Ripper, and he was a mad physician.
    So these details were already in the public domain before Mac. wrote his report, in 1894.


    And in the Aberconway version of the memorandum Mac says - I have always held strong opinions over Druitt [1] and the more he thinks it over, the stronger the opinions become, and finally if his conjections are correct. Conjecture -an opinion or conclusion formed on the basis of incomplete information.
    Yes, and Mac's report was dated Feb. 1894, so "always" just may refer back to 1891 when the Farquharson letter surfaced, though the killer at that point was not named, but that letter may have instigated an investigation which came up with the name Druitt.


    Leave a comment:


  • Herlock Sholmes
    replied
    Originally posted by John G View Post
    To be honest, prior to this thread Druitt wouldn't even have been on my list of suspects. Now I see him as a realistic suspect, although I still have problems with the geographical profile!
    It the very least heís an intriguing suspect though John? Now, if I could convince that Wallace was guilty that would be an achievement.

    Leave a comment:


  • Herlock Sholmes
    replied
    Originally posted by Darryl Kenyon View Post
    As John pointed out in Days of my years Mac described sexual mania as "gaining erotic pleasure from either witnessing or causing acts of ultra violence and/or death."
    With that in mind looking at the Littlechild Letter it seems to me he is replying to Sims about Druitt. " I never heard of a Dr D". He then goes on to mention that Tumblety wasn't a sadist and then goes on to mention - "It is very strange how those given to 'Contrary sexual instinct' and 'degenerates' are given to cruelty, even Wilde used to like to be punched about. It may interest you if I give you an example of this cruelty in the case of the man Harry Thaw" explaining the case, Why?
    Mac says that Druitt was said to be sexually insane. Is Littlechild answering a question put to him by Sims about the subject? Or is Sims explaining to Littlechild that Druitt was a sexual sadist who liked inflicting pain and the ripper probably did as well, in a previous correspondence?
    With the fact that Littlechild says Contrary sexual instinct and then mentions Oscar Wilde, could Sims have explained to Littlechild, again in a previous letter that Druitt was gay and liked to inflict pain on boys. Hence the trouble at school? And the replies? Just a few thoughts
    Regards Darryl
    An interesting point Darryl. I canít really add anything to Rogerís reply though. I have to echo a point that Roger made a few days ago in that anyone interested in the case would have to be Ďincuriousí beyond the bounds of normality not to find Druitt an intriguing suspect. Why would anyone seek to simply dismiss the MM and Druitt. I find it bizarre to be honest.

    Leave a comment:


  • John G
    replied
    To be honest, prior to this thread Druitt wouldn't even have been on my list of suspects. Now I see him as a realistic suspect, although I still have problems with the geographical profile!

    Leave a comment:


  • Herlock Sholmes
    replied
    Originally posted by Darryl Kenyon View Post

    Sorry Herlock, didn't want to mention you by name.
    Regards Darryl
    No problem Darryl. Iíve no issue with saying that I feel that Druitt is the likeliest of the named suspects. Itís just my own opinion.

    Leave a comment:


  • rjpalmer
    replied
    Here is something I notice awhile back. It might be worth pointing out that flogging, caning, corporal punishment, etc. in board schools became a national issue in 1888 when Mr. Paget, the Hammersmith Police Magistrate, fined a school-master for caning the living heck out of a young student. Somethings never change. This led to a flurry of letters to the editor, in newspapers across Britain, either supporting Paget's decision or denouncing it, with many being of the 'spare the rod, spoil the child' variety. There was even talk of the Home Office paying the school master's fine, in protest of Paget's decision. The case was eventually overturned in July, 1888, when it was decided that Tate (the school-master) did "absolutely nothing wrong." I suppose it would depend on Mr. Valentine's view of such matters, whether whipping the heck out a young student would be a "serious" matter or not. The courts and the Home Office seems to have been okay with it.

    Click image for larger version

Name:	Paget.JPG
Views:	0
Size:	83.4 KB
ID:	710696

    Leave a comment:


  • rjpalmer
    replied
    Originally posted by Darryl Kenyon View Post
    Is Littlechild answering a question put to him by Sims about the subject? Or is Sims explaining to Littlechild that Druitt was a sexual sadist who liked inflicting pain and the ripper probably did as well, in a previous correspondence?
    Hi Darryl. A key question and a subtle line of inquiry. Years ago, Andrew Spallek theorized along similar lines, and it raises a number of valid questions. Whatever Sims had said to Littlechild about "Dr. D," it seems to have triggered this discussion about sadism. Littlechild then goes on to discuss the Thaw case, and Thaw's flogging of a young boy. There is no direct evidence for it, of course, but it could be that Druitt was 'into' some sort of flogging, either on the receiving or administering end. One would assume the 'administering end' (no pun) because the former would have left marks on his flesh, and these would have been noticed when the body was examined in Chiswick, and would have led to the suicide being listed as a 'suspicious death.' Evidently MJD's own body was unblemished, as it were.

    That said, it is difficult to believe that these theoretical events could have been directly connected to the Blackheath school. At least to me it is. Possibly, but once again it would raise the old conundrum. If this took place at the school, and Sims is alluding to it, then presumably he (and Macnaghten) would have been fully aware that Druitt was a school-master. So why do both men refer to him as a 'young doctor'?

    These are the mysteries that propel some of us forward, and make us interested in MJ Druitt. Some seem exasperated at any mention of MJD, but to each his own.

    Leave a comment:


  • Darryl Kenyon
    replied
    Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

    I donít really understand this perception Darryl as I appear to be the only person on this thread that considers Druitt the likeliest suspect that we have.
    Sorry Herlock, didn't want to mention you by name.
    Regards Darryl

    Leave a comment:


  • Darryl Kenyon
    replied
    As John pointed out in Days of my years Mac described sexual mania as "gaining erotic pleasure from either witnessing or causing acts of ultra violence and/or death."
    With that in mind looking at the Littlechild Letter it seems to me he is replying to Sims about Druitt. " I never heard of a Dr D". He then goes on to mention that Tumblety wasn't a sadist and then goes on to mention - "It is very strange how those given to 'Contrary sexual instinct' and 'degenerates' are given to cruelty, even Wilde used to like to be punched about. It may interest you if I give you an example of this cruelty in the case of the man Harry Thaw" explaining the case, Why?
    Mac says that Druitt was said to be sexually insane. Is Littlechild answering a question put to him by Sims about the subject? Or is Sims explaining to Littlechild that Druitt was a sexual sadist who liked inflicting pain and the ripper probably did as well, in a previous correspondence?
    With the fact that Littlechild says Contrary sexual instinct and then mentions Oscar Wilde, could Sims have explained to Littlechild, again in a previous letter that Druitt was gay and liked to inflict pain on boys. Hence the trouble at school? And the replies? Just a few thoughts
    Regards Darryl

    Leave a comment:


  • Herlock Sholmes
    replied
    Originally posted by Darryl Kenyon View Post

    Because if there was very good evidence linking Druitt to the murders [as I disagreed with in my last post], experienced officers like Anderson and Swanson would not have disagreed with Mac and seen the worth of said evidence.
    I am not saying Druitt is not a suspect and I believe Mac's sincerity but I personally believe it is more of what he perceived the killer to be. Why else mention "Said to be a Doctor" for instance, without being sure? Unless he thought Jack possessed some form of anatomical knowledge. Mac even concludes that Jack probably did away with himself shortly after the Kelly murder, hence no more killings, again a plus to Druitt. And in the Aberconway version of the memorandum Mac says - I have always held strong opinions over Druitt [1] and the more he thinks it over, the stronger the opinions become, and finally if his conjections are correct. Conjecture -an opinion or conclusion formed on the basis of incomplete information.
    Many people confessed to being the ripper and many people were suspected with unsound minds. Again I am not saying that Druitt shouldn't be treated as a suspect, but I feel that on this thread we are pushing Druitt back to being the prime suspect, which I believe he is not
    Regards Darryl
    I donít really understand this perception Darryl as I appear to be the only person on this thread that considers Druitt the likeliest suspect that we have. We have a mixture of some that donít even feel that he merits the term suspect, some that feel that he does merit the term but is still a poor suspect and some that feel that he is, at the very least, a reasonable suspect. So Iíd say that the general opinion is that heís a suspect worthy of further exploration and discussion. So I canít see why you would feel that Druitt is being in some way over-promoted? Iím of the opposing view. Iím of the opinion that Druitt is far too easily dismissed these days. It appears to be ok to discus other suspects that thereís no evidence for and yet a man named by the Assistant Commissioner Of The Men is beyond the pale.

    On your point about Anderson and Swanson. I donít think it particularly unlikely that senior police officers might have disagreed. I simply donít accept that Mac would have alighted on Druitt simply because he fit certain preconceptions or because he conveniently died after Kelly. We know that police numbers werenít reduced after Druittís death and also that some believed Mackenzie and Coles to have been victims. Mac would have been aware of this and so why wouldnít he have just selected some nonentity that died or was incarcerated after Mackenzie or Coles. For me it all points to Mac genuinely feeling that he had good reason to suspect Druitt.
    Last edited by Herlock Sholmes; Yesterday, 01:37 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Herlock Sholmes
    replied
    Originally posted by harry View Post



    . Herlock,
    About 900 times Paul has explained.That alone is enough to label you a liar and a fool.
    Its good to see that reasoned debate is still possible.

    When has numbers proved what jargon we should use.I understand you were trying to score a point,but out of those names mentioned,only one,to my knowledge,insist we should not use current police jargon.So it's 2-1 in our favour,if you wish to use numbers.
    I’m sure that you understand the point being made Harry. According the thought processes of yourself and Trevor the suspects section of this Forum should be near to completely empty. If we all agreed with you what would be the benefit of this use of the word Harry? Why are you and Trevor so insistent on a point that no one, as far as I’m aware, has ever been remotely concerned with? We use the dictionary definition of suspect. We will continue to correctly use the dictionary definition of suspect. You and Trevor are quite at liberty to refuse to do so. All the rest of us can do is to consider this question:

    ”is it a coincidence that the two people who are insisting on using the police jargon version of the word suspect are two people that feel that Druitt should be dismissed as a suspect?”

    Answer....no it’s not.

    I suppose seeing that I have less than 2000 posts to my credit,my comments should be treated as inferior to those that have more.I should be treated as less informed?
    No. I’ve never in the past had any issues with your posts Harry. I can’t recall us having any disagreements even. For some reason though people lose their sense of balance when Druitt is involved for some reason. Personally I think it’s because often Druitt is dismissed from conversation by the simple parroting of a mantra “there’s no evidence against him.” It doesn’t matter of course that there’s no real evidence against any suspect. People get riled when Druitt is considered. Frankly it’s bizarre. And biased.

    Now lets see,only one expression of current police jargon has been used,by Trevor.It's 'A person of interest'.I totally agree with him,Druitt would have been a person of interest,he was never a suspect.No matter how often posters use the term,it is incorrect.Police statements of that time reference that.There were no suspects.They claimed that,but they did use the expression,persons in whom the police were interested.Not much difference is there.
    Are we talking about every single police officer or a certain amount or one division?

    Sir Melville Macnaghten suspected him. Sir Melville Macnaghten was a police officer. So Druitt was a suspect.

    Now Herlock suppose for those of us who are not so well informed, you will explain the term suspect,both in it's current usage,and that of 1888/94.How were suspects created? You might also explain when a murder case become historical.
    I don’t know when a case becomes historical Harry. But I know that The Whitechapel Murders is a historical case.

    Now posters might be offended in my use of the word fool,were they also offended when I was termed senile? I doubt it,she was on the side of the good and knowledgable.Before you rush to say he was not a she,I would ask him,before he takes his skirt and knickers off before going to bed tonight,to have a good look down,to allay my suspicions.
    I never called you senile Harry and I wasn’t aware that anyone had. I genuinely don’t understand the rest of the above quote.

    This quibbling has gone on too long. It’s utterly pointless but only you and Trevor can’t see it. I’ll ask three questions”

    By what criteria do you decide who is a suspect or person of interest?

    When there’s a difference of opinion on this for a particular suspect who is the deciding voice?

    What benefit would be gained by ripperology as a whole would be gained if we used the modern police definition of suspect?






    Leave a comment:


  • Darryl Kenyon
    replied
    Originally posted by Wickerman View Post
    So why should we be surprised if Anderson now disagreed with Macnaghten?
    Because if there was very good evidence linking Druitt to the murders [as I disagreed with in my last post], experienced officers like Anderson and Swanson would not have disagreed with Mac and seen the worth of said evidence.
    I am not saying Druitt is not a suspect and I believe Mac's sincerity but I personally believe it is more of what he perceived the killer to be. Why else mention "Said to be a Doctor" for instance, without being sure? Unless he thought Jack possessed some form of anatomical knowledge. Mac even concludes that Jack probably did away with himself shortly after the Kelly murder, hence no more killings, again a plus to Druitt. And in the Aberconway version of the memorandum Mac says - I have always held strong opinions over Druitt [1] and the more he thinks it over, the stronger the opinions become, and finally if his conjections are correct. Conjecture -an opinion or conclusion formed on the basis of incomplete information.
    Many people confessed to being the ripper and many people were suspected with unsound minds. Again I am not saying that Druitt shouldn't be treated as a suspect, but I feel that on this thread we are pushing Druitt back to being the prime suspect, which I believe he is not
    Regards Darryl

    Leave a comment:


  • harry
    replied
    Herlock,
    About 900 times Paul has explained.That alone is enough to label you a liar and a fool. When has numbers proved what jargon we should use.I understand you were trying to score a point,but out of those names mentioned,only one,to my knowledge,insist we should not use current police jargon.So it's 2-1 in our favour,if you wish to use numbers.
    I suppose seeing that I have less than 2000 posts to my credit,my comments should be treated as inferior to those that have more.I should be treated as less informed?

    Now lets see,only one expression of current police jargon has been used,by Trevor.It's 'A person of interest'.I totally agree with him,Druitt would have been a person of interest,he was never a suspect.No matter how often posters use the term,it is incorrect.Police statements of that time reference that.There were no suspects.They claimed that,but they did use the expression,persons in whom the police were interested.Not much difference is there.

    Now Herlock suppose for those of us who are not so well informed, you will explain the term suspect,both in it's current usage,and that of 1888/94.How were suspects created? You might also explain when a murder case become historical.

    Now posters might be offended in my use of the word fool,were they also offended when I was termed senile? I doubt it,she was on the side of the good and knowledgable.Before you rush to say he was not a she,I would ask him,before he takes his skirt and knickers off before going to bed tonight,to have a good look down,to allay my suspicions.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X