Casebook: Jack the Ripper - Main
   

Introduction
Victims
Suspects
Witnesses
Ripper Letters
Police Officials
Official Documents
Press Reports
Victorian London
Message Boards
Ripper Media
Authors
Dissertations
Timelines
Games & Diversions
Photo Archive
Ripper Wiki
Casebook Examiner
Ripper Podcast
About the Casebook

Most Recent Posts:
Motive, Method and Madness: Time after Time: Did JtR have a watch? - by Sam Flynn 2 hours ago.
Motive, Method and Madness: Time after Time: Did JtR have a watch? - by Joshua Rogan 3 hours ago.
Motive, Method and Madness: Time after Time: Did JtR have a watch? - by Batman 4 hours ago.
Hutchinson, George: Why Didn't the Police Have Schwartz and/or Lawende Take a Look at Hutchinson? - by Wolf Vanderlinden 4 hours ago.
Hutchinson, George: Why Didn't the Police Have Schwartz and/or Lawende Take a Look at Hutchinson? - by Wolf Vanderlinden 4 hours ago.
Motive, Method and Madness: Time after Time: Did JtR have a watch? - by DJA 5 hours ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Motive, Method and Madness: Time after Time: Did JtR have a watch? - (10 posts)
Hutchinson, George: Why Didn't the Police Have Schwartz and/or Lawende Take a Look at Hutchinson? - (9 posts)
Torso Killings: JtR failed amputation. Torso killer was successful. - (2 posts)

Wiki Updates:
Robert Sagar
Edit: Chris
May 9, 2015, 12:32 am
Online newspaper archives
Edit: Chris
Nov 26, 2014, 10:25 am
Joseph Lawende
Edit: Chris
Mar 9, 2014, 10:12 am
Miscellaneous research resources
Edit: Chris
Feb 13, 2014, 9:28 am
Charles Cross
Edit: John Bennett
Sep 4, 2013, 8:20 pm

Most Recent Blogs:
Mike Covell: A DECADE IN THE MAKING.
February 19, 2016, 11:12 am.
Chris George: RipperCon in Baltimore, April 8-10, 2016
February 10, 2016, 2:55 pm.
Mike Covell: Hull Prison Visit
October 10, 2015, 8:04 am.
Mike Covell: NEW ADVENTURES IN RESEARCH
August 9, 2015, 3:10 am.
Mike Covell: UPDDATES FOR THE PAST 11 MONTHS
November 14, 2014, 10:02 am.
Mike Covell: Mike’s Book Releases
March 17, 2014, 3:18 am.

Go Back   Casebook Forums > Ripper Discussions > Suspects > Druitt, Montague John

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #111  
Old 09-14-2016, 01:57 PM
John Wheat John Wheat is offline
Chief Inspector
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 1,822
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GUT View Post
But then I'm one of those idiots that think the police if the time had a far better idea than we do, so the suspects that they named but never cleared are lengths ahead of modern inventions trying to turn witnesses and famous people into a ripper.
Hi Gut

I tend to take a balanced view of the police of the time. On the one hand they weren't complete buffoon's and they did a better job all things considered than for instance some more modern day Police forces have done during hunts for serial murderers e.g. the police force that hunted the Yorkshire Ripper. However it is worth noting that the police of the time never solved the case so they are hardly infallible. As for witnesses and famous people being turned into ripper suspects. I regard those that do as jokers.

Cheers John
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #112  
Old 09-14-2016, 02:27 PM
GUT GUT is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: I come from a land Down Under
Posts: 7,370
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Wheat View Post
Hi Gut

I tend to take a balanced view of the police of the time. On the one hand they weren't complete buffoon's and they did a better job all things considered than for instance some more modern day Police forces have done during hunts for serial murderers e.g. the police force that hunted the Yorkshire Ripper. However it is worth noting that the police of the time never solved the case so they are hardly infallible. As for witnesses and famous people being turned into ripper suspects. I regard those that do as jokers.

Cheers John
I agree about the police, BUT they had ALL the information to work with, something we don't have in our arsenal
__________________
G U T

There are two ways to be fooled, one is to believe what isn't true, the other is to refuse to believe that which is true.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #113  
Old 09-14-2016, 03:33 PM
c.d. c.d. is offline
Assistant Commissioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 3,678
Default

I am always amused (well sort of) when the police acting as complete buffoons is the sine qua non of the theory that is put forth. Seems to happen quite a bit.

c.d.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #114  
Old 09-14-2016, 03:39 PM
GUT GUT is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: I come from a land Down Under
Posts: 7,370
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by c.d. View Post
I am always amused (well sort of) when the police acting as complete buffoons is the sine qua non of the theory that is put forth. Seems to happen quite a bit.

c.d.
It is isn't it. They couldn't find their backsides with a mirror on a stick, if you believe some theorists.

Were they perfect?? No

Did they apply today's techniques?? No

Were they total idiots?? No
__________________
G U T

There are two ways to be fooled, one is to believe what isn't true, the other is to refuse to believe that which is true.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #115  
Old 09-14-2016, 04:00 PM
Jonathan H Jonathan H is offline
Inactive
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Adelaide, South Australia
Posts: 2,329
Default Case Solved, 1891?

I have been asked to offer a rebuttal, so I will.

Montague Druitt was "in all probability" (there was never going to be a trial) "Jack the Ripper" and this solution was broadly shared with the public between 1898 and 1917 (albeit Druitt was un-named and partially disguised)

Much of today's books and articles arguing for alternate suspects, theories, or no "Jack" at all, hinge on Sir Melville Macnaghten being either incompetent or ill-informed, or both. A range of primary sources by that police chief, or about him, or on his behalf prove that the foundation stone of so-called "Ripperology" was always made of sand.

Sidebar: subsequent primary findings since the early 2000's have totally undercut the theory that Sir Robert Anderson and Donald Swanson were better informed about this case than Macnaghten -- essentially proving secondary sources Stewart Evans, Don Rumbelow and Phillip Sudgen as prescient and justified about this contentious aspect.

Montie Druitt was not gay but erotically turned on by ultra-violence against poor female prostitutes in the East End. In a tormented state, he killed himself before he could be sectioned by his family.

Here is a reviewer outside RipperLand who gets how strong this argument really is; agreeing it was case solved in 1891:

http://www.mysteryscenemag.com/41-re...JyaXBwZXIncyJd
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #116  
Old 09-14-2016, 05:45 PM
John Wheat John Wheat is offline
Chief Inspector
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 1,822
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonathan H View Post
I have been asked to offer a rebuttal, so I will.

Montague Druitt was "in all probability" (there was never going to be a trial) "Jack the Ripper" and this solution was broadly shared with the public between 1898 and 1917 (albeit Druitt was un-named and partially disguised)

Much of today's books and articles arguing for alternate suspects, theories, or no "Jack" at all, hinge on Sir Melville Macnaghten being either incompetent or ill-informed, or both. A range of primary sources by that police chief, or about him, or on his behalf prove that the foundation stone of so-called "Ripperology" was always made of sand.

Sidebar: subsequent primary findings since the early 2000's have totally undercut the theory that Sir Robert Anderson and Donald Swanson were better informed about this case than Macnaghten -- essentially proving secondary sources Stewart Evans, Don Rumbelow and Phillip Sudgen as prescient and justified about this contentious aspect.

Montie Druitt was not gay but erotically turned on by ultra-violence against poor female prostitutes in the East End. In a tormented state, he killed himself before he could be sectioned by his family.

Here is a reviewer outside RipperLand who gets how strong this argument really is; agreeing it was case solved in 1891:

http://www.mysteryscenemag.com/41-re...JyaXBwZXIncyJd
What a load of bullshit.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #117  
Old 09-15-2016, 04:06 AM
mklhawley mklhawley is offline
Chief Inspector
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Greater Buffalo, New York
Posts: 1,902
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Wheat View Post
What a load of bullshit.
Sounds like rhetoric from a politician; baseless in facts and emotionally loaded.
__________________
The Ripper's Haunts/JtR Suspect Dr. Francis Tumblety (Sunbury Press)
http://www.michaelLhawley.com
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 04:22 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.