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

[Ally]

We do not know the reason is the honest answer. Remember, the "random spot" is not where the body was found, it is where he met the victim. And, in all the cases (Nicholls, Chapman, Stride?, Eddowes, & Kelly), we do not know where he first met the victim. Ergo, we do not know the location of this "random spot", or even if it was random.

And we know that whether it was where the body was found, or where he met them, it was still all within the same tight geographical region. Unless you think Polly Nichols left her boarding house traveled miles away and then the killer brought her right back to her doorstep? And the same for the other victims. We know where they started the evening and where they ended up. It's all within the same relatively tight geographical region.

Fair enough, but Sutcliffe et. al. all have the benefit of history to look back on and have learned that too many bodies in one area may tip off the police. This was not the case in 1888, there was no real historical trace to learn from. Most murders were between family members or people who knew each other. As long as his victims were not related to him by family or by social connections, he would be clean away with it. Distance being irrelevant.

Exactly. So why then, distance being irrelevant, would he have traveled for hours, by train to go to Whitechapel, when he could have killed a victim in the city he was in on that day? He was already away from home, in a city that was not geographically relevant to him. He'd already traveled and removed himself from his home area. You think there weren't prostitutes in every city?

As you said, he didn't have the benefit of history to look back on, so this convoluted idea that he would get on a train, travel 3 hours away from the city he was in, that he'd already traveled to, to then turn back around and travel back to that area the next day, just to .... what? Distance is irrelevant, traveling is irrelevant, he had no reason to travel 3 hours away to a city, walk for a mile, and pick Whitechapel as the ONLY PLACE he could kill a woman. It's absurd.

This is where your opinion is subject to bias. It simply is not true that the killer had to live in the one part of London where his preferred victim-type were so readily available.

Yeah because Whitechapel, London is the only place in all of England where victims could be found. The killer HAD TO GO there. Not. Except that Druittists need him to be there. His preferred victim type was available in other places than a tight few block radius, and anyone who isn't swimming in their own confirmation bias, would recognize that. The killer lived in the area. He wasn't traveling all day on trains repeatedly just to get to Whitechapel to kill women. Whitechapel is only important to us, because of what happened there. It wasn't the holy mecca to anyone else, or some special place, except by what occurred there. There is no reason for a serial killer to kill over, and over, and over, and over in the same place except.... it's where they were on the daily.

My last point here always seems to be forgotten, that is we have no idea how many times this killer roamed the streets looking for the right victim, at the right location, at the right time, only to be faced with sunrise after a failed night on the prowl.

You're right, we don't know that but we don't have to dive into the realm of being completely absurd in speculation. Druitt had absolutely no logistical reason to make this insane trip to murder a woman, in Whitechapel, except again, people prefer absurd speculation and "possibility" over basic common sense.

Finally, my suspect is not Druitt (I believe my suspect had an 'awkward gait', which I doubt Druitt could have had), but I readily admit Druitt is of the same social type that I believe the Ripper belonged, and more to the point here, to date he has not been and cannot be, so easily dismissed.

He has been and can be easily dismissed. By anyone utilizing common sense, instead of absurd argument for the sake of it.

[Simon Wood]

Exactly right, Ally. Nicely bowled.

[Scott Nelson]

As far as Druitt is concerned we can’t assess the private information so all that we have is the memorandum and anything else that Macnaughten written or said. We therefore have four options: That Macnaughten lied and Druitt wasn’t guilty, that Macnaughten’s information was incorrect and Druitt wasn’t guilty, that the information was correct but he misinterpreted it or misjudged it’s significance and Druitt wasn’t guilty or that the information was actually correct and that Druitt was guilty.

Slight expansion on Macnaghten being given incorrect information may be that the source(s) mistakenly believed Druitt could be a killer (when he wasn't).

[Herlock Sholmes]

Serial killers don’t operate according to common sense and reason though. They have abnormal thought processes and impulses so that events can appear unlikely when we look at them retrospectively then attempt to hold them to the standards of normal people. We find out about their behaviour pre-murders only by interviewing them which of course never happened with Druitt.

The odds are that Druitt wasn’t the ripper but the same applies to every other suspect but why should we make assumptions like the one that he must have travelled back to London purely to commit murder? We all know that killers don’t just decide one day to kill and then go out to do it, so if Druitt was the killer, and yes it’s a big ‘if,’ we can speculate (as we’re forced to do in this case) that Druitt might have visited Whitechapel previously and used prostitutes and for some time had had thoughts of murder? We know that men from the upper classes did this so why would it be unlikely or impossible for Druitt to have done this?

We also know that Druitt was a Barrister so how can it be remotely unlikely that he might have had a meeting arranged for during the day on the 31st? Some meetings just can’t be cancelled or rearranged. Would he have cancelled his entire summer break in Dorset for the sake of one meeting or would he have simply resigned himself to the idea of jumping on a train and travelling back? For all that we know he might have received a letter from his chambers while he was down there asking him to go and meet a client? Who knows, but none of these suggestions are ‘out there,’ they are everyday occurrences.

So if we go with the behaviour in the second paragraph then consider the reasonable possibility that he didn’t return to London purely to murder what do we have. Druitt with 3 straightforward options. Travel down on an early train on the 31st or, depending on the time the game finished, catch either the 4.55 or the 7.58. The fact that he played cricket is irrelevant, a 2 or 3 hour village cricket match wouldn’t sap anyones energy.

He gets to London, decides to pick up a prostitute, goes to Whitechapel because it’s the only red light area he’s ever been to (perhaps usually with a friend or two) or perhaps as a serial killer (who again, don’t think in a reasoned way, common sense way) he might simply have decided on Whitechapel as the area that he was going to kill, perhaps in his eyes ‘clean up the street. Then for whatever trigger reason he commits his first murder.

There are no timing issues, no locational issues and we can’t expect a sk to reason like normal, sane people. And this is a man named by the Chief Constable as a likely suspect, where we have to ask ourselves why the hell would he put the name of a non-violent (as far as anyone knew) non-criminal (apart from the crime of suicide) upper class Barrister on a list of 3 alongside a Polish Lunatic and a Russian petty criminal, unless at the very least he himself felt that he had good reason to do so. For me this makes Druitt an intriguing and plausible suspect but, like every single other suspect, we have no hard evidence. But the MM should surely give us reason for considering possibilities? The dismissal by Macnaughten by some is just a matter of convenience. We can’t assume dishonesty. We can’t assume anything.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Slight expansion on Macnaghten being given incorrect information may be that the source(s) mistakenly believed Druitt could be a killer (when he wasn't).

Accepted Scott

[GUT]

Serial killers don’t operate according to common sense and reason though. They have abnormal thought processes and impulses so that events can appear unlikely when we look at them retrospectively then attempt to hold them to the standards of normal people. We find out about their behaviour pre-murders only by interviewing them which of course never happened with Druitt.

The odds are that Druitt wasn’t the ripper but the same applies to every other suspect but why should we make assumptions like the one that he must have travelled back to London purely to commit murder? We all know that killers don’t just decide one day to kill and then go out to do it, so if Druitt was the killer, and yes it’s a big ‘if,’ we can speculate (as we’re forced to do in this case) that Druitt might have visited Whitechapel previously and used prostitutes and for some time had had thoughts of murder? We know that men from the upper classes did this so why would it be unlikely or impossible for Druitt to have done this?

We also know that Druitt was a Barrister so how can it be remotely unlikely that he might have had a meeting arranged for during the day on the 31st? Some meetings just can’t be cancelled or rearranged. Would he have cancelled his entire summer break in Dorset for the sake of one meeting or would he have simply resigned himself to the idea of jumping on a train and travelling back? For all that we know he might have received a letter from his chambers while he was down there asking him to go and meet a client? Who knows, but none of these suggestions are ‘out there,’ they are everyday occurrences.

So if we go with the behaviour in the second paragraph then consider the reasonable possibility that he didn’t return to London purely to murder what do we have. Druitt with 3 straightforward options. Travel down on an early train on the 31st or, depending on the time the game finished, catch either the 4.55 or the 7.58. The fact that he played cricket is irrelevant, a 2 or 3 hour village cricket match wouldn’t sap anyones energy.

He gets to London, decides to pick up a prostitute, goes to Whitechapel because it’s the only red light area he’s ever been to (perhaps usually with a friend or two) or perhaps as a serial killer (who again, don’t think in a reasoned way, common sense way) he might simply have decided on Whitechapel as the area that he was going to kill, perhaps in his eyes ‘clean up the street. Then for whatever trigger reason he commits his first murder.

There are no timing issues, no locational issues and we can’t expect a sk to reason like normal, sane people. And this is a man named by the Chief Constable as a likely suspect, where we have to ask ourselves why the hell would he put the name of a non-violent (as far as anyone knew) non-criminal (apart from the crime of suicide) upper class Barrister on a list of 3 alongside a Polish Lunatic and a Russian petty criminal, unless at the very least he himself felt that he had good reason to do so. For me this makes Druitt an intriguing and plausible suspect but, like every single other suspect, we have no hard evidence. But the MM should surely give us reason for considering possibilities? The dismissal by Macnaughten by some is just a matter of convenience. We can’t assume dishonesty. We can’t assume anything.

Can’t count the times I have had to rush back to chambers for an urgent conference, because I forgot to get something filed, because I needed to sign something, or some other reason, and that’s in the modern age of email, e-filing etc. once drove near on 8 hrs, (after being in Court from 10am to 8pm) because something urgently needed my attention (and hey I sure charged them for the effort)

The other thing is, for all we know he never originally intended to play the second game and so arranged something in London, and then “Hey Monty, we could do with an extra player for the game can you get back down?”

[Abby Normal]

Serial killers don’t operate according to common sense and reason though. They have abnormal thought processes and impulses so that events can appear unlikely when we look at them retrospectively then attempt to hold them to the standards of normal people. We find out about their behaviour pre-murders only by interviewing them which of course never happened with Druitt.

The odds are that Druitt wasn’t the ripper but the same applies to every other suspect but why should we make assumptions like the one that he must have travelled back to London purely to commit murder? We all know that killers don’t just decide one day to kill and then go out to do it, so if Druitt was the killer, and yes it’s a big ‘if,’ we can speculate (as we’re forced to do in this case) that Druitt might have visited Whitechapel previously and used prostitutes and for some time had had thoughts of murder? We know that men from the upper classes did this so why would it be unlikely or impossible for Druitt to have done this?

We also know that Druitt was a Barrister so how can it be remotely unlikely that he might have had a meeting arranged for during the day on the 31st? Some meetings just can’t be cancelled or rearranged. Would he have cancelled his entire summer break in Dorset for the sake of one meeting or would he have simply resigned himself to the idea of jumping on a train and travelling back? For all that we know he might have received a letter from his chambers while he was down there asking him to go and meet a client? Who knows, but none of these suggestions are ‘out there,’ they are everyday occurrences.

So if we go with the behaviour in the second paragraph then consider the reasonable possibility that he didn’t return to London purely to murder what do we have. Druitt with 3 straightforward options. Travel down on an early train on the 31st or, depending on the time the game finished, catch either the 4.55 or the 7.58. The fact that he played cricket is irrelevant, a 2 or 3 hour village cricket match wouldn’t sap anyones energy.

He gets to London, decides to pick up a prostitute, goes to Whitechapel because it’s the only red light area he’s ever been to (perhaps usually with a friend or two) or perhaps as a serial killer (who again, don’t think in a reasoned way, common sense way) he might simply have decided on Whitechapel as the area that he was going to kill, perhaps in his eyes ‘clean up the street. Then for whatever trigger reason he commits his first murder.

There are no timing issues, no locational issues and we can’t expect a sk to reason like normal, sane people. And this is a man named by the Chief Constable as a likely suspect, where we have to ask ourselves why the hell would he put the name of a non-violent (as far as anyone knew) non-criminal (apart from the crime of suicide) upper class Barrister on a list of 3 alongside a Polish Lunatic and a Russian petty criminal, unless at the very least he himself felt that he had good reason to do so. For me this makes Druitt an intriguing and plausible suspect but, like every single other suspect, we have no hard evidence. But the MM should surely give us reason for considering possibilities? The dismissal by Macnaughten by some is just a matter of convenience. We can’t assume dishonesty. We can’t assume anything.

well said herlock.
inconvenience is the last thought on a serial killers mind. im sure it wasnt on hansens mind when he was abducting women and taking them in his truck to an airport and then putting them in a plane and flying them into the wilderness, or on geins mind when he was digging up corpses in tje middle of the night. or bundy driving all around the country to find victims. or the zodiac hand making and wearing an executioners mask and stalking couples in broad daylight in a park.or chikitilo with all his long walks and train rides to find and kill victims.

for all we know, if druitt was the ripper, he enjoyed his safaris into tje city jungle to stalk his prey. inconvenient and nonsensical to us sure, but maybe not to a serial killer.
THEY DONT THINK OR DO THINGS LIKE NORMAL PEOPLE.

As you know druitt isnt even in my top tier of ripper suspects, and i think more than likely the ripper was a local man, but until he can be definitively ruled out he is still a valid suspect. He was a major suspect of one of the police at the time and checks a few other boxes as well.
IMHO he certainly cant be ruled out based on the latest. check mark against his candidature for sure, but not ruled out.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Can’t count the times I have had to rush back to chambers for an urgent conference, because I forgot to get something filed, because I needed to sign something, or some other reason, and that’s in the modern age of email, e-filing etc. once drove near on 8 hrs, (after being in Court from 10am to 8pm) because something urgently needed my attention (and hey I sure charged them for the effort)

The other thing is, for all we know he never originally intended to play the second game and so arranged something in London, and then “Hey Monty, we could do with an extra player for the game can you get back down?”

That’s actually a point that I also suggested over on JTRForums GUT For all that we know he might not have decided whether he was going back for the second game or not. It’s not like it was a case of him dashing off to a random town dripping in sweat, then running between trains to arrive just in time for anything and it wouldn’t have been the end of the world if he hadn’t returned for the second game. After all he wasn’t based down there so he couldn’t have been an ‘all season’ player. He’d just have turned up to play if he’d been in town. He was more of a guest player.

[Herlock Sholmes]

well said herlock.
inconvenience is the last thought on a serial killers mind. im sure it wasnt on hansens mind when he was abducting women and taking them in his truck to an airport and then putting them in a plane and flying them into the wilderness, or on geins mind when he was digging up corpses in tje middle of the night. or bundy driving all around the country to find victims. or the zodiac hand making and wearing an executioners mask and stalking couples in broad daylight in a park.or chikitilo with all his long walks and train rides to find and kill victims.

for all we know, if druitt was the ripper, he enjoyed his safaris into tje city jungle to stalk his prey. inconvenient and nonsensical to us sure, but maybe not to a serial killer.
THEY DONT THINK OR DO THINGS LIKE NORMAL PEOPLE.

As you know druitt isnt even in my top tier of ripper suspects, and i think more than likely the ripper was a local man, but until he can be definitively ruled out he is still a valid suspect. He was a major suspect of one of the police at the time and checks a few other boxes as well.
IMHO he certainly cant be ruled out based on the latest. check mark against his candidature for sure, but not ruled out.

Cheers Abby. My main point about Druitt is that I just don’t accept that Macnaughten simply plucked his name out of thin air just because he died just after Kelly died. This simply doesn’t hold water for me (as Wickerman has said too) So to me this points to MacNaghten genuinely thinking that there was ample reason to suspect Druitt and that Druitt’s own family suspected him. This should at least interest us. Of course he could have been mistaken or the info could have been exaggerated or wrong but we shouldn’t just assume it. I’ll stand by what I’ve always believed….Druitt is too easily dismissed……and usually with “but there’s no evidence against him.” But which suspect has evidence against them. We’re all speculating. And there is evidence in favour of Druitt….MacNaghten.

[Simon Wood]

There is evidence in favour of Druitt?

For his guilt or his innocence?

Kindly explain.

Simon

[rjpalmer]

Exactly right, Ally. Nicely bowled.

Hello Simon and Ally.

I'm curious about something. Feel free to enlighten me if either of you so choose.

In the wildly unlikely event that someone could prove that Druitt did indeed travel from Blandford Forum to London's Waterloo Station on the night of August 30th, how would you react?

It's not an idle question; I think it has some relevance.

I refer to irrefutable documentation: Druitt's name on a legal paper signed in London on August 31st, or his presence at a meeting on that same date.

Would you admit that Druitt's behavior was exceedingly weird and would this raise suspicions against him in your mind?

Or would you concede that he could have gone to London for some other reason?

Cheers.

[harry]

There comes a time surely,when it can be said that we have not and will not solve the Ripper killings,on the available information,and that applies to Druitt as much as any other person.By all means discuss possibilities if you believe it would help,but cases built on possibilities alone achieve little.If you want the truth,you will in time have to prove that what is or was possible actually happened.This isn't being done,is my point.
All we have to support a case against Druitt is a comment by a former senior policeman,and when narrowed down all that can be deduced by that comment is that Druitt's family had suspicions.What those suspicions amounted to is anyone's guess.What the former policeman's suspicions were cannot be discussed,he didn't elaborate.You see i have not mentioned evidence,for the simple reason i cannot find any.

[Simon Wood]

Hi RJ,

Forgive me, but your chance of successfully promoting the idea of Druitt finishing a cricket match, travelling from Wimborne to Waterloo, crossing London to Whitechapel, identifying a likely dollymop, doing the deed, then returning to Waterloo for a return train to Wimborne before enjoying a cold supper and catching a good night's sleep prior the morrow's cricket match, is slightly less than your chance of getting a whale up your bum.

My apologies.

Simon

[Trevor Marriott]

Slight expansion on Macnaghten being given incorrect information may be that the source(s) mistakenly believed Druitt could be a killer (when he wasn't).

Regarding Druitts family suspecting him, I wonder how this so called suspicion arose, bearing his family resided in Dorset and he was living in London so they would have had very little contact with him.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Herlock Sholmes]

Hi RJ,

Forgive me, but your chance of successfully promoting the idea of Druitt finishing a cricket match, travelling from Wimborne to Waterloo, crossing London to Whitechapel, identifying a likely dollymop, doing the deed, then returning to Waterloo for a return train to Wimborne before enjoying a cold supper and catching a good night's sleep prior the morrow's cricket match, is slightly less than your chance of getting a whale up your bum.

My apologies.

Simon

Or, if we look at reality.

He finished a 2 or 3 hour village cricket game, which would have taken up very little energy, then gets a train and goes to London (where he lives and works) arriving in the late evening. He probably has a comfortable 3 or 4 hours to get to Whitechapel, hacking through steamy jungles and fighting off aggressive savages no doubt, he meets and kills Nichols. He probably gets back to where he’s staying by 4.30ish. Seven hours sleep and he’s up at 11.30 with all day to do what he likes before catching a train back. Alternatively he stays over another night but returns by an early morning train arriving eadily in time for his game refreshed and ready.

If this is your idea of remarkable behaviour Simon then I’d suggest that you’re far too easily shocked. The problem is that when Joanna made her first post over on JTRForums a very few posters were putting champagne in the fridge, preparing canapés and discussing seating arrangements for the party, but when it was shown that he had 2 possible trains that he could very easily have caught then we were treated to the sounds of deflating balloons and weeping. Cue the sidestep. ‘Ok, it’s absolutely possible that he could very, very easily have got to London in plenty of time and had ample time for sleep before a leisurely return but its unlikely.’

A series of throat-cutting, evisceration murders of women on the street in a small area and over a short period of time being committed by different men is unlikely. A man getting a train to London isn’t.