|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| |
Thread |
Last Poster |
Posts |
Pages |
Last Post |
  | Archive through June 18, 2005 | Caroline Anne Morris | 50 | 1 | 6-18-05 10:28 am |
| |
 Closed: New threads not accepted on this page |
|
|
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Jeffrey Bloomfied
Chief Inspector
Username: Mayerling
Post Number: 706
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, June 18, 2005 - 11:07 am: | 
|
Hello all,
Isn't it odd that nobody has seen fit to check out all the listed suicides of drowned people in the Thames from say mid November 1888 to say March 1889. Occasionally I have seen names given of other drowning victims, but no consistant list to work with.
It would probably take some digging because we cannot rely on just THE TIMES or the other London papers (Monty's death was listed in a smaller newspaper). But I can't believe that only one person drowned himself in this period in the Thames.
Has any attempt been made to check with the River police records - or do the surviving records begin in the 20th Century?
Best wishes,
Jeff |
Chris Phillips
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Cgp100
Post Number: 1074
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, June 18, 2005 - 11:28 am: |
|
Caroline Morris
The focus seems to have been on men considered in that era to be sexually insane, who either committed suicide after MJK or were committed to an asylum.
I think it's quite an important question what Macnaghten meant by "sexually insane". Very few examples of the phrase seem to be known from that period. Macnaghten used it of Druitt, and it's not clear what he meant. Oscar Wilde used it, apparently with reference to homosexuality.
It's fairly obvious from the context that Macnaghten wasn't referring to a history of sexual violence. I've gradually come round to the view that he probably did mean Druitt was homosexual.
Whether the police did go out looking for homosexual suspects, I don't know. Perhaps Tumblety fits the bill, but I don't think there is enough evidence to generalise.
Chris Phillips
|
Andrew Spallek
Chief Inspector
Username: Aspallek
Post Number: 858
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, June 18, 2005 - 12:06 pm: |
|
Jeff --
I don't know that Montague was the only PERSON found drowned in the Thames during this period. But researchers have combed all London-area newspapers by now and there is no mention of a DOCTOR being drowned during this time period. A check with official police records (which if they exist are likely now at Kew) woudn't hurt.
Chris --
I think it is almost certain that MM had confused Druitt's co-workers with his family. The passage you quote from Sims is clearly taken from MM's autobiography in which he states that the murderer resided with "his people." Who who was the source of MM's "private information?" It could have been either family or co-workers (or someone else, I suppose).
Andy S.
|
Andrew Spallek
Chief Inspector
Username: Aspallek
Post Number: 859
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, June 18, 2005 - 12:16 pm: |
|
Chris --
I'd be interested in the quote(s) from Wilde where he uses the term "sexually insane" (or similar). I have done a number of searches of Victorian literature and journalism and can find almost no use of that term (and none relating to homosexuality).
There is no doubt that MM was referring to sexually-motivated violence when he used the phrase "sexually insane" to refer to Druitt. This is made clear in his autobiography (1914) when he refers to the murderer as a "sexual maniac" and then explains this term in light of the violence. Homosexuality was considered more of a criminal act than a form of insanity in the late 19th century, as the Cleveland Street affair demonstrates.
Andy S. |
Phil Hill
Chief Inspector
Username: Phil
Post Number: 693
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, June 18, 2005 - 12:41 pm: |
|
Although I have seen the term "sexually insane" used in regard to homosexuality during the period, I thought I had also seen it applied as a term for masturbation.
I have tried to check my references but can't find it - does anyone else recall this?
Phil |
Chris Phillips
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Cgp100
Post Number: 1075
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, June 18, 2005 - 12:54 pm: |
|
You can find the Oscar Wilde quotation here:
http://casebook.org/cgi-bin/forum/show.cgi?tpc=4922&post=73025#POST73025
I looked it up at the suggestion of Martin Fido.
A Google with the search term:
"sexual insanity" "Oscar Wilde"
brings up some academic papers touching on this, but they are for subscribers only (one offers a sample chapter free, but apparently not the references). If anyone has access to such material it may be worth following up.
Chris Phillips
|
Caroline Anne Morris
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Caz
Post Number: 1865
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, June 18, 2005 - 1:43 pm: |
|
Hi All,
No one has actually addressed my question about the possible misconceptions in 1888 about what kind of man made a likely suspect for the serial murder and mutilation of East End unfortunates.
What makes today's investigators think we should still be looking at the bottom of the Thames for allegedly sexually insane individuals who lost the will to live after MJK's murder? Or in an asylum, for a supposed sex maniac with a penchant for public self abuse?
How many convicted serial killers since Jack's day fit with the type then considered 'likely' suspects?
Love,
Caz
X |
Andrew Spallek
Chief Inspector
Username: Aspallek
Post Number: 861
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, June 18, 2005 - 1:50 pm: |
|
Thanks, Chris. I do recall that discussion now. The thrust of Wilde's letter, however, is that at the time (1896) the medical community was just beginning to view homosexuality as a form of insanity (a view that prevailed well into the 20th century before being abandoned). That Wilde had to point this out to the legal community supports my point that law enforcement would have considered homosexuality a criminal offense in 1888 and a law enforcement officer (even writing in 1894) would not refer to homosexuality as being "sexually insane." At any rate, MM's autobiography makes it clear that he was referring to sexually-motivated violence.
Andy S. |
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 2069
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, June 18, 2005 - 2:33 pm: |
|
Hi Caz,
I saw your post earlier but it being Saturday and a beautiful day havent really considered all the posts yet.
All I think at the moment is that I don"t really see Jack as a sexual serial killer in the sense of those we hear of today.
He may well have been and further understanding of such killers might prove he was as Glenn seems to be arguing.
But to me he was more the type of killer who was mad-and I do know that Asylums have had many killers with sexual delusions about women-especially about prostitutes.And when the insane kill they do so quite dramatically----heads nearly severed[as in these cases-its almost a feature in fact -this severing of the head ,for those who kill when insane].Another feature is frenzied stabbing-well so far there is only Martha Tabram who was stabbed in such a way and she may not have been a ripper victim.
I am not aware either of another such murderer who creates a sort of "street theatre"of corpses decorated with their intestines around their necks etc etc.
And the prurient "message"- the pointedly
humiliating positioning of the corpses clothing
limbs etc-so typical of the psychotic individual"s
attitude to "immorality"/"sex" and [especially] "prostitution".
So until I am persuaded otherwise I for one,
see a killer suffering from bouts of psychosis,
needing to be certified-sectioned whatever and not a psychopath like Peter Sutcliffe.Not so far anyway----and I know there are many here who would disagree with me and who know a lot more about serial killersBut I do happen to have worked with people who have given vent to such thoughts in their psychotic ravings that match the weird oddball nature of the murders.
Natalie |
Chris Phillips
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Cgp100
Post Number: 1076
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, June 18, 2005 - 2:43 pm: |
|
Caroline Morris
No one has actually addressed my question
Probably because it's meaningless unless the language is defined - as I suggested in my response to your previous message.
Chris Phillips
|
Chris Phillips
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Cgp100
Post Number: 1077
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, June 18, 2005 - 2:57 pm: |
|
Andy
The thrust of Wilde's letter, however, is that at the time (1896) the medical community was just beginning to view homosexuality as a form of insanity (a view that prevailed well into the 20th century before being abandoned). That Wilde had to point this out to the legal community supports my point that law enforcement would have considered homosexuality a criminal offense in 1888 and a law enforcement officer (even writing in 1894) would not refer to homosexuality as being "sexually insane."
I don't see that gulf between 1894 and 1896. But anyway, unless anyone knows of other occurrences of the phrase, Wilde's usage seems to be the only guide we have.
At any rate, MM's autobiography makes it clear that he was referring to sexually-motivated violence.
I don't think it's necessarily safe to assume that the "sexual mania" referred to in Macnaghten's book has an identical meaning to "sexual insanity" in the memoranda.
On the contrary, I don't feel your definition fits the context of the memoranda at all well. I can't see that Macnaghten could have been saying of Druitt "He had a history of sexually motivated violence". I can believe all manner of things could be hushed up in Victorian society, but I don't believe this would have been, for a man in Druitt's position.
Chris Phillips
|
Chris Phillips
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Cgp100
Post Number: 1078
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, June 18, 2005 - 3:06 pm: |
|
Andy
I think it is almost certain that MM had confused Druitt's co-workers with his family. The passage you quote from Sims is clearly taken from MM's autobiography in which he states that the murderer resided with "his people." Who who was the source of MM's "private information?" It could have been either family or co-workers (or someone else, I suppose).
Yes, the quotation from Sims is strikingly similar to that passage from Macnaghten's book:
I incline to the belief that the individual who held up London in terror resided with his own people ; that he absented himself from home at certain times ...
(Except of course that Macnaghten doesn't mention Blackheath, but presumably he supplied that information to Sims - it's in the Aberconway version of his memoranda, but not the official version.)
And isn't it interesting that both Sims and Macnaghten emphasise "his occasional absences from home" or "that he absented himself from home at certain times". It reads almost as though the people at Blackheath had noted that his absences coincided with the Whitechapel murders.
Or could it have been that Macnaghten had a more detailed report of Druitt's inquest than we do, and that the reason for the trouble at the school was Druitt's "absences", and that Macnaghten put together two and two himself?
I think the enduring appeal of Druitt as a suspect is that there's enough information to put together any number of interesting hypotheses, and not enough information to disprove them.
Chris Phillips
|
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 2071
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, June 18, 2005 - 3:37 pm: |
|
I dont know whether this throws any light on the usage under discussion but until about twenty years ago in England the term "Sex Maniac" was used loosely to mean a male with an insatiable sexual appetite who was likely to attack/rape women.
Natalie |
Phil Hill
Chief Inspector
Username: Phil
Post Number: 694
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, June 18, 2005 - 4:21 pm: |
|
One of the reasons that legal thinking on homosexuality was confused in the late 1880s/90s was that it 9as against sodomy) had only recently been made illegal. Largely through the actions of the MP (Henry?) Labouchere, mentioned by AP recently ina nother thread. |
Andrew Spallek
Chief Inspector
Username: Aspallek
Post Number: 862
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, June 18, 2005 - 5:36 pm: |
|
Chris,
I didn't say there was a "gulf" between 1894 and 1896. You apparently missed my point entirely. In 1888, 1894, and 1894 the legal thinking was that homosexuality was more a criminal offense than an insanity. Wilde was writing to legal men and pointing out that medicine was beginning to view homosexuality as an illness. Macnaghten, not being a medical man, would have been operating with the legal understanding in 1894 and so would not have referred to homosexuality as "insanity."
I think that "sexually insane" and "sexual maniac" are too similar to point to different aspects of the same person.
Or could it have been that Macnaghten had a more detailed report of Druitt's inquest than we do, and that the reason for the trouble at the school was Druitt's "absences", and that Macnaghten put together two and two himself?
Very astute. You've read my mind. Now you'll have to read my upcoming article to see how it plays out.
Andy S. |
Caroline Anne Morris
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Caz
Post Number: 1867
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, June 19, 2005 - 4:21 am: |
|
Hi Nats,
Many thanks for your constructive comments.
The problem for me is that if Jack was the kind of man you describe, would he not have been caught in the act, unable to distinguish between right and wrong, and unable to stop himself even in a crowd of people etc etc?
I think Jack knew exactly what he was doing, and was therefore responsible for his actions, and took pains not to get caught.
Hi Chris,
It doesn't matter how 'insane' was defined in 1888 - sexual or otherwise; I don't see Jack as insane by any definition. Do you?
Love,
Caz
X |
Chris Phillips
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Cgp100
Post Number: 1080
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, June 19, 2005 - 4:55 am: |
|
Caroline Morris
It doesn't matter how 'insane' was defined in 1888 - sexual or otherwise; I don't see Jack as insane by any definition. Do you?
Well I hardly think he was the most balanced chap in the world!
But seriously, as we have only tenuous evidence about Druitt's mental condition, and it's unclear what Macnaghten meant (or you mean) by "sexual insanity", probably your general question would be better addressed in a different thread.
Chris Phillips
|
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 4568
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, June 19, 2005 - 5:02 am: |
|
Surely we have to allow a certain degree of intelligence to paranoid schizophrenics? (or whatever the appropriate psychiatric term is). The fact that so many of them live rough and manage to survive would indicate that they aren't completely helpless?
Robert |
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 2076
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, June 19, 2005 - 5:36 am: |
|
Hi Caz,
Without wanting to open up a debate about Adolph Hitler he is cited in medical text books
as an example of the dangers -world wide -of underestimating the intelligence and skewed thinking of a person suffering from a mental condition such as paranoia/schizophrenia.
More than a few possess well above normal intelligence and some would be classed as gifted in terms of intelligence.
There is every reason to think that contrary to this type of madness "getting in the way" of capture,it would no doubt have greatly assisted the murderer in evading capture!Every thing could have been assessed in terms of risk evaluation,the capabilities of the police,their manpower etc etc.Tactics,strategies you name it ---NONE of this type of thinking would have been beyond the capability such a killer [if that indeed is what his mental condition was].Dont forget he was able to hold not only Whitechapel but the International media at bay----and has done ever since!
Think ,then of the military genius of Hitler,
before the paranoia destroyed him [and nearly everyone else ]before you dismiss the paranoid/schizoid killer.But ofcourse that does not mean he could not ,equally possibly,have been the sexual serial killer you suggest.
Love
Nats
xxxx
such as Beethoven Einstein |
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 4569
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, June 19, 2005 - 5:41 am: |
|
Eh???? Beethoven and Einstein paranoid?
Robert |
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 2077
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, June 19, 2005 - 5:42 am: |
|
Sorry Caz---- the Beethoven/ Einstein bit had been deleted as inappropriate here because although its thought they too had schizoid personalities they are cited as being examples of people finding outlets for their genius and therefore being able to use it to help progress the human race rather than destroy it.Their names had just not been properly deleted.
N |
John Ruffels
Inspector
Username: Johnr
Post Number: 382
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, June 19, 2005 - 8:18 am: |
|
Hello Natalie and Andy and Co.,
The original thrust of Natalie's opening remarks on this thread were that Montague Druitt might be some kind of mythic excuse: to fill a void in our knowledge of just who, and why, and even how, the Jack the Ripper murders came about.A scapegoat.
Myths, like early legends, folklore and some religions, sought to provide an (often) inadequate explanation about, say, why lightning struck buildings and caused damage.
I agree, despite Melville Macnaghten's belated, and furtive writings, very little concrete information has emerged to tell us more about the Montague Suspicion.
To tell us why Montague Druitt's friends and possibly, family passed information of their suspicions to the police authorities.
That they did so, there can be little doubt. George R Sims in his later writings let out further details: that the killer resided with "his people"; that he lived at Blackheath; and that he had a strong dislike of women of a certain class.
(Now there is something for you to sink your teeth into Caz!).
Some posters have suggested that Druitt's people may have suspected Montague of being "sexually insane": either a hetero, or homosexual maniac.
Chris Phillips suggests Macnaghten lined up Montague Druitt's known absences (from his school duties?) with the dates of the fiendish murders and drew strong conclusions.
It would have taken an extremely serious suspicion of some kind for Edwardian middle class friends or family to submit their eerie hunches
to the police. Much discussion must have taken place behind closed doors.
It is rather interesting though, that when Messrs Howells and Skinner,Shirley Richards and I, and, earlier, Dan Farson, went in search of family photographs of Montague Druitt, none were available from his English family, though I saw one in the Australian branch's thick book of likenesses. This suggests to me, any knowledge was closely held. Not known to Australian Druitts.
A strong explanation for why Macnaghten refused to release further information,as it would only cause pain to the suspect's family.
It was exactly that reasoning which caused Shirley Richards, and Howells and Skinner and I to search for Dan Farson's mythical THE EAST END MURDERER: I KNEW HIM. Allegedly composed in Australia by Montague's cousin, Dr Lionel Druitt.
No Dandenong Document was ever found.
But unlike others, I still feel there may be substance to the Montague Suspicion.... |
Caroline Anne Morris
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Caz
Post Number: 1871
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, June 19, 2005 - 11:16 am: |
|
Hi Nats,
Does this mean that, if he had been captured, Hitler would not have been executed for his crimes against humanity, but would have been sent to an asylum for the criminally insane?
I'm just trying to ascertain how responsible people think Jack was (in the upper storey) for his crimes, and whether such a killer today should be declared mentally unfit to plead.
Love,
Caz
X |
Maria Giordano
Inspector
Username: Mariag
Post Number: 429
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, June 19, 2005 - 11:34 am: |
|
We can go either way, Caz,and I often do. Sometimes I think he was a paranoid scizophrenic
a la Richard Chase(and one should read about this SK to get some possible insight into Jack). And sometimes I think he was organized like Bundy.
Let's not put too much stock into the "display" aspect of the crime scenes.I think he left them on the street because he had no other place to leave them. And the skirts were pulled up and legs spread because he needed to get to the pelvic area. Keep it simple.
Mags
|
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 2080
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, June 19, 2005 - 12:19 pm: |
|
Caz,
A difficult one that.Strictly speaking Hitler ,had he been captured, would almost certainly have been hanged at Nuremburg with the rest of his henchmen-due to the programmes of extermination he had been instrumental in setting up, the extent of his power and its consequences
etc.
That said the place here where those with
such a condition, usually end up is Broadmoor
an institution for the criminally insane.
But as I said, I was citing a medical text book on the consequences of underating such a person .
What you seemed to be saying was that if the ripper was "mad" he would have been carted off by the men in white coats and unable to avoid capture because of being so demonstrably insane.
What I was saying was that this is a view of the illness that bears little relation to reality
as History has proven again and again.
But it is absolutely true that without 20th century advances in medication the illness of paranoia gets progressively worse until the person used to "burn out" usually between the ages of 35 and 45 as I understand.After that they used wander the wards of psychiatric hospitals Cutbush/Kosminski like.
Maria,
The way the crime scene is interpreted is a matter of debate.
Reading the accounts of witnesses who viewed the corpses leaves little doubt in my mind that they contained an extraordinary amount of shock and awe!
Natalie |
c.d.
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Thursday, June 16, 2005 - 1:58 pm: |
|
Andrew,
Thanks for your response to my post about the Druitt timeline. I look forward to reading your article. Thinking about the timeline has raised two other questions for me. Why would Druitt (if he were the Ripper) pick a time for the murders so close to his scheduled cricket matches? He was certainly cutting it close (no pun intended). I guess you could argue that the murders were not planned but only occurred when the desire to kill became overwhelming. My second question is how did Druitt get to the railroad station from the murder sites. How far a distance is it? Could he have walked or would he have to take a cab? How hard was it to get a cab late at night in Whitechapel? Could he have been confident in his ability to do so? I find it hard to believe that the police wouldn't have questioned any driver who picked up a fare in Whitechapel on the days when the murders took place. Did Druitt have an office or some kind of apartment in the area where he could clean up? Given JTR's apparent fixation on female organs, I can't believe that he could simply postpone doing whatever it was that he did with them and undertake a long train trip. The idea of a properly dressed Druitt sitting in a railroad car while calmly reading a newspaper or legal brief knowing that he had a briefcase full of organs is too much to imagine. |
David Cartwright
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Sunday, June 19, 2005 - 12:22 pm: |
|
Hi All.
I agree Mags, keep it simple.
I truly believe that Montague Druitt was Jack the Ripper. Of course I have no proof, nobody has, but if the Ripper's identity is ever conclusively proved, I would admit to being surprised if it turned out to be any other than Druitt.
For me, there is a very strong circumstantial case to be made for HIM from start to finish, which fits for no other.
Phil Hill places great faith in Macnaghten's honesty & integrity, which I fully endorse.
Clearly, Druitt was seriously mentally ill, and I think that Paranoia Schizophrenia is a very possible hypothesis here.
If only Macnaghten had kept his "private information" on record, for future generations, we may not have been having these discussions now.
Best wishes all.
DAVID C. |
AIP
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Friday, June 17, 2005 - 10:56 am: |
|
Plenty of armchair detectives here then! |
Lobot
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Friday, June 17, 2005 - 2:25 am: |
|
From teaching at a private boys colledge, and playing the gentlemanly pursuit of cricket, to hoofing it over to the rough old East End to disembowell whores. Hmmmmmmmm.Upper middle class people dont finish thier game of cricket and head over to Whitechapel to kill whores.Use your better judgement people. Druitt was not Jack the ripper. I think you need to be looking for an animal here, and not a gentleman. |
CB
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Thursday, June 16, 2005 - 8:41 pm: |
|
Hi all,
People forget that not only did Abberline suggest the possibility that Chapman was the ripper, he actually put forth a theory. He claimed that Chapman may have been harvesting the organs for a second party. He also claimed that the ripper most likely made his escape to America. I doubt that Abberline would suggest such an shocking theory, and then suggest that the ripper made his escape to America, just to protect Druitts family. He did say that he never thought that the ripper had died, and that there was no evidence against the man that was found drown. I think that he considerd the possibility that Chapman was the ripper. Chapman lived in the area. I think Abberline also infers Tabram was a ripper victim. I read that he sent a message to Detective Sergent Godley congaradulating him for catching the ripper. That would be a strange thing to do if he was covering up for Druitt, or knew the ripper was someone else.
Anderson claimed to know the identity of the ripper, but he never names him. It was Chief Inspector Donald Swanson who wrote the name Kosminski in the margin of his personal copy of Andersons book. Swanson never thought that the name would be published. They were his personal notes. I believe that this gives crediablity to the idea that Anderson and Swanson believed that Kosminski was Jack the ripper, and they did not leak name for the purpose of a cover up. Kosminski's named by Macnaughten as well.
Littlechild claims that Tumblety was a likely suspect. He did not go publicly with the name. However, Tumblety was arguably the most infamous ripper suspect world wide at the time of the murders. Littlechild names Tumblety in a letter to a friend. I do not think that he was trying to coverup the true Identity of the ripper.
Macnaughten of course names three likely suspects, and I do not think he ever went public with any of those names.
All the detectives would have known the other suspects. Anderson and Swanson would have known about Druitt, Chapman and Tumblety. Abberline would have known about Druitt, Kosminski, and Tumblety. Littlechild would have known about Druitt, Kosminski, and Chapman. Macnaughten would have known about Kosminski, Chapman, and Tumblety. All of the detctives seemed to have there own oppinion.
The eyewitness that identified Kosminski must not have conviced Abberline, Macnaughten or Littlechild. I am not convinced either.
It is possible that Macnaughten did not share his information with Anderson, Swanson, or Abberline. I think that his good friend Monroe would have known. I would find it hard to believe that Littlechild would not know what Monroe and Macnaughten knew, and Littlechild still pens Tumblety as a likely suspect.
We know that Tumblety was a contemperary suspect. What ever reason they had for suspecting him must not have been carved in stone, and Chapman was just a theory that Abberline put forth years later. They simply did not know. I believe that one of the suspects was Jack the ripper.
Macnaughten claimed that Druitt was a Doctor. He claimed that he was older. Littlechild claimed that Tumblety had commited suicide. It is posible they got the two men confused. However, Littlechild must have known that Druitt was not a doctor. He claimed that he never heard of a Dr. D involved with the ripper murders. Macnaughten probably got confused because Druitt came from a family of doctors.
Your friend, Brad
|
Chris Phillips
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Cgp100
Post Number: 1085
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, June 19, 2005 - 12:32 pm: |
|
Natalie
What you seemed to be saying was that if the ripper was "mad" he would have been carted off by the men in white coats and unable to avoid capture because of being so demonstrably insane.
If that is what Caroline Morris is saying (though I don't find her posts at all clear), it really doesn't have any relevance to Druitt, as he clearly wasn't in that condition.
And clearly - whatever Macnaghten meant - he didn't mean that Druitt was raving mad, so the suggestion that Macnaghten's suspicion was based on any such idea is obviously wrong.
Chris Phillips
|
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 2081
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, June 19, 2005 - 1:22 pm: |
|
Chris,
We have a suicide following his dismissal from the school because "he got into serious trouble ".His suicide note ,according to the coroners inquest,tells of him being "afraid of going to be like mother".
Now mother was in a lunatic asylum.She is recorded as having been "insane since July last"[1888] according to Druitt"s brother at the same inquest.
Mrs Druitt was reported to be under the impression people were "trying to electrocute her".
In other words she was found to be suffering from paranoid delusions.
Suicide/mental illness was in that family
Chris and if Druitt thought he was affected with the same condition as his mother ...he was probably right!
Something had gone seriously wrong for him to be sacked and to have then taken his life.None of this means though that to have met him at the time he would have looked like a raving madman!
He probably "looked" much the same as he always had much of the time. But his lucid periods probably gave him much insight into his mental condition and its likely course.And this is another clue to his probably having or being about to have that particular psychosis .....insight into the illness itself.
Best
Natalie
|
Andrew Spallek
Chief Inspector
Username: Aspallek
Post Number: 866
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, June 19, 2005 - 5:59 pm: |
|
Lobot:
Healthy, normal upper middle class people don't, but you can't generalize from the healthy to the disturbed.
c.d.:
Druitt could travel to Blackheath from Cannon Street, which is on the doorstep of the East End. If no train was available from Cannon Street at the right hour, he would have had to travel back to Charing Cross. Druitt did have a legal chambers at King's Bench Walk, at the Inner Temple. This would be about a mile walk from Mitre Square. It is possible that he used these chambers as a hideout after the murders, but not likely.
Why did he "schedule" his murders so close to the cricket matches? Think about it. When would he have time to carry out the murders? The weekend. When are cricket matches scheduled?
Andy S.
(Message edited by Aspallek on June 19, 2005) |
c.d.
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Monday, June 20, 2005 - 10:50 am: |
|
Andrew,
Thanks for your response. You stated that you didn't think that Druitt used his legal chambers as a hideout. If that is correct, it would mean that Druitt, an intelligent, educated individual put himself in a position where he was either walking the streets of Whitechapel on his way to the train station or taking a cab. If he took a cab, he could be identified by the cab driver. I simply can't imagine that the police would not have questioned any cab driver who picked up a fare in or around Whitechapel on the nights of the murders. It is also, I think, reasonable to assume that in at least one instance that his clothes would have blood on them. Yet, if we accept the number of canonical victims, he went through this scenario at least five times. |
Andrew Spallek
Chief Inspector
Username: Aspallek
Post Number: 868
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Monday, June 20, 2005 - 5:30 pm: |
|
c.d. --
If he is guilty, I don't think Druitt would have used his chambers as a hideout mainly because it is not really necessary and it could cause suspicion to fall on him if he appears at his chambers in the middle of the night. But it remains a possibility.
I don't think the blood stained clothes are as much of a problem as people seem to believe. If he were careful, he needn't has gotten much on himself. If he removed his overcoat first he could simply put that coat back on, covering any minor stains. His shoes and trouser cuffs may have been the greatest problem. But in those days the streets were pretty filthy. A little intentionally-applied mud could cover that up.
Cabs were such a common means of transportation then that I doubt such a cabbie would remember one particular rider. The number of "gentlemen" who were questioned and released testifies to the fact that such individuals did frequent the East End, so Druitt would not necessarily have seems out of place. Of course, he could also have disguised himself.
Andy S. |
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 2095
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 21, 2005 - 5:55 pm: |
|
Andrew,c.d.,
I tend to see Druitt as being someone who might have made use of things to do with trains ----washrooms,tunnels perhaps.All the murder sites except for the Berner Street one were near railway stations Hanbury Street a five minute or less walk from Liverpool Street Station,- Dorset Street much the same.Durward Street almost literally on top of Whitechapel Station,Mitre square a couple of minutes from Algate Street Station-all featured on the 1894 Ordnance survey map of Whitechapel,Spitalfields and The Bank and looking like they had been there some years with multiple tracks featured leading in and out of some of them.
Even the tubes were under construction and their newly built tunnels could have hid him for an hour or so.
I seem to see suspects in terms of how they would have got rid of the mess-Druitt using railway facilities,Cutbush using the muddy fields behind Hanbury Street etc
Most of our railways were built with good refreshment rooms and urinals with wash basins.
One chap was actually seen going into the cubicle of one of these and changing his clothes in a central London lavatory and came under immediate suspicion but was cleared.
Any number of places could have been used to disguise blood stains or clean up.
Natalie
|
David Cartwright
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 21, 2005 - 6:51 pm: |
|
Hi Natalie.
Andy and yourself are far more educated and knowledgeable than I am, concerning the geography and topography of the London railway system, stations, & facilities, at the time of the Whitechapel murders. So I'm finding all this fascinating and educational, especially as I am a Druittist of long standing.
I'm not going to get into any arguments with others on this point. I've had plenty of debates about this down through the years. They've solved nothing, and further argument won't change my carefully thought out views on Druitt. But any ideas or new information from Andy or yourself, that may fill in any gaps or holes in the case against him, will make very interesting reading for me.
Phil Hill sticks by his views about the honesty and integrity of Macnaghten, and rightly so in my opinion. I stick by an inexplicable, but firm belief about Druitt.
Keep up the geography lessons guys. I'm making notes of all of it.
Best wishes Natalie.
DAVID C. |
c.d.
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 22, 2005 - 9:37 am: |
|
Natalie,
Thanks for the information on the proximity of the railway stations to the murder sites. I had been under the erroneous impression that they were in fact some distance away. Now I see that Druitt or anyone else could have made use of them to quickly escape the area. Always good to learn something new about the case.
I still have a little trouble with the image of Druitt sitting on the train calmly reading the newspaper while at his feet is a briefcase containing female organs. Once Jack got his "prize", I would think the desire to do whatever he did with them would be overwhelming.
c.d.
|
c.d.
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Monday, June 20, 2005 - 5:13 pm: |
|
Macnaghten states that he has private information that Druitt's own family suspected him of being the Ripper. But what we don't know (do we?) is when these suspicions that his family had began to form. Were they formed before or after his death? If before, is it reasonable to assume that they might have confronted him or the police with their suspicions?
If Druitt were the Ripper, why was there no mention of his victims in his suicide note? Would he have taken this last opportunity to show remorse over what he did? Did he not mention it out of respect for his family? Could he have alluded to it in such a way that his family would have been spared any public shame?
"It is better to keep your mouth closed and have people think you are a fool than to open your mouth and prove them right."
Mark Twain |
c.d.
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 21, 2005 - 10:19 am: |
|
Andy,
You made some good points, especially how easy it would be to cover up any blood stained clothing. I seem to be the only one who believes that getting to the train station would be a major problem for any suspect who did not reside in Whitechapel.
As for the cab drivers, I am not so sure. How many fares would they have picked up on the nights of the murders between the hours in question? Also, given the size of the reward being offered and the fact that the murders were occurring in roughly the same area, they might have taken a closer look at the people getting into their cabs. |
Phil Hill
Chief Inspector
Username: Phil
Post Number: 706
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 22, 2005 - 11:06 am: |
|
The distances involved are not great. As the Victorians were used to walking, I see no problem in a sportsman such as Druitt walking from his Chambers at the Inner Temple, through the City (no more than a mile and a bit) and into Spitalfields.
I was always attracted to the idea that the furthest canonical murder (and the first traditionally) of Nichols in Bucks Row, might have been on a night when Druitt was walking back to the City from a point on the opposite side of the East End. (I think it was in Howells and Skinner and has been exploded, however.)
If Druitt were the murderer, I would not rule out his calling in at Kings Bench Walk after a foray, to clean up and perhaps change before returning to Blackheath. Much of the distance could have been covered by back streets, and if he wore a long coat and kept to the shadows, as a gentleman he might have attracted little attention.
Personally, I doubt he would have risked cabs or trains while at all bloodstained or carrying his knife.
On a final point, Inner Temple has a limited number of access gates which are now and would certainly then have had a porter on duty. I do not know whether all the gates remain9ed0 open throughout the night. I am inclined to think (guess!!) that only one - that to the Strand under Prince Henry's Room - might have been open 24/7.
On the other hand, if Druitt was a familiar face to the porters he might have got through with just a "Good night" and a touch of his hat.
But this is just speculation about Druitt, in the context of the thread. It is based on reasonable deduction and knowledge of London and the period, but has no factual basis.
Phil |
Andrew Spallek
Chief Inspector
Username: Aspallek
Post Number: 869
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 22, 2005 - 12:58 pm: |
|
Some good points here. I tend always to forget about the organs and I have to agree that it is difficult to imagine Druitt carrying these onto the train or keeping them about his chambers or his lodgings. I have to speculate that he had a "hideout" or "hideouts" somewhere near the East End where he did what he wanted to do with these specimens before discarding them. This hideout may have been his chambers, a rented flat, or merely a safe "nook or cranny." I still think he would have been noticed at KBW in the middle of the night and had some explaining to do, however. Perhaps he was just lucky. The problem with this is that after the Chapman murder he does not have a lot of time. He needs to get back to Blackheath and get ready for his cricket match.
As to the geography -- there is no substitute for walking the area yourself. I am fortunate in that I have a (very) small secondary source of income that provides just enough for me to make frequent trips to London. I find that as long as I go in the off-season and content myself with very modest (i.e. stay in a "dump") lodgings I can spend a week in London for about $1200 inclusive of airfare and all expenses. Of course, I don't go only for Ripper-related reasons. (And I might add that I live rather frugally so that I can save my money for these trips).
Andy S. |
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 2096
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 22, 2005 - 3:33 pm: |
|
I knew a teacher once who had several complete breakdowns before doctors found the most effective drugs for his psychosis.In his particular case he had a very prudish and prurient attitude to sex,though wanting to talk about it rather inappropriately.
During a psychotic episode the obsessive thinking turned more to obscure aspects of mysticism and involved sacrificial"burning" of various artefacts,
I wonder to what extent the ripper"s "trophies" were just an extension of this sort of bizarre behaviour ie after he had obtained the organs/flesh whatever did he "burn"
them in some sort of fire ritual/sacrifice----and was this what the fire in Mary"s room was about?
Thanks David for your kind comments.Hopefully my various expeditions to Whitechapel have helped
concentrate my mind on these areas you mention.
But quite a few people on these boards know Whitechapel pretty well-yourself included probably!
Best Wishes
Natalie |
CB
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 22, 2005 - 12:28 pm: |
|
Hi cd,
Good question! When did the family begin to suspect Druitt? Macnaughten wrote, "I am inclined to believe that the idividual who had held up London in terror resided with his own people; that he absented himself from home at certain times" This may indicate that Druitt's family suspected him before he commited suicide, and that they took notice of his activities the nights of the murders.
I read that James Monro had a private secretary that was married to a distant reletive of Druitt. Could this be the source of Macnaughtens private information? Monro and Macnaughten were good friends. Monro may have wanted to protect his private secretary and his wife, and that is why the information was kept secret.
What would it take for Druitt's family to believe that he was Jack the ripper? It would have to be something more then the hours that Druitt kept. It is posible that the family discoverd something among Druitt's possesions that convinced them that he was Jack. I have given some thought to the idea that Druitt may have been seeing a doctor for mental illness. Mental illness ran in the family. After Druitts death his file may have been given to the family. Douglas Brown claimed to have seen a statement that Macnaughten had connected the ripper to the leader of an assasination plot of Mr. Balfour. If Macnaughten claimed to have connected the ripper to the leader of the plot, then you would assume that he connected Druitt. What could Druitts connection to Balfour be? The Tuke family? Dr. Tuke did die around the time the ripper murders started. The death of his doctor could have been his trigger.
What ever information Macnaughten recieved, he either did not share the information with Anderson, Swanson, Littlechild or Abberline or the information was not conclusive. They did not find a confession. They did not find the knife. They did not find any organs in glass jars. The family must not have been able to confirm that Druitt was the ripper. The evidence must have been based on pure speculation.
Your friend, Brad |
c.d.
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Friday, June 24, 2005 - 9:38 am: |
|
Brad,
Hi. If Druitt's family really did have evidence that he was the Ripper, certainly an option would have been to go to the police and arrange for him to be quietly put in an asylum. This would take a brutal killer off the streets and protect their family name. If they kept their suspicions to themselves and allowed the murders to continue, they would have to weigh the possibilty that he would be caught and that the resulting scandal would ruin their standing in society.
c.d. |
|
Use of these
message boards implies agreement and consent to our Terms of Use.
The views expressed here in no way reflect the views of the owners and
operators of Casebook: Jack the Ripper.
Our old message board content (45,000+ messages) is no longer available online, but a complete archive
is available on the Casebook At Home Edition, for 19.99 (US) plus shipping.
The "At Home" Edition works just like the real web site, but with absolutely no advertisements.
You can browse it anywhere - in the car, on the plane, on your front porch - without ever needing to hook up to
an internet connection. Click here to buy the Casebook At Home Edition.
|
|
|
|
