|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
John Ruffels
Police Constable
Username: Johnr
Post Number: 9
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, April 03, 2003 - 5:46 am: | 
|
Sir Melville Macnaghten said about his suspect for "Jack The Ripper", "if my conclusions are correct the proof of this at one time lay at the bottom of the Thames"....
What exactly did he mean? Did he think The Ripper's knife had been thrown into the river?
Was he talking about Montague Druitt's body?
If so, what proof did the late Montague have about his person?
Anyone?...... |
Jeffrey Bloomfied
Sergeant
Username: Mayerling
Post Number: 13
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, April 04, 2003 - 9:11 pm: |
|
My guess is that he referred to the dead body
of Montague Druitt. It certainly did lie at the
bottom of the Thames, according to Sir Melville's
information. If there was any proof like a knife
or similar item at the bottom of the Thames,
then it has never surfaced (please excuse the
pun - it was unintentional).
The other items on Monty's body don't seem very
promising - the rocks and the money. What do they
connect to Whitechapel.
Jeff |
Andy Spallek
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 23, 2003 - 5:44 pm: |
|
There is a pecularity in MacNaughten's comment that the truth "did indeed" lie at the bottom of the Thames. It is the word "indeed" that bothers me. My conjecture is that Sir M is alluding to what might have been a popular quip around SY in the months and years immediately following the murders, a sort of stock reply in order to end the conversation. It may be that this stock answer that one received to an enquiry about the killer's identity is that "the truth lies at the bottom of the Thames" -- meaning, "talk no more about it, the case is unsolvable."
Sir M may be saying that there was more truth to this quip than generally imagined.
Andy
|
Chris Scott
Detective Sergeant
Username: Chris
Post Number: 67
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, April 27, 2003 - 8:24 pm: |
|
I have found this statement by MacNaughten made in 1913 and thought it might be of interest:
Coshocton Tribune (Ohio) 3 June 1913
JACK THE RIPPER RECALLED
Scotland Yard Sleuth Says Noted Murderer Ended Own Life in 1888
London, June 2.
Sir Melville MacNaughton (sic) chief of the criminal investigation department of Scotland Yard, who recently retired, reveals the fact that the mysterious murderer, "Jack the Ripper," who killed seven women on the East End, London, in 1888, and whose end remained a mystery until now, committed suicide in November of that year.
"I have a very clear idea who he was and how he committed suicide," said MacNaughton, "but that and other secrets will never be revealed by me."
He adds that no record exists of the secret information he possessed during his connection with the service and he says he will not write any reminiscences
|
Brian W. Schoeneman
Detective Sergeant
Username: Deltaxi65
Post Number: 144
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, April 27, 2003 - 9:23 pm: |
|
Chris,
Looks like Sir Melville wasn't exactly truthful - unless he doesn't consider "Days of My Years" to be "reminiscences". And they were published in 1914. Only took a year to write them, I suppose.
And it sounds like he's talking about Druitt again.
B |
Chris Scott
Detective Sergeant
Username: Chris
Post Number: 68
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Monday, April 28, 2003 - 7:36 am: |
|
Hi Brian
I agree - if his book do not count as reminiscences I don't know what would! And I certainly think his comments can only be interpreted as applying to Druitt. Interesting that he referred to the "secret information" which I presume is the same source as his "private info" he alludes to in his memorandum in the police files.
Also interesting that he got the month wrong, saying that his suspect committed suicide in November 1888. Only a small point but reinforces the widely held view that MacNaughten relied on his memory rather than checking facts.
Chris S |
Christopher T George
Inspector
Username: Chrisg
Post Number: 162
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, May 30, 2003 - 9:10 am: |
|
Hi, everyone:
Whether or not Major Arthur Griffiths actually saw a Home Office report about Druitt or not, the question is what that report was about. On this matter, Abberline affords a clue when he was quoted in the Pall Mall Gazette as saying that the body was found in the Thames and a report "was made to the Home Office." In other words, a report was made to the Home Office AT THE TIME OF THE DISCOVERY OF DRUITT’S BODY.
However, Macnaghten is explicit in his statement that certain facts which pointed to the conclusion that Druitt was the Ripper were not in the possession of the police until "some years after" Macnaghten joined the force in 1889. Paul Begg suggests in Jack the Ripper: The Definitive History that it is highly likely that the Home Office report dealt with the suicide of Druitt – and Abberline is quite definite in saying that nothing connected Druitt to the crimes except his suicide at the end of 1888 – and had nothing to do with the information referred to by Macnaghten that reached the police some years after 1889.
It is possible that a fruitful avenue for research might therefore be to examine the Home Office records pertaining to Thames suicides, assuming such records still exist, and there the report on Druitt's death may even now still be languishing.
Best regards
Chris George
|
Jennifer D. Pegg
Sergeant
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 39
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, May 30, 2003 - 2:27 pm: |
|
i thought you could search procat omnline i guess the criteria would be too wide though
jp |
John Ruffels
Detective Sergeant
Username: Johnr
Post Number: 58
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, May 31, 2003 - 7:42 pm: |
|
So, "What did Sir Mellville Mean?".
From the amazing Chris Scott "Finding Machine" we are delivered up the voice of Sir Melville on June3 1913, by courtesy of the illustrious COSHCOCTON TRIBUNE (Ohio).
Therein he says: "I have a very clear idea who he was and how he committed suicide', said Macnaghten, " but that and other secrets will never be revealed by me...".He adds that no record exists of the secret information he possessed during his connection with the service, and says he will not write any reminiscences.
Now. Other than boosting his own importance as the "Omniscient One", Macnaghten, seems to be confirming Abberline's contention that the Druitt evidence was just the Home Office Post Mortem report.
But then he says that during his years in the service "secret information" came into his hands which sealed beyond doubt, the fact that MJD was JTR.That no record now exists.
So perhaps, he is saying, there is written evidence of Monty's identity and his suicide, but
the "clincher" evidence is by word of mouth and that Scotland Yard will not commit it to paper.
(Sounds like he was drumming up interest from publishers to me!).
One further point about the Post Mortem records for Montague Druitt's death.Dr Diplock who was in charge of Coronial Inquiries for the Chiswick area,operated out of "Lock Hospital".Does this establishment still exist? Are its records from 1888 still extant?
Sir Francis Camps once claimed it was normal to file the Post Mortem papers at the hospital to which the body was taken.(Hence the exciting discovery of the Eddowes papers and Kelly photograph from the files in the basement of London Hospital).
Finally, Dr Diplock's middle name was "Bramah",a bit unusual.I notice in a later Medical list another Diplock with the same middle name.Does his family today still possess Dr Diplock's papers? |
Jeffrey Bloomfied
Detective Sergeant
Username: Mayerling
Post Number: 57
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, June 01, 2003 - 1:06 pm: |
|
Hi John,
First, although a downer point I can speak of it
from my recent experiences at work. I learned that in New York State hospitals are not required
by law to keep medical records longer than seven
years. So when I inquired about a 1994 medical
record in 2003, I was told "No can do". Of course this is a law for New York State, not
England, so it may not apply to hospitals in the
Chiswick area. But then, England has had two wars
since 1888 where they suffered aerial attacks. In
the second blitz damage was really extensive. It
really is amazing that the Eddowes and Kelly
material survived.
As for "Bramah", that is the middle name of the
author of the "Max Carrados" mystery stories, who
published as Ernst Bramah. I can't recall his
last name.
Best wishes,
Jeff |
Wolf Vanderlinden
Sergeant
Username: Wolf
Post Number: 23
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, June 01, 2003 - 3:47 pm: |
|
Ernst Bramah Smith
Wolf. |
JeffHamm
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Friday, June 13, 2003 - 2:25 am: |
|
Althought Macnaghten "liked Druitt" as the best suspect, he lists his 3 as being more likely suspects than Cutbush. This shows that he couldn't be sure of which, if any, of them were in fact Jack. He may have ranked these three in terms of whom he felt most likely, something one would in fact expect him to do. With that in mind, I always interpreted his "truth at the bottom of the Thames" as further indication that he felt Druitt was the only person who could truly have provided him with the answer and confirm or disconfirm his suspicions.
For whatever reason, he seems to have felt Druit a very probable suspect, but he seems to have had enough doubts to list two other suspects. These doubts may have been due to the lack of any real tangible evidence, and it was just his suicide corresponding to just after the last accepted Ripper murder that fostered his belief. Presumably there were also some "private correspondance", but these may just have been groudless rumours that also stemmed from Druitt's suicide, his dismissal from teaching, and his families history of mental problems. Tantalising, but not definative, and not even strong enough to make a good solid circumstantial case. Just enough to tease the imagination.
- Jeff |
Slithas
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Thursday, November 03, 2005 - 5:18 pm: |
|
One thing I don't understand is why almost all the suspects of being Jack disappeared in less than a fortnight of the last . Is this just coincidence? |
|
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.
|
|
|
|
