|
 |
 |
|
|
|
** This is an archived, static copy of the Casebook messages boards dating from 1998 to 2003. These threads cannot be replied to here. If you want to participate in our current forums please go to https://forum.casebook.org **
Archive through January 5, 2000
Casebook Message Boards: Ripper Suspects: Specific Suspects:
Contemporary Suspects [ 1888 - 1910 ]:
Druitt, Montague John:
Archive through January 5, 2000
Author: Bob_C
Friday, 26 November 1999 - 03:34 am |        | Hi all,
Thanks for the greetings from the US of A, cheers, and I like turkeys too, especially without feathers, stuffed, roasted brown and crispy, and washed down with a bottle or five of Maquis D'Augonne 1989.
Poor old Monty. Not only bumping himself off because he broke some silly school rule and felt so self-concious about it, but getting blamed for being Jack as well. If he'd have known that, he'd have bumped himself off twice.
Sorry, but Monty is a really poor suspect IMHO, with the only reason for suspicion being that he jumped in the Thames some weeks after Kelly was killed. He is otherwise not recorded as showing any sign of anything Jack-like in a very public and eliteaer life (Cricket, School, Barrister, Treasurer of Elite Cricket Club) although such must have noticed were it to be applicable.
The assumption that Jack would have committed suicide is simply not supported by track records of such SKs. It was simply a desperate grasping at straws by McNaughton even though Monty's name was not even heard of in JTR-circles until after he was dead and couldn't defend himself.
I don't know if Monty then spoke in native Dorset accent (I wasn't born, but grew up, in mid-Dorset and can still parrot the brogue perfectly), probably not, but I know what he would have said if he did:
OOOHAAAR..OI LAUS DEY DO BE A'LOOKIN FOR HOO DONE DE MAYD TO'DEFF. YERR, WASSON! TWERNT MEE!
Poor old sod.
Best regards,
Bob |
Author: Emma Kelly
Friday, 24 December 1999 - 05:04 pm | | G'day all,
Have to agree, Monty is a right poor suspect. Did anyone ever take into account that the day Annie Chapman was killed that he was playing cricket in Blackheath? It doesn't quite add up. Personally I'd plump for George Chapman, supposed "character deficiencies" notwithstanding. Cheers and Happy Christmas!
Emma |
Author: Melanie Johnson
Sunday, 02 January 2000 - 11:37 am | | | Got to agree with you, Emma. And Bob, you as well. I live in the Blackheath area, and there are still some older people that have royal rows about Monty. I personally don't believe he was Jack, and I agree that the only reason he was included was that he died so suddenly after Kelly's murder. Oh, well. =) |
Author: Ashling
Sunday, 02 January 2000 - 06:46 pm | | Hi all.
MELANIE & EMMA K: How many miles is Blackheath from London? Was Blackheath near a train station that ran to London in 1888? I live in the USA & will be grateful for any clarity y'all can give.
Thanks,
Janice |
Author: Jon
Sunday, 02 January 2000 - 08:46 pm | | Can anyone think of any reasonable explanation why Druitt was found in the Thames?, considering:
He was schooled at Winchester College & Oxford, and was known as a good all-rounder, so Druitt was taught to swim & was a good swimmer.
How often will a good swimmer choose suicide by drowning?
Why would anyone choose to put several rocks in his coat pocket?....are we supposed to believe it is just incase he changes his mind, the rocks will keep a struggling swimmer on the bottom?
Wouldnt he simply slip off the coat and rise to the surface?.....fat lot of good the rocks were then....if you recall he was found floating in the Thames, the waterman Winslade brought the body ashore in his boat, so the rocks obviously were not that heavy, right?.
And why buy a return ticket to Hammersmith, then use half of it, and then go jump in the Thames?
No, I never have thought Druitt was the Ripper, but I think the whole suicide tale just reaks of foul play.
Regards, Jon |
Author: Bob_C
Monday, 03 January 2000 - 07:55 am | | Hi Jon,
You touch a whole row of points that have always bothered me with Druitt. As you, I don't think he was Jack, but as the all-rounder he was, and an avid sportsman at that, we may indeed assume he could swim.
The only reason I accept that he may have committed suicide instead of 'being suicided' is the fact that he knew, or at least thought, he was going mad and may have reacted in panic. If he incapacitated himself in some way before jumping or not is not to prove, but his 'suicide' does seem to be a bit questionable, as you say.
Best regards,
Bob |
Author: A.M.P.
Monday, 03 January 2000 - 08:17 am | | Blackheath is a suberb of south east London, once part of the county of Kent. By 1888 it was already well built up, that whole part of south London having expanded rapidly with the coming of the railways in the mid-nineteenth century.
Blackheath enjoyed excellent rail links to the London terminii after the South Eastern Railway company opened the line from London Bridge to Gravesend in 1849. London Bridge Station was no more than five miles from Blackheath. From 1864 an easy interchange also existed to Charing Cross.
Hope this helps. |
Author: Peter R.A. Birchwood
Monday, 03 January 2000 - 10:34 am | | Janice and Adrian:
Blackheath really is pretty close to the East End but although there's been some information given in the past about how Druitt could have taken the train from Blackheath Station into Charing Cross, London Bridge or Cannon Street, I can't remember anyone noticing that he could have gone to New Cross (about 3 miles further) and taken the Underground Railway directly to Whitechapel, a matter of 5 stops. This connection was operating from at least 1884 and did, I believe, run early morning/late night services for the convenience of market traders.
By the way, I suffered no Y2K problems with this computer but our other, older machine reset itself to 4th January 1980!
Peter. |
Author: Jon
Monday, 03 January 2000 - 12:20 pm | | Bob C.
We have no other reason to believe Druitt thought he was going insane beyond that suspicious note found by his brother William.
William Druitt was a solicitor in Bournmouth and it was he who discovered the suicide note in Montague's chambers at 9 Kings Bench Walk.
It was brother William who declared at the inquest that Montague had no other relatives.
Macnaghten in his notes declared "..From private information I have little doubt but that his own family suspected this man of being the Whitechapel murderer; it was alleged that he was sexually insane...."
What family ? only brother William ? not the mother surely, as she was in an asylum already.
Brother William spoke of Montague as being Jack ?
brother William alleged Montague as being sexually insane ?
brother William found the suicide note ?
.....then it must have also been brother William who verified that the suicide note was in his brothers hand ?
I think brother William may have had a bigger role to play in this, than has been assumed.
Just airing a few thoughts, Jon |
Author: A.M.P.
Monday, 03 January 2000 - 03:20 pm | | Good spot, Peter.
The line you are talking about ran under the Thames through London's first sub-aqueous passenger tunnel, bored from Wapping to Rotherhithe between 1825-42 by the Brunels and opening from 1843 as a foot tunnel. It was sold to the East London Railway Company in the early 1860s, opening as a steam railway from 1869. The 1884 date you mention is when it was linked at Whitechapel to the main Underground network. Therefore the alternative route you propose from Blackheath to Whitechapel did exist, via the interchange at New Cross, (which is only a couple of miles from Blackheath). In fact, not only was there the option of the South Eastern Railway, but from 1870 onwards horse trams ran between New Cross and Blackheath Hill too.
Could the early morning and late evening trains you refer to have been operated under the 1864 Cheap Trains Act? I have not been able to find out whether the Act was ever applied to trains on the Blackheath to London Bridge route or on the East London line. If it did, under the Act's original terms the return trains would not have been late night services. Of course, the appropriate companies could have scheduled early and late trains independently of the Act if a demand existed for those services. Best Wishes. |
Author: dean
Monday, 03 January 2000 - 06:19 pm | | | What is the JM on the wall of Mary Kelly's room ,as no one seems to except new evidence.Why not James Maybrick? |
Author: DD
Monday, 03 January 2000 - 06:31 pm | | Dean, first off it's 'FM' not 'JM' which the diary authors claim indicates Florie Maybrick, his wife. Secondly the 'FM' is nothing more than blood splatters or cracks in the partition. It was NOT 'written'. The Diary is a complete waste of time. Forget it.
Regards DD |
Author: Bob_C
Tuesday, 04 January 2000 - 05:52 am | | Hi Jon,
That is sufficient. He is claimed to have written (more or less) '..since friday I feel I am going to be like mother and the best thing for me to do is die' Now, this could have been misinterpreted, misunderstood, mis-reported or a damn outright lie. It is true that his mother became mentally ill, and that could well have preyed on his mind, however, if the above repoprt be true or not.
The fact is that he was found dead, with stones in his pockets, money on him (no robbery motive), no signs of external violence (at least as far as the condition of the body allowed) and a ticket that seemed to indicate a curious route. I ask the board, if you are contemplating suicide, would you maybe not ride around a bit first? In this situation I would not expect anyone to behave rationally, let alone take the underground to the river instead of the train because it's quicker.
Dean, DD is almost certainly correct, the diary is so full of errors and false assumptions that I feel we can direct it to the fiction shelves.
Best regards
Bob |
Author: Angela Robertson
Tuesday, 04 January 2000 - 11:09 am | | Bob~
I totally concur with your reasoning with regard to Monty's mental state. This is of course conjecture but I seriously doubt that he'd be anything but utterly single-minded. I've never been in that sort of predicament, but if I was going to commit suicide I'd go do the Dutch right off, before I had time to think about it. Riding about like that might indicate that Monty was having second thoughts. Would a madman have time to reason it out? I just think that the only reason Monty is a suspect is because of Macnaghten's memoranda. The facts simply do not add up here.
Regards from Edinburgh,
Angie |
Author: Bob_C
Tuesday, 04 January 2000 - 12:39 pm | | Hi Angie,
Maybe you're right that he would go right ahead, assuming he could at least think clearly. Could he though? He may well have had second thoughts, however, or simply didn't know/think about the underground. We can assume that if he was intending to bump himself off, and was not a total raving madman by then, he probably wasn't worrying about the odd mile or two to the site anyway, having other things on his mind.
I fully agree, as do many others, about Monty being suspect at all due to Macnaughten's (in)famous accusation. Curios is, however, the point that Druitt being a great all-round sportsman and therefore very likely a very strong swimmer, he would chose drowning as his method of exit! Or did he incapaitate himself somehow, or is it a false assumption that he could swim (well)?
Many greetings to the lovely city of Edinburgh and to you,
best regards,
Bob
from a pokey little north German harbour town with lots of water, traffic lights and pubs but bloody awful weather 80% of the time. |
Author: Jon
Tuesday, 04 January 2000 - 10:56 pm | | I believe the original quote that has come down to us regarding the contents of Druitt's alleged suicide note came from the Acton & Chiswick Gazette. The actual quote is a reading by the Coroner, and he preceded the quote with "..which was to the effect: 'Since Friday I felt I was going to be like mother, and the best thing for me was to die". The Coroner was likely summerizing the note though it perhaps was also a direct quote.
The note was said to be addressed to brother William in this report.
The report that William found the note where his brother 'resides' is annoyingly unclear as to whether he is refering to 9 Eliott Place, Blackheath or 9 Kings Bench Walk, however he was not known to 'reside' at his chambers in the City.
How usual is it, when writing on a Saturday, to refer to yesterday as Friday? or put another way...if the note was wrote on Sunday or Monday then "Since Friday.." makes more sense. But if it was wrote on Saturday then "Since Friday.." sounds a little strange.
The second half return ticket to Hammersmith was dated December 1st (Saturday), he bought a return ticket expecting to be coming back, he took cheques & money with him, which might suggest he was going to meet someone. But Druitt ends up in the Thames somehow.
I think Howells & Skinner make an interesting case that Druitt may have been 'set up' by his own kind.
So if we rely on the date of the return ticket then Saturday must have been his last day alive, therefore Saturday was the day the note was allegedly wrote, allways assuming its genuine, of course.
As Hammersmith & Chiswick are in the same general area then we assume that this is where he went into the Thames, possibly held submerged on the bottom by something that eventually shifted, freeing the corpse to float towards Thornycroft, three weeks later.
Its another disappointment that an autopsy report does not exist, I wonder if they would have viewed water in the lungs or absence of it, as a clue to whether the victim drowned or not, in those days.
The Ripper Legacy, by Howells & Skinner does put an interesting slant on the Druitt theory.
Regards, Jon |
Author: Ashling
Wednesday, 05 January 2000 - 04:10 am | | A.M.P. & PETER: Thanks! The train info helps tremendously ... The way some folks speak of the impossibility of a Dru-itt Dun-it solution, I was beginning to think Blackheath was located on the far side of the moon.
JON: Keeping digging, you're turning up some interesting dirt.
Janice |
Author: Bob_C
Wednesday, 05 January 2000 - 04:28 am | | Hi Jon,
Who do you mean by 'his own kind'? Druitt was a very respected member of the Victorian community, a well-known sportsman besides being a sucessful barrister and until last, a schoolmaster who was respected by his peers. That is a record I would very much like to have.
Of course there are theories that point all sorts of fingers at him, but with the same sort of evidence that would, IMHO, convict Sooty. (What's that little blighter been up to lately?) There is, to be blunt, not the slightest breath of evidence anywhere at all that could even suggest he were Jack, and that is a pretty damning poke at MacNaughten.
About the cause of death, there I would also be a bit more cautious. Suicide does seem to be the likely method of exitus, but as we have agree earlier, there are some aspects that invite question. His letter (if he wrote 'feel' or 'felt' may be of academic interest) did indicate suicidal thoughts, and the bit about buying a return ticket means nothing. Even assuming he was thinking rationally, which may not under the circumstances be true, he may not necessarily have intended to bump himself off where he did, or even have been thinking about it.
To illustrate, a very tragic case occurred at a company where I was employed. A mate of mine was working with me together. We had talked about this and that, and agreed to meet, as we often did, that evening in the pub for darts. Being a bit broke, he borrowed a little money for the evening and to get cigarettes, which he then purchased, offering me one. (We borrowed money/fags from each other as needed without thought)
Ten minutes later, he excused himself to the toilet. I was busy, and thought no more of him. That evening, he didn't turn up as expected. Next morning, we heard he'd been found hanged by his belt in one of the toilets . No note, nothing. Careful forensic investigation showed that he had most certainly committed suicide. To this day, nobody knows why.
Best regards
Bob |
Author: Angela Robertson
Wednesday, 05 January 2000 - 11:29 am | | That's awful, Bob, about your mate. But, and I mean no disrespect here, it does illustrate that not every suicide may be premeditated, or go about finishing everything first.
But as for Monty himself, I do think that things still don't add up there. Why the stones in Monty's pocket? There isn't much reason for that unless he thought by adding weight he'd die faster in the Thames. It's a little fishy, but that explanation could suffice. Just food for thought,
Angie |
Author: Jon
Wednesday, 05 January 2000 - 07:17 pm | | Bob
'His own kind' was in reference to the 'clique' the 'old school tie' the 'chums' the 'Oxbridge friends' and last but not least (Shhh, because this is a secret) The Apostles.
:-)
To make a long story short....Druitt, as shown by Howells & Skinner, may very well have been visiting a 'friends' house on that fatefull Saturday.
One of the 'Apostles' was Henry (Harry) Wilson who had a 'chummery' in his house, called The Osiers, in Chiswick Mall.
Chiswick Mall was at the riverside, adjacent to Thornycroft Wharf.
Ashling
Yes, I am interested in getting as much background info on Druitt as I can, I think there's a good case for Druitt being a victim himself. I dont believe Druitt was Jack, but I do believe Macnaghten had been fed a line by someone, and thats the sole reason he is on the present day suspect list. And that 'someone' was in a position to manipulate evidence.
Regards, Jon |
|
|
|
|
