Who was killed by Jack the Ripper?

[Fiver]

I try to be cautious but one aspect of this has never washed with me and it’s something that tends to be thrown around so casually some treat it almost as a fact. It’s the idea that Macnaghten just picked Druitt out of thin air for his ‘better than Cutbush’ list because he died after Kelly. I’m firmer in my opinion that this wasn’t the case than I am in my opinion of how many victims there were or whether the killer wrote the GSG. I firmly believe that Macnaghten felt that he had a valid reason for naming Druitt - whether that reason was correct or not is another matter.

Thank you for the rail information. To repeat, I have never questioned that there was enough time for Druitt to have committed the Nichols murder.

Using Google maps and selecting Transit, it looks like the round trip would take about 7 hours today, not counting time for finding a victim, washing up, and changing clothes. Does that seem like a fair estimate of the time involved for Druitt to have murdered Nichols?

Lets go with a minimum of 7 hours travel time for Druitt to have committed the Nichols murder. That leads to some points.

The other murders were about 6 miles from where Druitt lived. The Nichols murder was about 120 miles from Blandford. Why would Druitt be willing to travel 20 times as far for the Nichols murder and only the Nichols murder? Why would a killer willing to travel 120 miles one way, cluster all of his crimes within about half a mile of each other? As more police and public attention focused on Whitchapel, why didn't he at least go to other London red light districts such as Haymarket?

[Fiver]

Sir Melville Macnaghten had virtually limitless resources at his disposal. Police records, prison records, asylum records. He picks a ‘foreign lunatic’ (hardly likely to sue had his name leaked out) a foreign criminal (hardly likely to sue had his name leaked out) and then a highly respectable Barrister, Schoolteacher, Public Schoolboy, cricketer with no history of criminality or violence (with a solicitor for a brother and I highly respected family name) . The question that I think doesn’t get asked enough is “why the hell did he pick Druitt?”

For me the question is - If Macnaghten had used those resources, why was he wrong about Druitt's age, occupation, health, lodgings, and time of death?

[Herlock Sholmes]

You mistyped before about having an issue in your previous reply to me. You meant to say you had no issue but you typed "I genuinely have issue at all with anyone who doesn’t think Druitt a good suspect Paddy." Okay so we're past all that.

You said "I don’t know why the term ‘round trip’ is particularly relevant Paddy." To me the term is spot on. This was a round trip. And yes I know if it happened he took a train back to Dorset for his Saturday match. I know the round trip is not technically an alibi. I get that. I just don't think the round trip happened at all. That he interrupted his summer cricketing in Dorset to go to London for one day only, a Friday and I don't think he murdered Polly Nichols. it's that simple. But again, thanks for your explanation.

And again, this thread is hijacked beyond hope. I would go over to your Druitt and Monro thread, which is more appropriate, but a certain bicycle squad detective has appeared there so that thread will surely melt down.

My main point is that we have always thought of Druitt as "local." A resident of London. Employed there. Domiciled there. It is a basic part of his suspect status. Turns out he would have to make a round trip from his summer cricketing in Dorset to murder Polly Nichols. That's not local. This is very different.

No problem Paddy.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Thank you for the rail information. To repeat, I have never questioned that there was enough time for Druitt to have committed the Nichols murder.

Using Google maps and selecting Transit, it looks like the round trip would take about 7 hours today, not counting time for finding a victim, washing up, and changing clothes. Does that seem like a fair estimate of the time involved for Druitt to have murdered Nichols?

Lets go with a minimum of 7 hours travel time for Druitt to have committed the Nichols murder. That leads to some points.

The other murders were about 6 miles from where Druitt lived. The Nichols murder was about 120 miles from Blandford. Why would Druitt be willing to travel 20 times as far for the Nichols murder and only the Nichols murder? Why would a killer willing to travel 120 miles one way, cluster all of his crimes within about half a mile of each other? As more police and public attention focused on Whitchapel, why didn't he at least go to other London red light districts such as Haymarket?

Maybe he just returned to London and decided when he got there, or even on the train journey? Whoever was the killer though he did decide to cluster his murders on that area. He might have chosen Whitechapel for a specific reason that’s lost to us.

[Herlock Sholmes]

For me the question is - If Macnaghten had used those resources, why was he wrong about Druitt's age, occupation, health, lodgings, and time of death?

Jon Hainsworth believes that he was hiding Druitt’s identity to protect his family but an alternative explanation could be something as simple as a man’s faulty memory. Yes, we can say he should have checked but he wasn’t submitting Druitt’s name for an investigation. Because of the closeness of 41 to 31 and Doctor instead of the son of one I don’t see any reason why these couldn’t be simple errors of memory and a failure to check his facts. How do we know what illness Druitt might or might not have had? The ToD is unknown but again why couldn’t this just be a case of a man recalling events of 5 years previously and getting some of the details wrong?

[Fiver]

Jon Hainsworth believes that he was hiding Druitt’s identity to protect his family but an alternative explanation could be something as simple as a man’s faulty memory. Yes, we can say he should have checked but he wasn’t submitting Druitt’s name for an investigation. Because of the closeness of 41 to 31 and Doctor instead of the son of one I don’t see any reason why these couldn’t be simple errors of memory and a failure to check his facts. How do we know what illness Druitt might or might not have had? The ToD is unknown but again why couldn’t this just be a case of a man recalling events of 5 years previously and getting some of the details wrong?

It could just be faulty memory, since Macnaghten makes it clear he is writing from memory and it's about 25 years after the murders. But in the same memoir where Macnaghten get almost everything wrong about Druitt, he get almost everything right about the murders. To me that difference in detail make it unlikely that Macnaghten had gotten his information from the Druitt family or from the Druitt inquest records.

[Herlock Sholmes]

It could just be faulty memory, since Macnaghten makes it clear he is writing from memory and it's about 25 years after the murders. But in the same memoir where Macnaghten get almost everything wrong about Druitt, he get almost everything right about the murders. To me that difference in detail make it unlikely that Macnaghten had gotten his information from the Druitt family or from the Druitt inquest records.

Surely it would have been easier to lay his hands on a record of the murders than it would have been to lay his hands on Druitt’s personal details? Which would have meant that he didn’t have to rely on memory for details of the murders.

[Doctored Whatsit]

Surely it would have been easier to lay his hands on a record of the murders than it would have been to lay his hands on Druitt’s personal details? Which would have meant that he didn’t have to rely on memory for details of the murders.

True, but if Macnaghten had instigated even the briefest official investigation of Druitt's circumstances, that information should have been available to him. He said that he destroyed all of his personal records, but he surely couldn't have destroyed police records. So, it seems likely that there was no police investigation of his suspicions.

[Herlock Sholmes]

True, but if Macnaghten had instigated even the briefest official investigation of Druitt's circumstances, that information should have been available to him. He said that he destroyed all of his personal records, but he surely couldn't have destroyed police records. So, it seems likely that there was no police investigation of his suspicions.

Possibly not Doc although we don’t know what his personal papers included of course.

[Doctored Whatsit]

Possibly not Doc although we don’t know what his personal papers included of course.

As is the norm with Ripperology, we frequently have grounds for doubt, but rarely firm evidence!

[Fiver]

Surely it would have been easier to lay his hands on a record of the murders than it would have been to lay his hands on Druitt’s personal details? Which would have meant that he didn’t have to rely on memory for details of the murders.

"During this night an apron, on which bloody hands had been wiped, was found in Goulburn Street (situated, if my memory is correct, about half-way between Berners Street and Mitre Square)." - Days of My Years, Sir Melville Macnaghten

Mcnaghten said he was relying on memory for the details of the murders and his saying Goulburn Street instead of Goulston Street, shows he didn't have the records of the murders in front of him. Mcnaghten correctly gives dates, locations, and level of wounds for Smith, Tabram, Nichols, Chapman, Stride, Eddowes, and Kelly murders, even though he discounts Smith and Tabram as Ripper victims. He discusses the Dear Boss letter, which he discounts as a hoax, and the Graffito, which he believes was a clue. Yet for Druitt, he gets the age, occupation, health, lodgings, and death of death wrong.

[Wickerman]

True, but if Macnaghten had instigated even the briefest official investigation of Druitt's circumstances, that information should have been available to him. He said that he destroyed all of his personal records, but he surely couldn't have destroyed police records. So, it seems likely that there was no police investigation of his suspicions.

If rumors came to light while Druitt was alive then yes, we should expect the police to have investigated Druitt, but from Mac's wording I took it that rumors only surfaced after Druitt's death. This explains why Mac. only had personal notes, so there would never have been any police files for him to destroy.
The police don't investigate a dead man.

[c.d.]

The police don't investigate a dead man.

Why not? Dying doesn't exonerate you from possibly being the Ripper.

c.d.

[Herlock Sholmes]

"During this night an apron, on which bloody hands had been wiped, was found in Goulburn Street (situated, if my memory is correct, about half-way between Berners Street and Mitre Square)." - Days of My Years, Sir Melville Macnaghten

Mcnaghten said he was relying on memory for the details of the murders and his saying Goulburn Street instead of Goulston Street, shows he didn't have the records of the murders in front of him. Mcnaghten correctly gives dates, locations, and level of wounds for Smith, Tabram, Nichols, Chapman, Stride, Eddowes, and Kelly murders, even though he discounts Smith and Tabram as Ripper victims. He discusses the Dear Boss letter, which he discounts as a hoax, and the Graffito, which he believes was a clue. Yet for Druitt, he gets the age, occupation, health, lodgings, and death of death wrong.

Yes but the ripper murders were a far more well known series of events than the circumstances of Druitt’s life and he was only saying “if my memory is correct..” on the location of the spot where the apron was found.

[Herlock Sholmes]

As is the norm with Ripperology, we frequently have grounds for doubt, but rarely firm evidence!

Certainly true Doc. How many points might we have been able to clear up if we just had a surviving record or two more?