Ep. 38- Killers on the Loose: Eliminating the Suspects

[Mike Covell]

He could have stayed in Dorset the entire time or he could have spent the intervening three weeks in London attending to his legal work, as court was most certainly in session at the time, and then returned for a day of cricket on Sept. 1.

The tea breaks in the game do last a long time!

[Ben]

Hey Andy,

He could have stayed in Dorset the entire time or he could have spent the intervening three weeks in London attending to his legal work, as court was most certainly in session at the time, and then returned for a day of cricket on Sept. 1. I think either scenario is quite plausible as it was only a three hour rail journey.

Here my money would be on the more parsimonious asumption that he is only ever recorded as being is Dorset over that time period (where he can be pinpointed on the 3rd, 4th, 10th, 11th August and the 1st September, and possibly the 22nd August too unless that was a different Druitt (?)) because he was only there for that time period and nowhere else. That would tie in rather nicely with a normal period of time allotted for a summer holiday in the public school system.

Spending a few weeks in Dorset, then coming home, then returning there for one day just for one cricket match despite it being a three-hour train journey there and back, and despite the fact that he had a team to play for in London, doesn't quite do it for me. The fact that he played at Blackheath tells us that he wasn't deprived of a cricket team if ever he wanted to play. In fact, the evidence suggests very strong that he had a team to play for whichever location he was staying at.

I'm not saying the to-ing and fro-ing between locations theory is wildly implausible, just the less likely explanation.

We are not trying to convict Druitt of a crime. We are stating that he was a "contemporary" (more or less) suspect for a reason and that he as of yet has no alibi or reason to be eliminated

Agreed, Andy. The question is whether that reason(s) was a particularly good one.

Best regards,
Ben

[aspallek]

I'm sorry to belabor this here as it should be in the Druitt threads but I must respond to two points:

1(a) The August 22 match was played in Salisbury, not Dorset, so if this is Montague it is actually "proof" that he was away from Dorset on August 22.

1(b) There is no reason to assume that this "Druitt" who played in Salisbury on August 22 was Montague, as even Sugden concedes. There were a number of Druitts who played for various teams at the time. Montague's cousin Charles Druitt actually lived right outside of Salisbury at the time so this "Druitt" could easily have been Charles.

2 The Blackheath club appears to have been on hiatus during August 1888, so Montague would have had no opportunity at that time to play for them.

[Ben]

Hi Andy,

I don't know if the chap on 22nd August was Montague or not, but if it was, the distance between Salisbury and Bournemouth (and Salisbury to Winbourne for that matter) was truly negligile when you examine the distance between any of those places and London. If it wasn't, the observation about Druitt being pinpointed to Dorset for that time period remains valid.

On point #2, I'd be very interested to know the nature of the Blackheath Club hiatus.

Best wishes,
Ben

[aspallek]

1) by road: Salisbury to Bournemouth 27 miles, Salisbury to Central London 95 miles. A significant difference but hardly negligible. Salisbury could have been easily reached by rail from London. But again, there is no reason to think this was Montague, especially when cousin Charles lived close by.

2) I don't know the nature of the hiatus. I only know that I have looked high and low for evidence of the Blackheath club playing during the time in question and I have found none. If someone else finds that I am wrong I will stand corrected. I have also searched three Dorset newspapers for any other evidence that Druitt played cricket there in between the dates in question and I have found none.

I see no compelling reason on the basis of Druitt's known movements to diminish his status as a viable suspect, assuming Tabram was not a Ripper victim.

[Ben]

1) by road: Salisbury to Bournemouth 27 miles

Exactly, Andy, and if I was spending a relaxing summer holiday in Bournemouth, I'd cheerfully consider a visit to nearby Salisbury in the directly neighbouring county of Wiltshire.

I only know that I have looked high and low for evidence of the Blackheath club playing during the time in question and I have found none.

I'd urge caution when chalking that up to a "hiatus", thouigh. I cannot for the life of me envisage what possible set of circumstances would present any huge obstacle to a group of men congregating for a game of cricket outdoors on grass. Assuming there still is a Blackheath Cricket Club, it may be worth consulting their archives, unless you or someone has done so already. Events such as these would not always make the newspapers.

I see no compelling reason on the basis of Druitt's known movements to diminish his status as a viable suspect, assuming Tabram was not a Ripper victim.

Which takes us back to the central bone of contention. I certainly wouldn't assume that Tabram was not a ripper victim (the opposite assumption would be safer, at least, given what we know of other serial killers), and I would certainly argue that Druitt's recorded movememts tend to paint a more pursuative picture of someone who spent almost the entirety of August and the first part of September in Dorset, not to-ing and fro-ing to London to kill prostitutes.

Cheers,
Ben

[aspallek]

OK, Ben we are once again getting nowhere so lets bring it to a close since neither of us is going to change the mind of the other. Let's just suffice it to say that we agree that Druitt remains a plausible suspect but we disagree significantly on how plausible.

[Chris]

What Ben said on the podcast was:
"it's argued that he [Druitt] could have made it back from cricket matches, but they reinforce the fact that it would have been very tight ..."

I don't think Andy was being unreasonable in interpreting that as a reference to the timing.

The reason people get a bit irritated with this kind of statement is that "Druitt had a cricket alibi" is one of those old chestnuts that regularly crops up, but no evidence that comes anywhere near giving him an alibi has ever been presented.

[Ben]

I don't think Andy was being unreasonable in interpreting that as a reference to the timing

Nor do I, but then it was a reference to timing, since the timing of events of the morning of the 8th September in relation to Druitt directly impact, in my view, upon the plausbility of his candidacy; negatively so, I'd say, and I'm certainly not alone in that belief.

Since I made clear later in the podcast that it was also my fervent hope that future research could lead to the uncovering of an alibi for Druitt, it is obvious that I don't believe that "Druitt had a cricket alibi". As far as I'm concerned, he's an implausible suspect who nonetheless cannot be ruled out on current evidence.

Regards,
Ben

[Chris]

Ben

Well, if you were suggesting the timing for Druitt to get to Blackheath after the Chapman murder was "very tight", you were simply wrong. There would have been hours to spare.

The plausibility of a man playing cricket the morning after committing a murder is a separate issue. It has absolutely nothing to do with "tight" timing.

[Ben]

Hi Chris,

I'd argue that the timing was tight enough to markedly reduce the plausibility of him committing the murders. If I might dredge up an earlier post for a second:

"The.. premise becomes implausible when we consider that the killer would have spent virtually the entirety of the night and most of the early hours in pursuit of victims, and that he had then to make good his escape, dispose of any incriminating evidence, find a convenient means of conveying freshly extracted viscera on a train back home, get changed, have breakfast etc. Again, I stress that there's no known factor that militates against such an occurance being possible, but that's not the same as arguing that it is plausible or likely, and as far as I'm concerned, it isn't."

I forgot to mention the inevitable long walk to the nearest station (Canon Street) where, presumably, he had to wait for a train. I've heard it stated that trains left from the station before 7.00am, but when exactly before I don't know.

Again, nothing is impossible and there is no suggestion of any physical impediment to his committing the crime and playing cricket a short time thereafter, but the timing of events cannot help but weigh into the issue of plausibility.

Best regards,
Ben

[Chris]

Ben

The point I'm making is simply that if the journey could have been made with several hours to spare there is no sense in which the timing can be described as "very tight", and indeed it would be misleading to do so.

[Ben]

Understood, Chris.

I used the expression to convey my belief that the timing of events directly impacted upon the issue of suspect plausibility. I appreciate that this was open to misinterpretation, and hope that my position is better elaborated and clarified here.

All the best,
Ben

[aspallek]

Ben has explained himself regarding the meaning of his statement and I think had he to say it over again he would have perhaps used a word other than "tight." I am certainly inclined to cut him some slack with the understanding that one does not always pick his words carefully in conversation.

The irony is that Ben's main objection seems to involve Druitt's behavior on the morning of Sept 9. I can assure you there is nothing at all unusual about a murderer engaging in normal or even frivolous behavior immediately after killing. I recall reading an account in the Times from 1888 about a young boy killing his mother and then being apprehended thereafter playing with his mates in the street. I think any police officer could give a dozen similar examples.

Regarding the plausibility of Druitt playing cricket in the late morning after carousing and prowling all night I also see no difficulty. I've never gone on a killing spree obviously but there have been many times in my life where I have gone the night with very little or no sleep and functioned normally the next day. In fact, I suspect the early morning train from London to Blackheath (which indeed departed well before 7 am) was on any given Saturday probably full of bedraggled, hung over young men returning to their suburban abodes from the wild streets of London. I suspect the spectre of Montague arriving in that condition would not have aroused undue suspicion.

I appreciate Ben's comments because the spark further research. Had it not been for what I believe is a misstatement in an otherwise fine book, I would not have searched so diligently last summer for a cricketing alibi for Druitt. As it was, I searched 3 Dorset newspapers that all reported on cricket and found no such alibi for Montague. I've searched newspapers that reported on cricket for some mention of Blackheath playing during the weeks in question and have found no mention. Clearly, my research may have been lacking complete coverage and someone may yet find what I did not. However, I would appreciate some acknowledgment that I am not merely taking things for granted but that I am researching diligently the other side of the argument as well. In fact, I would be thrilled to be the person who finally clears Druitt's name by finding an alibi for him.

It when I read or hear statements like "Druitt was away from London playing cricket when most of the murders took place" that my ire it peeked a bit. Such statements are simply not in accord with the facts as diligent research has been able to reconstruct them thus far.

And Ben, I think you are setting up a bit of a "straw man" if it is your contention that I believe it likely that Druitt made all the movements that would have been required. Most of them I don't believe are likely or unlikely. They are merely possible. Frankly, in many ways Druitt is an unlikely suspect -- and yet he was a contemporary police suspect. That's what makes him so compelling.

BTW -- good idea about searching the Blackheath Cricket Club archives for August 1888 fixtures. I have an "in" there and I think I can accomplish that!

[Ben]

Hi Andy,

I am certainly inclined to cut him some slack with the understanding that one does not always pick his words carefully in conversation.

Greatly appreciated, but long though my list of faults may be, an inability to explain or articulate myself clearly using appropriate terminology has never been one of them, and I wasn't drinking at the time either. I would, perhaps, have specified "tight" in terms of plausibility, but even so, none of my learned fellow podcasters seemed to think my observation was significantly awry.

I can assure you there is nothing at all unusual about a murderer engaging in normal or even frivolous behavior immediately after killing.

Quite possibly, although my objection has less to do with the psychological implications of a spot of post-evisceral cricketting, but rather the practical and physical considerations. The former I've outlined above, but more significant to my mind is the reality that a hypothetical Druitt the Ripper would have been up all night sauntering the streets in search of prostitutes and engaging in all manner of physical exertions. I doubt very much that the prospect of more activity on the cricket pitch would have appealed very much to any functioning human being. It wouldn't be so much of a problem if he was working in an office the next day - in that situation he could function normally and remain inconspicuous. But when the activity was both optional (i.e. not just a normal sedentry day at work), and involving physical activity, we stray into implausible terriroty.

And Ben, I think you are setting up a bit of a "straw man" if it is your contention that I believe it likely that Druitt made all the movements that would have been required. Most of them I don't believe are likely or unlikely. They are merely possible

Well, I'd have to argue that they're unlikely, but I don't doubt your sincerety for a moment when you say you're not plugging Druitt as a "likely" suspect, just a interesting one. Indeed, I believe the same to be true of other police suspects (contemporary or not) who fail to float my boat in terms of plausibility. Their weakness as suspects don't make them any less compelling, in my view.

All the best!
Ben