Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Oh, Dear Boss: Druitt's on a Sticky Wicket

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

  • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

    They are about getting a result. The CPS won’t proceed with a case if they see no realistic chance of a result even with a team of experienced detectives believing a person guilty. So why proceed with an investigation if they didn’t have a chance of getting to the bottom of it and where the suspect had been dead for 6 years?
    There was no CPS in 1888 what applies today did not apply in 1888.

    When the police receive information as in the case of Druitt they do not simply bin it becasue the person named is now dead, they are obligated to investigate it. that would have been even more paramount in 1888 and onwards given the Ripper crimes and the fact that the killers identity had never been established.

    Why dont you take the blinkers off and listen to what those who are more experienced in criminal investiagtions are telling you.?

    www.trevormarriott.co.uk

    Comment


    • .
      In 1903, Inspector Abberline, gave an interview to the Pall Mall Gazette in response to a claim made in a Sunday newspaper that the Ripper was a young medical student who had drowned in the Thames. Abberline said, ''Yes, I know all about that story, but what does it amount to, simply this, soon after the last murder in Whitechapel the body of a young man was found in the Thames, but there is nothing beyond the fact that he was found at that time to incriminate him''.
      What weight should we put on Abberine’s often repeated quote? This is a man that has retired from the force and is living n Bournemouth of course. Does what he said imply any ‘insider’ knowledge? No it simply sounds like he’s responding to a suggestion about which he knows no more than any other newspaper reader. Based on the fact that it’s just a story about a man who’d killed himself just after Kelly’s murder, of course it’s not evidence of guilt. Basically all that Abberline is saying is ‘you can’t accuse a man of murder just because he committed suicide just after it.’ He clearly doesn’t know about Macnaghten’s info so his opinion is worthless on the subject. The use of it is desperation.
      Regards

      Sir Herlock Sholmes

      “It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into.”

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post

        why? it could also mean for being absent from his teaching duties too much.
        Is that classed as serious? I would have imagined if that had been the case he would have received warnings or reprimands we see no evidence of that from any source.

        Are you also trying to prop up Druiit as a suspect?

        www.trevormarriott.co.uk

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post

          Thank you for posting that i would suggest then rules out the gone abroad reason for dismissal.

          www.trevormarriott.co.uk
          ‘Gone abroad’ was clearly nothing more than a euphemism. At a time when the honour of the club would have been of paramount importance they wouldn’t have wanted to give any true reason that they might have seen as bringing shame on the club.
          Regards

          Sir Herlock Sholmes

          “It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into.”

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

            What weight should we put on Abberine’s often repeated quote? This is a man that has retired from the force and is living n Bournemouth of course. Does what he said imply any ‘insider’ knowledge? No it simply sounds like he’s responding to a suggestion about which he knows no more than any other newspaper reader. Based on the fact that it’s just a story about a man who’d killed himself just after Kelly’s murder, of course it’s not evidence of guilt. Basically all that Abberline is saying is ‘you can’t accuse a man of murder just because he committed suicide just after it.’ He clearly doesn’t know about Macnaghten’s info so his opinion is worthless on the subject. The use of it is desperation.
            Why dont you stop simply arguing for the sake of arguing on almost every issue concering Druitt if anyone is desparate its you.

            www.trevormarriott.co.uk

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

              ‘Gone abroad’ was clearly nothing more than a euphemism. At a time when the honour of the club would have been of paramount importance they wouldn’t have wanted to give any true reason that they might have seen as bringing shame on the club.
              what club are you referring to?

              www.trevormarriott.co.uk

              Comment


              • Originally posted by FISHY1118 View Post

                You really are an amaizing chap you know that. Bit like a ''Do as i say not as i do'' hey ,what makes your contributions to the subject of Druitt any less pointless ?

                That point goes for your entire post . I think were all a bit tired of your holier than tho attitude to be honest , by all means post whatever you like but stop telling others what they can or cant/ should or shouldnt post . ffs

                .
                This is a thread for discussing Druitt. What’s the point of posters simply parroting ‘he isn’t a suspect, he isn’t a suspect?’ What does that achieve?

                My contribution is that I have an open mind on the subject and accept possibilities. My contribution is no more important than anyones but at least I engage on the subject. All that you, Trevor and Harry are doing is repeatedly telling us that we should dismiss him. It’s tedious and utterly pointless and relentlessly negative. At least there are some posters here who, whilst not considering Druitt a strong suspect, remain open minded and are prepared to discuss

                Its you and Trevor that are ‘amazing.’ You spend so much time posting repetitions on a suspect that you don’t think is worth discussing. Why bother? If a suspect held no interest for me I wouldn’t bother posting on the subject.
                Regards

                Sir Herlock Sholmes

                “It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into.”

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post

                  what club are you referring to?

                  www.trevormarriott.co.uk
                  Blackheath Cricket Club.
                  Regards

                  Sir Herlock Sholmes

                  “It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into.”

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post

                    Why dont you stop simply arguing for the sake of arguing on almost every issue concering Druitt if anyone is desparate its you.

                    www.trevormarriott.co.uk
                    Because I’m faced with biased posters like yourself. If you discussed rather than just keep telling us why he’s such a poor suspect then I wouldn’t need to respond.
                    Regards

                    Sir Herlock Sholmes

                    “It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into.”

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post

                      Is that classed as serious? I would have imagined if that had been the case he would have received warnings or reprimands we see no evidence of that from any source.

                      Are you also trying to prop up Druiit as a suspect?

                      www.trevormarriott.co.uk
                      Again, you’re just not thinking. How can we possibly know how long any absences might have been occurring? How do we know that he hadn’t had a warning or two already? His sacking might have been the final straw?
                      Regards

                      Sir Herlock Sholmes

                      “It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into.”

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post

                        There was no CPS in 1888 what applies today did not apply in 1888.

                        When the police receive information as in the case of Druitt they do not simply bin it becasue the person named is now dead, they are obligated to investigate it. that would have been even more paramount in 1888 and onwards given the Ripper crimes and the fact that the killers identity had never been established.

                        Why dont you take the blinkers off and listen to what those who are more experienced in criminal investiagtions are telling you.?

                        www.trevormarriott.co.uk
                        Because evidence tells me that you’re wrong more than most.

                        I don’t know how old you are Trevor but I’m assuming that you did no police work in the LVP? That no investigation was done is entirely understandable and reasonable.

                        Insufficient evidence which might have been word of mouth. Suspect dead. Family members who probably wouldn’t have agreed to speak officially. And an upper class family whose reputation the upper echelons of the police might not have wanted to drag through the mud for no end result. Get real Trevor.
                        Regards

                        Sir Herlock Sholmes

                        “It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into.”

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

                          Because I’m faced with biased posters like yourself. If you discussed rather than just keep telling us why he’s such a poor suspect then I wouldn’t need to respond.
                          we could discuss this now until forever and you would still refuse to accept what is presented to you regarding Druitt and his suspect viability

                          www.trevormarriott.co.uk

                          Comment


                          • I post Herlock,because you continually address posts to me,and it invites a reply.I get a notification.
                            Your latest rant produces nothing new.You keep repeating claims that are baseless,so any continuance of worthless content is down to you.
                            Several people committed suicide during the Whitechapel killings,numerous others were found to have mental problems.Interesting,but of no investigational importance in regard to the murders,and contain no evidence of guilt.
                            Mac and Druitt get special attention because you continually refer to them.It is you ,not I ,that believe 'Suspect' to be a proper description of Druitt.
                            How much space have you devoted to try and prove that.? Far more than I have in refuting it,and how far have you succeeded in producing fresh information.You are stuck on the one solitary piece of useless news that Druitts family believed Druitt had mental problems,and from that unconfirmed tit-bit we should consider Druitt to be a successful and calous serial killer. Get real.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

                              Because evidence tells me that you’re wrong more than most.

                              You wouldnt know how to identify evidence if it jumped up and punched you on the nose, further more you clearly do no have the abilty to assess and evaluate the evidence that is put before you

                              I don’t know how old you are Trevor but I’m assuming that you did no police work in the LVP? That no investigation was done is entirely understandable and reasonable.

                              We dont know if any investigation was done but as the others mentioned in the MM were exonarated that indicated enquries were condcuted into them for them to be removed from the original MM suspect list so why not in the case of Druitt.

                              Insufficient evidence which might have been word of mouth. Suspect dead. Family members who probably wouldn’t have agreed to speak officially. And an upper class family whose reputation the upper echelons of the police might not have wanted to drag through the mud for no end result. Get real Trevor.
                              You really have no idea I would suggest you stop posting on this thread you are doing yourself no favours in your postings which are becoming repetitive i am not going to encourage your ranting and raving anymore by replying to your posts

                              www.trevormarriott.co.uk

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post

                                we could discuss this now until forever and you would still refuse to accept what is presented to you regarding Druitt and his suspect viability

                                www.trevormarriott.co.uk
                                And you continue to think that everyone should simply accept your opinion as fact. I explore the possibilities. You just think we should abandon any discussion on the subject. I just wish that you would abandon talking on the subject.
                                Regards

                                Sir Herlock Sholmes

                                “It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into.”

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X