Would we have suspected Maxwell?

[CPenney]

I'm not saying the police were 'dummies', but as late as the 1970's Peter Sutcliffe was interviewed 9 times by police who were swamped with information. Not saying JTR was ever interviewed that many times but a very good chance that whoever committed these murders was at some stage questioned/spoken to by police...

I think this is an excellent point - it shouldn't be taken as a disparagement of the police to speculate that he might have been stopped in the street, or interviewed in a police sweep and been released. I'm not as expert on serial killers in general as many on the boards, but it's a common refrain from neighbours to say that an arrested killer was the "last person" you'd have suspected of being a monster.

[Lechmere]

dirtyd22no

I should have explained that remark of mine more fully.
I meant I would discount anyone that the police had a close look at and cleared - where they interrogated them and 'checked them out'.
Sutcliffe while he was interviewed several times was never closely looked at as he seemed too normal and didn't fit the police prejudice as to what the culprit should be like.
I think the Yorkshire Ripper case provides many interesting parallels. One of which was 'information overload', where the blizzard of paperwork prevented clear thinking.
I also think there is a very good chance the culprit was at one stage or another interviewed but probably seemed totally harmless.

[pinkmoon]

dirtyd22no

I should have explained that remark of mine more fully.
I meant I would discount anyone that the police had a close look at and cleared - where they interrogated them and 'checked them out'.
Sutcliffe while he was interviewed several times was never closely looked at as he seemed too normal and didn't fit the police prejudice as to what the culprit should be like.
I think the Yorkshire Ripper case provides many interesting parallels. One of which was 'information overload', where the blizzard of paperwork prevented clear thinking.
I also think there is a very good chance the culprit was at one stage or another interviewed but probably seemed totally harmless.

Whoever our killer was he was certainly a cool customer and he could probley stand up to a grilling from the police without any forensics in those days it would be a lot easier to bluff the police.

[C. F. Leon]

I think this is an excellent point - it shouldn't be taken as a disparagement of the police to speculate that he might have been stopped in the street, or interviewed in a police sweep and been released. I'm not as expert on serial killers in general as many on the boards, but it's a common refrain from neighbours to say that an arrested killer was the "last person" you'd have suspected of being a monster.

You hear that line from people with ANY crime- especially sensational murders, but I remember it being used with some of the spying cases in the '80s-'90s. It's usually from people only casually connected with the suspect- neighbors, co-workers, fellow students, etc (because these are who the media can get to give interviews). I've become convinced that it doesn't refer to the suspect, but to how naive the 'witness' is and to the style of reporting these crimes by the media.

[Steve S]

I could see anyone listing Druitt with Tumblety & Kozminski, as they were all named suspects by police officials after-the-fact.
But why list Druitt with Maybrick & Ostrog?

The less said about Maybricks candidacy the better, and Ostrog was not even in the country at the time - or perhaps you were not aware of this?

I would suggest.....Because Druitt, Maybrick, and Ostrog are "One-source" suspects?