Charles Lechmere: Prototypical Life of a Serial Killer

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

If I employed that reasoning I could say that we have no proof that Druitt wasn’t abused as a child and that he’d kept the terrible knowledge to himself? Or that there’s no proof that Druitt, when playing alone as a child, didn’t torture small animals. I could also say that there’s no proof that Macnaghten didn’t receive his private information. Or that there’s no proof that his family didn’t actually suspect him. Or even that there’s no proof that he wasn’t the ripper.

There’s no proof that any suspect didn’t have an alibi unknown to us (apart from people like Neil Cream or PAV) but that’s not really the point is it PI? Surely you can understand this. We can’t exonerate a suspect on the off-chance that he might have had an alibi that we’re unaware of. It doesn’t work like that and I suspect that, even though many will agree with your opinion on Druitt’s value as a suspect, you won’t find anyone to support the statement quoted above. I don’t know why you are so unwilling to accept the obvious. This is not my opinion, it’s a fact that as far as the current evidence stands Druitt categorically has no alibi. I can also assure that by simply accepting this undoubted fact you won’t get labelled as a Druittist.

We have been through this before.

It is not correct to say, as you do, that Druitt did not have an alibi for the first murder.

He certainly did have an alibi but we do not know whether it was cast iron.

Even if it was not cast iron, that does not mean that he did not have an alibi.

As I have stated before, I believe that Druitt did have a cast iron alibi for the first murder, and I believe that Kosminski had alibis too.

For saying that I believe that Kosminski had alibis, I was accused by one member of 'invention'.

That is, I suggest, pure nonsense.

There is a considerable difference between an opinion and an invention.

Neither Druitt nor Kosminski had the opportunity to provide police with details of their alibis - because they were never challenged to produce any.

That does not mean, as you are claiming with reference to Druitt, that he did not have an alibi.

If either of those two so-called suspects had failed to produce an alibi, then we would have read about it by now.

There is nothing in any of Anderson's writings about his suspect having failed to produce an alibi when challenged to do so.

There is nothing in Swanson's writings about Kosminski having failed to produce an alibi when challenged to do so.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

How would that have been an issue if he’d told them beforehand that he had to head back to London on business? No one at the time would have suspected him of being the ripper so no one would have given it a second thought.

(HS #352)

If some people wouldn’t make unfounded assumptions like….”the killer wouldn’t have done that,” as if they have access to thought processes and so must be correct.

(HS # 360)

If some people didn’t resort to clichés like…all senior police officers were liars or idiots.

(HS # 360)

Some people have quoted senior police officers - Abberline, Reid, and Smith - as evidence that Kosminski/the Polish Jew could not have been identified as the murderer, as claimed belatedly by Anderson and Swanson.

Not all police officers were liars - or idiots.

[Herlock Sholmes]

We have been through this before.

And you’re still completely wrong.

It is not correct to say, as you do, that Druitt did not have an alibi for the first murder.

It is factually correct to say that Druitt did not have an alibi. You can imagine an alibi or suspect that someone might have had one. They either have a provable one or they don’t and Druitt doesn’t.

He certainly did have an alibi but we do not know whether it was cast iron.

The phrase ‘cast iron’ is simply a turn of phrase. It’s not an accepted term in any real sense. You won’t find a barrister using the defence “my client has an alibi but it’s just not cast iron.”

Even if it was not cast iron, that does not mean that he did not have an alibi.

Yes it does. If an alibi isn’t ‘cast iron’ it’s not an alibi…it’s a piece of speculation.

As I have stated before, I believe that Druitt did have a cast iron alibi for the first murder, and I believe that Kosminski had alibis too.

And you’re categorically wrong on both counts unless you can prove either. Which you can’t. Please stop trying to subvert the language PI. It’s a tool of obfuscation and nothing more.

For saying that I believe that Kosmnski had alibis, I was accused by one member of 'invention'.

Rightly so.

That is, I suggest, pure nonsense.

Staggering.

Neither Druitt nor Kosminski had the opportunity to provide police with details of their alibis - because they were never challenged to produce any.

So they don’t have alibi’s.

That does not mean, as you are claiming with reference to Druitt, that he did not have an alibi.

An imagined alibi is not an alibi.

If either of those two so-called suspects had failed to produce an alibi, then we would have read about it by now.

Is this really the best that you can come up with PI? How many times do you this explaining to you? Druitt wasn’t interviewed or investigated at the time as far as we know.

There is nothing in any of Anderson's writings about his suspect having failed to produce an alibi when challenged to do so.


There is nothing in Swanson's writings about Kosminski having failed to produce an alibi when challenged to do so.

And there’s nothing in their writings about them finding an alibi either. I genuinely sometimes wonder if you are being serious? Are you?

There’s no point in discussing this with you PI because I’m really struggling to believe that you’re sticking to it.

Druitt categorically didn’t have an alibi. I’d genuinely be amazed if you could find a single person that agrees with you on this particular point.

[Herlock Sholmes]

How would that have been an issue if he’d told them beforehand that he had to head back to London on business? No one at the time would have suspected him of being the ripper so no one would have given it a second thought.

(HS #352)

If some people wouldn’t make unfounded assumptions like….”the killer wouldn’t have done that,” as if they have access to thought processes and so must be correct.

(HS # 360)

If some people didn’t resort to clichés like…all senior police officers were liars or idiots.

(HS # 360)

Some people have quoted senior police officers - Abberline, Reid, and Smith - as evidence that Kosminski/the Polish Jew could not have been identified as the murderer, as claimed belatedly by Anderson and Swanson.

Not all police officers were liars - or idiots.

You were the one making the claim……that his friends would have noticed that he’d gone. So for that to have been the case Druitt would have had to have simply vanished without telling any of his friends that he was going. Do you think that’s a reasonable suggestion? That an intelligent man would leave inexplicably without telling anyone?

Im not claiming to know anything for a fact, all that I said was you cannot assume that he just disappeared leaving a group of friends standing around scratching their heads just because it helps making Druitt less likely. It doesn’t work that way. So my suggestion was a perfectly reasonable one.


I don’t understand this next point or how it’s relevant to me?

Some people have quoted senior police officers - Abberline, Reid, and Smith - as evidence that Kosminski/the Polish Jew could not have been identified as the murderer, as claimed belatedly by Anderson and Swanson.

Not all police officers were liars - or idiots.

[Fiver]

There is absolutely nothing in Druitt's background or upbringing to suggest that he might have become a serial killer.

You're treating tendencies as certainties. Serial killers likely to have had disfunctional backgrounds and/or exhibit other anti-social behaviors before they begin killing. But there are also serial killers from good backgrounds.

He lived nowhere near the Whitechapel area and in the opposite direction of the route taken by the murderer following the double murder.

You're on better ground here. The Ripper is more likely to be a local, but we cannot state that as a certainty. And 9 Kings Bench Walk was a relatively short trip by train or cab. Dropping of the bloody apron piece could have been an attempt at misdirection by the killer.

Maybe it is 'jaw-droppingly desperate' to suggest that Druitt may have commuted between London and Dorset during a very public visit to Dorset, without anyone noticing, and without Macnaghten knowing of it or mentioning it as one of 'many circumstances connected with this man which made him a strong 'suspect'.'

This is speculation on your part. Almost everything Macnaghton said about Druitt was wrong. We have no idea if Macnaghton even knew anything about Druiitt's cricket schedules.

That said, the cricket schedule does show Druitt is unlikely to have killed Chapman. He would have had 6 hours to get from the murder site to playing a match at Rectory Field in Blackheath. It is possible, but then Druitt would have been playing on no sleep at all.

Perhaps someone who understands cricket can tell me how well or poorly Druitt played at that match.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

There’s no point in discussing this with you PI because I’m really struggling to believe that you’re sticking to it.

Druitt categorically didn’t have an alibi. I’d genuinely be amazed if you could find a single person that agrees with you on this particular point.

You do not grasp the fact that there are different grades of alibi, nor that there is a big distinction between opinion and invention.

Another thing you seem incapable of grasping is that the fact that we do not know how strong Druitt's alibi was does not mean that he 'categorically did not have an alibi'.

If you do not know the facts then you cannot make a categorical statement about them.

That is why I used the word 'believe' and, unlike you, did not make a categorical statement of fact.

And that is why the charge of invention made against me by you and another member is completely without foundation.

You argue that the omission by Anderson and Swanson of any mention of Kosminski's failure to produce an alibi is no more significant than their omission of any mention of his having had an alibi.

They were claiming that a certain Polish Jew was the Whitechapel Murderer.

If he was investigated and questioned, then he must have been asked what his whereabouts were on the nights of the murders.

Either he was able to produce an alibi or he was not.

If he was not able to produce an alibi then one can reasonably expect Anderson or Swanson to have mentioned it.

The fact that neither of them did so supports my contention that there never was any case against Kosminski or the 'Polish Jew'.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

I don’t understand this next point or how it’s relevant to me?

Some people have quoted senior police officers - Abberline, Reid, and Smith - as evidence that Kosminski/the Polish Jew could not have been identified as the murderer, as claimed belatedly by Anderson and Swanson.

Not all police officers were liars - or idiots.

I was responding to your comment,

'If some people didn’t resort to clichés like…all senior police officers were liars or idiots.'

I cannot imagine whom you had in mind.

[Fiver]

It is not correct to say, as you do, that Druitt did not have an alibi for the first murder.

He certainly did have an alibi but we do not know whether it was cast iron.

Even if it was not cast iron, that does not mean that he did not have an alibi.

As I have stated before, I believe that Druitt did have a cast iron alibi for the first murder, and I believe that Kosminski had alibis too.

Which murder do you consider the first?

Tabram? Druitt's cricket schedule does not give him an alibi for August 7.

Nichols? Druitt's cricket schedule does not give him an alibi for August 31.

A better chance for an alibi might be if we could find the schedule for Druitt teaching at Valentine's School in Blackheath. From what I have found, the earliest trains from London to Blackheath appear to left at 5:10am. If classes started at 7am, Druitt wouldn't have enough time to get there from London.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

Which murder do you consider the first?

Tabram? Druitt's cricket schedule does not give him an alibi for August 7.

Nichols? Druitt's cricket schedule does not give him an alibi for August 31.

A better chance for an alibi might be if we could find the schedule for Druitt teaching at Valentine's School in Blackheath. From what I have found, the earliest trains from London to Blackheath appear to left at 5:10am. If classes started at 7am, Druitt wouldn't have enough time to get there from London.

I meant Nichols.

As I have stated, I believe that Druitt had a cast-iron alibi for that murder.

I have read that about the tram schedule before.

I have also read that Druitt's responsibilities would have included watching over the boarders at night.

If this is true, does that not have implications for his ability to have been at the scene of Mary Kelly's murder?

Even if his responsibility ended around midnight, it might have been too late to catch a train to London.

[GUT]

I meant Nichols.

As I have stated, I believe that Druitt had a cast-iron alibi for that murder.

I have read that about the tram schedule before.

I have also read that Druitt's responsibilities would have included watching over the boarders at night.

If this is true, does that not have implications for his ability to have been at the scene of Mary Kelly's murder?

Even if his responsibility ended around midnight, it might have been too late to catch a train to London.

Please tell us about this cast iron alibi, never found one yet.

the rest is mights any may haves, no one knows wha5 his responsibilities were, just as no one knows why he was sacked.

[Herlock Sholmes]

You do not grasp the fact that there are different grades of alibi, nor that there is a big distinction between opinion and invention.

Could you please provide evidence that this is anything other than a turn of phrase in general usage. Are you trying trying to claim that in law there are different grades of alibi?

Another thing you seem incapable of grasping is that the fact that we do not know how strong Druitt's alibi was does not mean that he 'categorically did not have an alibi'.

There’s nothing to grasp PI. If an alibi cannot be specifically cited and proven the it’s completely useless. A work of imagination. You cannot exonerate any on the grounds that ‘ well he might have had an alibi’ which is what you’re attempting to do.

If you do not know the facts then you cannot make a categorical statement about them.

They are not facts. They are things that you are saying which are provably incorrect but you just won’t admit it.

That is why I used the word 'believe' and, unlike you, did not make a categorical statement of fact.

I will make a statement of fact…..Druitt doesn’t have an alibi. Provably, categorically and emphatically because I discount imaginary ones.

And that is why the charge of invention made against me by you and another member is completely without foundation.

No it’s not. It’s perfectly correct. It’s why no one will back you up on it. Because everyone knows that you’re wrong.

You argue that the omission by Anderson and Swanson of any mention of Kosminski's failure to produce an alibi is no more significant than their omission of any mention of his having had an alibi.

Im getting a heading following these twists of reason and language PI. You said that if these suspects hadn’t got an alibi it would have been mentioned. The same works the other way. It would have been mentioned if they had an alibi. You can’t have your cake and eat it.

They were claiming that a certain Polish Jew was the Whitechapel Murderer.

That was what they believed. What of it?

If he was investigated and questioned, then he must have been asked what his whereabouts were on the nights of the murders.

Where does it say that Druitt was interviewed or investigated at the time? Why do you keep repeating this? MacNaghten himself said that he didn’t get his information at the time of the murders. He wrote the memorandum 6 years later. Please try and understand.

Either he was able to produce an alibi or he was not.

If he was not able to produce an alibi then one can reasonably expect Anderson or Swanson to have mentioned it.

The fact that neither of them did so supports my contention that there never was any case against Kosminski or the 'Polish Jew'.

No it doesn’t. In any conceivable way.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Which murder do you consider the first?

Tabram? Druitt's cricket schedule does not give him an alibi for August 7.

Nichols? Druitt's cricket schedule does not give him an alibi for August 31.

A better chance for an alibi might be if we could find the schedule for Druitt teaching at Valentine's School in Blackheath. From what I have found, the earliest trains from London to Blackheath appear to left at 5:10am. If classes started at 7am, Druitt wouldn't have enough time to get there from London.

I was going to say that it’s good to be back but what can you do when faced with this kind of thinking Fiver? How more straightforward could this be?

[Herlock Sholmes]

I meant Nichols.

As I have stated, I believe that Druitt had a cast-iron alibi for that murder.

Untrue.

I have read that about the tram schedule before.

You can’t have or you wouldn’t be the only person that claims an alibi. Everyone else can see this PI so why can’t you?

I have also read that Druitt's responsibilities would have included watching over the boarders at night.

There’s no proof of that. It was just a suggestion. No more.

If this is true, does that not have implications for his ability to have been at the scene of Mary Kelly's murder?

No, because it’s not a fact backed up by evidence. Just like his mythical alibi.

Even if his responsibility ended around midnight, it might have been too late to catch a train to London.

Again…..you’re making deductions from things that aren’t true. What’s the point?

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

Please tell us about this cast iron alibi, never found one yet.

the rest is mights any may haves, no one knows wha5 his responsibilities were, just as no one knows why he was sacked.

As I explained in a recent post, I do not make categorical statements about Druitt's alibis.

We do know, however, that he was in Dorset at the time of the first murder - unless he was commuting between London and Dorset during a trip to Dorset, and doing so in such a way as not to arouse any suspicion.

We do not know why he was sacked, but we do know it was not for being the Whitechapel Murderer.

[John Wheat]

I think it unlikely Druitt was the Ripper but I don't think we know enough about Druitt's movements to give him an alibi for any of the Ripper murders.