Proof of Innocence?

[Gary Barnett]

I have learned one thing, at least. It cost half-a-crown if you wanted your club's full score in the Blandford Weekly News.

And in the Western Gazette.

[Michael Banks]

Mr Bankes - the speculation that Montague was gsy is backed up with evidence. Your denial of it is worthless.

The band went to the Rec every Thurdsay until August when the practice ended as peoe began dancing. Thereafter the local Army Volunteers went there. The evidence is this happen at 7pm.

And Mr Maessen
If I get any useful responses from Dorset Archives, the British Library, Blandford Museum.or Blandford Cricket Club on this topic I shall endeavour to make sure you are not troubled with it.

Mr Stow - speculation, no more. That might be good enough for you of course.

[Edward Stow]

I see cottaging was catered for at the Blandford expo. What more evidence does anyone require that Montague stayed local?

Blandford seems a very expensive town - two shillings to attend and half a crown to advertise each cricket score?

[Christer Holmgren]

Hi Christer,

I believe I remember you identifying yourself as a former sports journalist.

I don't know enough about cricket to speak intelligently about the sport, but in baseball there are instances where a batter isn't primarily concerned with hitting a home run.

It is great when it happens, but it might be in the team's best interest to play it safe with a bunt or even to take a pitch that might result in a pop up, thus allowing the runner to advance.

You're swinging for the whole salami. You're arguing whether or not MJ Druitt was the murderer. You want to hit the ball over the fence and end the game.

That's not my immediate concern. I'm happy with a more limited result.

I'm testing the hypotheses that several people on this thread have already advanced: that Macnaghten was incompetent and/or a serial liar.

If Druitt stayed in Dorset on August 31st and we can prove it, then I will have made some progress in answering that question.

If not, the hypothesis is still an open question.

Thus, for my limited purposes, Druitt's alleged sexuality, etc., is of no immediate concern to me.

Have a good night.

You misremember things, I’ m afraid, I was never a sports journalist. I mainly wrote feature.

And no, I am not trying to end the game for Druitt. I am recognizing that a bad case has grown much worse. You will see that if you check out my posts in detail.

[Christer Holmgren]

Why say that? I’m not ‘forbidding’ Fish. I’m agreeing that on the face of it he appeared to have had a very normal life. But that’s all that left to us on his childhood. The surface. And sadly we’re all too aware that things can go unreported. I’m not for a moment suggesting that this was the case but in the absence of any real childhood info were in the dark on this aspect of his life. So absolutely, there’s nothing that we can point to with evidence which suggests childhood trauma or deprivation. Indeed he had a privileged upbringing.

I realise that some think that I’m ‘defending’ Druitt as a suspect but there’s nothing I can do about that, but all that I’m actually trying to do is to add the other side of the story when some are just making assumptions.

Druitt excelled in school, he was very active in various school clubs and involved in sports to a very high degree. He was popular with his fellow pupils. It is a picture that is 100 per cent contrary to that of deprived/bullied/unhappy boys, and therefore it is perfectly in order to say that he seems not to have shared the background of a troublesome background with beatings and psychological abuse that is very common with serial killers. He therefore seems to be an exception to the rule in this case too if he was the Ripper.
It is all extremely basic and a very fair thing to argue, but you nevertheless won’ t have it. You speak of ”the other side of the story”, but we have absolutely no signs of any such side being present in his formative years.

Ant that fact leads to what? It leads to YOU saying that I am the one speculating…!

[Jay Hartley]

Druitt excelled in school, he was very active in various school clubs and involved in sports to a very high degree. He was popular with his fellow pupils. It is a picture that is 100 per cent contrary to that of deprived/bullied/unhappy boys, and therefore it is perfectly in order to say that he seems not to have shared the background of a troublesome background with beatings and psychological abuse that is very common with serial killers. He therefore seems to be an exception to the rule in this case too if he was the Ripper.
It is all extremely basic and a very fair thing to argue, but you nevertheless won’ t have it. You speak of ”the other side of the story”, but we have absolutely no signs of any such side being present in his formative years.

Ant that fact leads to what? It leads to YOU saying that I am the one speculating…!

Just to flag a little irk of mine. It has been recorded by many serial killers who have been subsequently interviewed after capture that, indeed, much express childhood trauma such as abuse or neglect. However, serial killers are usually narcissistic psychopaths, which means they want your pity if they can't have your adulation. it's an emotion they feed off in the hope it can be used to manipulate for their own gain.

There are some good studies around this. We need to consider that the record given to us by the killers themselves may be tainted somewhat. Thomas McArthur, the Canadian serial killer, had no childhood issues and did not commit his first murder until his fifties.

The so-called exceptional may not be all that exceptional.

[Christer Holmgren]

Just to flag a little irk of mine. It has been recorded by many serial killers who have been subsequently interviewed after capture that, indeed, much express childhood trauma such as abuse or neglect. However, serial killers are usually narcissistic psychopaths, which means they want your pity if they can't have your adulation. it's an emotion they feed off in the hope it can be used to manipulate for their own gain.

There are some good studies around this. We need to consider that the record given to us by the killers themselves may be tainted somewhat. Thomas McArthur, the Canadian serial killer, had no childhood issues and did not commit his first murder until his fifties.

The so-called exceptional may not be all that exceptional.

It is not a suggestion that many serial killers had troubled backgrounds with much abuse, both physical and psychological. It is a well established fact. It may well be that some serial killers have tried to take advantage of the fact, once they learned that they could get advantages by claiming a bad childhood, but that will be a secondary effect of a primary fact if you ask me. And basically, I don´t think that serial killers as a rule have brilliant and loving childhoods but claim that thy were abused when caught. It will perhaps more be along the lines of exagerrating the abuse in order to gain sympathy.

The kind of childhood that Montague Druitt had, as far as we know, is not a childhood that is in any way likely to produce a serial killer, it is the complete reverse. Let me quote from Wikipedia:

"Montague Druitt was born in Wimborne Minster, Dorset, England. He was the second son and third child of prominent local surgeon William Druitt, and his wife Ann (née Harvey). William Druitt was a justice of the peace, a governor of the local grammar school, and a regular worshipper at the local Anglican church, the Minster. Six weeks after his birth, Montague Druitt was christened at the Minster by his maternal great-uncle, Reverend William Mayo. The Druitts lived at Westfield House, which was the largest house in the town, and set in its own grounds with stables and servants' cottages. Druitt had six brothers and sisters, including an elder brother William who entered the law, and a younger brother Edward who joined the Royal Engineers.
Druitt was educated at Winchester College, where he won a scholarship at the age of 13, and excelled at sports, especially cricket and fives. He was active in the school's debating society, an interest that might have spawned his desire to become a barrister. In debates, he spoke in favour of French republicanism, compulsory military service, and the resignation of Benjamin Disraeli, and against the Ottoman Empire, the influence of Otto von Bismarck, and the conduct of the government in the Tichborne case. He defended William Wordsworth as "a bulwark of Protestantism", and condemned the execution of King Charles I as "a most dastardly murder that will always attach to England's fair name as a blot". In a light-hearted debate, he spoke against the proposition that bondage to fashion is a social evil.
In his final year at Winchester, 1875–76, Druitt was Prefect of Chapel, treasurer of the debating society, school fives champion, and opening bowler for the cricket team. In June 1876, he played cricket for the school team against Eton College, which won the match with a team including cricketing luminaries Ivo Bligh and Kynaston Studd, as well as a future Principal Private Secretary at the Home Office Evelyn Ruggles-Brise. Druitt bowled out Studd for four. With a glowing academic record, he was awarded a Winchester Scholarship to New College, Oxford.
At New College, Druitt was popular with his peers and was elected Steward of the Junior Common Room. He played cricket and rugby for the college team, and was the winner of both double and single fives at the university in 1877. In a seniors' cricket match in 1880, he bowled out William Patterson, who later captained Kent County Cricket Club.
Druitt gained a second class in Classical Moderations in 1878 and graduated with a third class Bachelor of Arts degree in Literae Humaniores (Classics) in 1880 His youngest brother, Arthur, entered New College in 1882, just as Druitt was following in his eldest brother William's footsteps by embarking on a career in law."

What is of interest here is not that Druitt was given lots of opportunities on account of his familys wealth - it is that he responded to the opportunities he was given and thrived. It paints a picture of a boy who very much embraced the norms of the society he was born into and who was much appreciated for it.

The killer you mention, Bruce McArthur, is described like this in an article about a documentary on his story:

"Serial homicide expert Jooyoung Lee...explores how McArthur fits the profile of many serial killers; skilled at deception, opportunists who enjoy having control while preying on marginalized victims. He also speaks about the systemic racism that led to lack of police followup when men of colour started going missing in the Village.
He hopes the documentary will bring a deeper understanding “of the many factors that went into creating Bruce McArthur and abetting his crimes.”
Lee details the repressed shame McArthur would have felt given his upbringing, along with anger and resentment he would have felt toward himself, his family and the gay community by being attracted to men.
The documentary points to a tipping point after McArthur, who previously lived as a straight man with a wife and children, was outed to his family by a male lover."

So what we seem to have here is a killer who was brought up feeling repressed about his sexual orientation, responding to it by allowing himself to be led into a heterosexual marriage, resulting in him turning into a pressure cooker. It all smells very much of self-resentment.
Psychological repression, therefore, meaning that it seems that his problems surfaced together with his sexuality. There is nothing strange about how he could have had a perfectly normal childhood up to that point. And of course, we can not point to somebody abusing him as such, it was more about collective societal norms delivering the abuse. Regardless, McArthur is not the norm when it comes to serial killers and childhood abuse. He is an exception.

However, to get a better picture, I suggest we read up on the hundreds of serial killers who have spoken of extremely abusive childhoods, many of the stories being corroborated and well documented. It is not an entirely simple matter, because there are many factors to weigh in, but basically, violence nurtures violence.

[Michael Banks]

Druitt excelled in school, he was very active in various school clubs and involved in sports to a very high degree. He was popular with his fellow pupils. It is a picture that is 100 per cent contrary to that of deprived/bullied/unhappy boys, and therefore it is perfectly in order to say that he seems not to have shared the background of a troublesome background with beatings and psychological abuse that is very common with serial killers. He therefore seems to be an exception to the rule in this case too if he was the Ripper.
It is all extremely basic and a very fair thing to argue, but you nevertheless won’ t have it. You speak of ”the other side of the story”, but we have absolutely no signs of any such side being present in his formative years.

Ant that fact leads to what? It leads to YOU saying that I am the one speculating…!

Are you saying that people with ‘issues’ can’t keep them hidden? Or that any perhaps ‘strange’ behaviour might remain unknown to us because they were never put on record (which is all that we have to go on) All that we know about him are achievement based. We have no records of school friends describing him or how he behaved or what experiences he had or even family members doing the same. Of course we have no evidence of any form of childhood trauma; it would be ridiculous to argue otherwise. All that I’m saying is that the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. And of course any known information that we have about killers come to us from interviews after they were caught so how many possible incidents might have been put down to strange behaviour by a kid who was ‘a bit weird’ without anyone considering them sinister? To be honest, any might disagree of course, but I’ve always been a little wary of accepting as true the words of men who kill and mutilate women.

[Christer Holmgren]

Are you saying that people with ‘issues’ can’t keep them hidden?

Very obviously not. Why would I? We all know that many people with many types of issues are good at hiding them. So it seems it is instead about you asking an unneccessary question and proposing things on my behalf that are untrue.

Or that any perhaps ‘strange’ behaviour might remain unknown to us because they were never put on record (which is all that we have to go on)

Same answer. Suggesting all sorts of outlandish claims on my behalf reflects on you, not me.

All that we know about him are achievement based.

Yes, indeed. And it is not half bad. It is a record involving many examples of how Druitt embraced the norms of society. He was given posts that confirmed that he was able and willing to be part of that society, and that is a very important thing.
What you need to do is to take a look at the serial killers that are likely to be of the same ilk as Jack the Ripper. Forget about the likes of Harold Shipman, who killed for money and did so by injecting people with lethal stuff, being a doctor, and focus instead on those who inflicted massive physical violence on their victims. How many of those have a background similar to that of Druitt? How many of them had glowing academic records, lined with lots and lots of assignments in school, being treasurers of debating clubs, being elected stewards of the junior common rooms, prefect of Chapel etcetera, etcetera, excelling in sport activities where they played leading roles - all of these things being examples of embracing the societal norms and challenges to the full? Who was like that of Arthur Shawcross, Ottis Toole, Michail Popkov, Daniel Barbosa, Yang Xinhai, Willy Pickton, Karl Denke, Fritz Haarmann, Mikhail Novosyolov, Will Bonin, William Suff, Randy Kraft, Peter Sutcliffe, Kenneth Bianchi, Bobby Joe Long...? To name but a few?

Montague Druitt showed great promise as a student. He looked very much like somebody who was not only willing to play a vital part in society, but also very able to do so. He is nothing like Ted Bundy, for example, who wanted to be a top class student and an important figure, but who did not have the stuff it takes to do so, having to settle for second class schools and failing to make any real impact. And resenting every little bit of it, since he was sure he was much better than the rest of us.

Can you find me a single example of a person who looked like an up and coming pillar of society, who was well loved by his fellow students and who was very active on all levels in the school work, only to then evolve into a violent sexual serial killer with tremendeous bodily harm on his agenda? Please do not skip over the question, for it is of vital importance.

We have no records of school friends describing him or how he behaved or what experiences he had or even family members doing the same.

We do have it on record that Druitt was a popular man. Similarly, impopular students do not get elected for all sorts of tasks in school, it is the ones who are well liked and trusted who get these positions.

Of course we have no evidence of any form of childhood trauma; it would be ridiculous to argue otherwise. All that I’m saying is that the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

There is no abscence of evidence here, apart from any evidence pointing to any discontentment at all in Druitts upbringing and school time. There is plentiful evidence of a very succesful student who was very content to take part in all sorts of matters involved with the school work, academically as well as physically and sportsman-wise. Which is the exact opposite of what we should expect from a physically violent serial killer, generally speaking.

[Gary Barnett]

Mr Bankes - the speculation that Montague was Gay is backed up with evidence. Your denial of it is worthless.

The band went to the Rec every Thurdsay until August when the practice ended as peoe began dancing. Thereafter the local Army Volunteers went there. The evidence is this happen at 7pm.

And Mr Maessen
If I get any useful responses from Dorset Archives, the British Library, Blandford Museum.or Blandford Cricket Club on this topic I shall endeavour to make sure you are not troubled with it.

Ed,

They way I read Jurriaan’s post, he was encouraging just the sort of research you are undertaking. Keep up the good work.

Gary

[Phil Kellingley]

I realise that some think that I’m ‘defending’ Druitt as a suspect but there’s nothing I can do about that, but all that I’m actually trying to do is to add the other side of the story when some are just making assumptions.

And in order to put 'the other side' for this particular event the main assumptions you have to make are:

1. That MacNaghten's memo is to be trusted (despite having multiple untruths which indicate that he actually had no idea who the killer was)
2. That Druitt would end a game of cricket in Dorset close to the family home where he was known to spend the summer.
3. That the game would have ended early rather than starting late (despite clear evidence presented in this thread that it was not uncommon for games to start in the mid-afternoon)
4. That Druitt, rather than go back to the family home, would go to London (for no reason that is known).
5. That Druitt would somehow have to have his cricket gear stored somewhere en route to be collected on his return
6. That Druitt would then commit a murder in a place that there is no evidence to support that he had any knowledge of, either in general or in particular.
7. That Druitt would then somehow have cleaned any blood from himself and/or his clothing, presumably without being seen.
8. That Druitt possibly would then have carried out some unknown business in London.
9. That Druitt would then returned either the same day or very early the following day to Dorset, having collected his cricket gear en route.
10. That Druitt then played cricket again at a different location.

The only facts in that list are items 2 and 10. All the rest is assumption/speculation.

Against those assumptions is a simple argument that he was staying (as has been evidenced) at the family home for the summer. He played cricket in a fairly near location on one day and returned to his home. He stayed there the following day. On the next day he played cricket again at a different but also fairly near location. The only assumption in that scenario is that he returned to and stayed at home.

I'm quite happy to state that I have never considered Druitt a viable suspect, that there is not a shred of evidence to consider him as a suspect and that the assumptions made in the argument of 'the other side' are fanciful speculation. I will go further and say that such speculation is not confined to this particular discussion on this thread but is also present in the writings of Howells and Skinner, David Anderson and Hainsworth & partner. Invention of possible scenarios to 'prove' Druitt guilty don't do anything except illustrate the desperation of those who believe MacNaghten's self-promoting writings about his suspect to be true and accurate because they simply are unable to produce a scrap of evidence to support them.

I'm sure that there will be howls of anguish from those 'putting the other side' but I'm equally sure that not one of them can produce anything against Druitt other than MacNaghten's erroneous ramblings.

[Gary Barnett]

And in order to put 'the other side' for this particular event the main assumptions you have to make are:

1. That MacNaghten's memo is to be trusted (despite having multiple untruths which indicate that he actually had no idea who the killer was)
2. That Druitt would end a game of cricket in Dorset close to the family home where he was known to spend the summer.
3. That the game would have ended early rather than starting late (despite clear evidence presented in this thread that it was not uncommon for games to start in the mid-afternoon)
4. That Druitt, rather than go back to the family home, would go to London (for no reason that is known).
5. That Druitt would somehow have to have his cricket gear stored somewhere en route to be collected on his return
6. That Druitt would then commit a murder in a place that there is no evidence to support that he had any knowledge of, either in general or in particular.
7. That Druitt would then somehow have cleaned any blood from himself and/or his clothing, presumably without being seen.
8. That Druitt possibly would then have carried out some unknown business in London.
9. That Druitt would then returned either the same day or very early the following day to Dorset, having collected his cricket gear en route.
10. That Druitt then played cricket again at a different location.

The only facts in that list are items 2 and 10. All the rest is assumption/speculation.

Against those assumptions is a simple argument that he was staying (as has been evidenced) at the family home for the summer. He played cricket in a fairly near location on one day and returned to his home. He stayed there the following day. On the next day he played cricket again at a different but also fairly near location. The only assumption in that scenario is that he returned to and stayed at home.

I'm quite happy to state that I have never considered Druitt a viable suspect, that there is not a shred of evidence to consider him as a suspect and that the assumptions made in the argument of 'the other side' are fanciful speculation. I will go further and say that such speculation is not confined to this particular discussion on this thread but is also present in the writings of Howells and Skinner, David Anderson and Hainsworth & partner. Invention of possible scenarios to 'prove' Druitt guilty don't do anything except illustrate the desperation of those who believe MacNaghten's self-promoting writings about his suspect to be true and accurate because they simply are unable to produce a scrap of evidence to support them.

I'm sure that there will be howls of anguish from those 'putting the other side' but I'm equally sure that not one of them can produce anything against Druitt other than MacNaghten's erroneous ramblings.

I’m with Jurriaan on this. It’s a pity that research threads are hijacked by theorists and naysayers.

[Chris Phillips]

I have learned one thing, at least. It cost half-a-crown if you wanted your club's full score in the Blandford Weekly News.

That's interesting. Fortunately, with almost no exceptions, the Blandford Club was evidently willing to pay for the full scores all kinds of matches to appear - not just the first eleven, but second eleven matches, junior matches, special selected teams, "Arabs" and so on.

[Gary Barnett]

That's interesting. Fortunately, with almost no exceptions, the Blandford Club was evidently willing to pay for the full scores all kinds of matches to appear - not just the first eleven, but second eleven matches, junior matches, special selected teams, "Arabs" and so on.

That add appeared in the Western Gazette, a Yeovil (Somerset) paper with a wide west country circulation.

I imagine the Blandford Weekly had a more local circulation and might have printed info on local matched gratis.

[Edward Stow]

Gary I'm fast coming to the conclusion that the British Library is the only place with any potentially useful records for this matter.