Proof of Innocence?

[R. J. Palmer]

R. J.,

Did you see the 1889 reference to MJD in ‘CRICKET’ I posted on Casebook? I suspect it referred to the previous season, but I’m not sure.

I agree the MJD in the football report is almost probably Melville.

Yes, the game was played Dulwich on 30 May 1888. MJD scored 43 runs that day--the same as listed in the article in Cricket in April 1889 (not 47 as I wrote earlier). Cricket was just giving a run-down on all the batters who scored runs the previous season. In 1888, Druitt played once for the Incogniti, and once against. More evidence that he's playing in London (or for London teams) in May/June/July, but down in the southwest in August. By September 8, he's back playing for Blackheath. This is his pattern throughout the 1880s, not just 1888.

[Gary Barnett]

I evidently threw another hand grenade into the room with my reference to an M.J. Druitt playing football for Christchurch in 1889, but there can really be no doubt that this was a one-off error.

It raises doubts...but only barely. There are so many references to M.J. Druitt playing cricket in Dorset in August during the 1880s (and even in his hometown of Wimborne Minster or for Bournemout where his brother lived) that we know it must be him. These games coincide perfectly with Druitt's summer break from the Blackheath School and all reference to him playing cricket in London suddenly stop in August. Thus, the inference is unavoidable. Monty is also referred to as M.J. Druitt at Winchester and Oxford in the 1870s, where we know he was enrolled.

But all these references dry up after 1888--with this one exception, and it is football and not cricket. The article in the Cricketeer reprinted by Gary over yonder is a reference to MJ Druitt playing for the Incognito team in Dulwich in May 1888--this is our drowned school master, still a happy man and scoring 47 runs.

The 1889 reference to "M.J. Druitt" playing football for Christchurch has to be Melvill (which is evidently how he spelled it). Throughout the 1890s he is very frequently referred to as 'M. Druitt'--but never again, that I can find, to M.J.

The doubt it raises is slight, but even a shadow of a doubt is some doubt. And this doubt is more irritating because an 'M. Druitt' played cricket at Blandford in 1885.

The printer's devil setting type at the Blandford News should have known better---the same paper reported M.J. Druitt's funeral the year before. His apparent carelessness left us with an irritating complication. A dried pea under the mattress, if I can use that metaphor, but I personally have no doubt it is Monty playing cricket down in Dorset over his summer breaks.

Ah I see you mention the 1889 CRICKET reference to MJD. As I posited, it referred to the previous season. He only scored 43 runs, btw, but he was probably happy with that.

A week or so before the Dulwich match he had played for Blackheath against the Incogniti.

[Caroline Brown]

A 41 year old doctor as opposed to a 31 year old barrister (son of a doctor) hardly constitutes disastrous misinformation.

-- Is Macnaghten deliberately trying to make it harder for his correspondent to check or identify who is being referred to? Switching elite professions and making the age wrong by a decade look to me like they might be conscious substitutions...

M.

What I don't understand is the point of Macnaghten deliberately disguising his suspect, by adding a decade to his age and giving him a different profession, if he is then going to identify him by his real name anyway. Couldn't he have written something to the effect that he knows the man's identity, but is withholding it because he took his own life after the 'last' murder, and no good could come of naming him now? Isn't that his excuse for destroying his 'private information' on Druitt? If that information wasn't essential for comparison purposes with Cutbush, why does he consider it essential to give Druitt's real identity, thinking that the wrong age and profession are going to fool anyone if it ever sees the light of day? Why could he not use a pseudonym, or something akin to Joe Bloggs, if his aim was to protect the Druitt family from the stigma?

Love,

Caz
X

[Gary Barnett]

Yes, the game was played Dulwich on 30 May 1888. MJD scored 43 runs that day--the same as listed in the article in Cricket in April 1889 (not 47 as I wrote earlier). Cricket was just giving a run-down on all the batters who scored runs the previous season. In 1888, Druitt played once for the Incogniti, and once against. More evidence that he's playing in London (or for London teams) in May/June/July, but down in the southwest in August. By September 8, he's back playing for Blackheath. This is his pattern throughout the 1880s, not just 1888.

Thanks, RJ, our posts semi to be a bit out of synch.

[Edward Stow]

Most Whitgift Cricket matches against other schools were played out on Wednesday afternoons...
which I can report as an Alumni. Even one listed and lauded as such.

[R. J. Palmer]

Ah. That wasn't the Blandford Weekly News? In that case forget what I said, because it was based on the reports in the Blandford Weekly News.

To return to this, I am convinced I made a filing error. Gary is correct--this notice appeared in the Western Gazette.

[R. J. Palmer]

For those interested in studying the minutia, D.J. Leighton, in his book on Druitt, writes that he played for Bournemouth against the Parsees on Friday/Saturday August 3 and 4th, 1888.

This is documented. The score card is available (ie., in the papers). MJD was down in Bournemoth that weekend.

Leighton then writes:

"A couple of days later he played for the Gentlemen of Dorset against the same opposition." (page 110)

This would be highly relevant, because we know what happened in George Yard in the early morning hours of the 7th after Bank Holiday (the 6th)

But Leighton gives no reference for this startling claim, and I've never been able to confirm that Druitt played in any such game on the 6th.

On August 10/11th, MJD is playing for the Gentlemen of Dorset against Bournemouth.

Leighton makes other provable errors, so I tend to think he's wrong unless I see the documentation.

[R. J. Palmer]

Most Whitgift Cricket matches against other schools were played out on Wednesday afternoons...
which I can report as an Alumni. Even one listed and lauded as such.

I'm going to bow out and wait for hard evidence of when the August 30th cricket match ended and/or began, but for what it is worth, here are the Blandford fixtures for 1889.

There are 5 Thursday games, but there are also 3 Wednesdays, 2 Tuesdays, and a Friday (totaling 6 weekday games not on Thursday) so it wasn't all about putting on a show for the half-holiday folks. We still need solid evidence.

[Edward Stow]

It should be easy enough to find the scores for these and how many innings were played.

You don't have to bow out Palmer Minor just because I'm an old Whitgiftian. There is a limit to Public School deference.

[Chris Phillips]

It should be easy enough to find the scores for these and how many innings were played.

I'm working through the fixtures for 1887-1889 at the moment. When I have made some tidy notes, I plan to post them

[Gary Barnett]

I'm going to bow out and wait for hard evidence of when the August 30th cricket match ended and/or began, but for what it is worth, here are the Blandford fixtures for 1889.

There are 5 Thursday games, but there are also 3 Wednesdays, 2 Tuesdays, and a Friday (totaling 6 weekday games not on Thursday) so it wasn't all about putting on a show for the half-holiday folks. We still need solid evidence.

The Friday match was at Wareham.

Have a nice break.

[Edward Stow]

I would be interesting to list the squads and how they change

[Gary Barnett]

Of course we shouldn’t forget that 30th August was an exceptional day for the town. Both an early closing day and a day of various exhibitions and entertainments.

Did that in any way impact on the timing of the cricket match?

We don’t know, but there are reasons to suspect that there might have been a connection.

[Abby Normal]

ah yes druitt was so normal, successful, happy and well loved that he got canned from work for serious trouble and killed himself shortly thereafter. whatever he appeared to be (or was) that all changed during the fall/winter of 88 and he was obvioulsy in some kind of psychological downward spiral. Gacy was a pillar of society, bundy was highly respected by many in the upper eschelons of society, HH holmes was seen as a succesful businessman. Yes alot of serial killers are low lifes or perceived as at least as avg joes, but not all, by any means. I dont think you can really rule out or judge validity of suspects based on their public persona. but thats just me.

[Kattrup]

ah yes druitt was so normal, successful, happy and well loved that he got canned from work for serious trouble and killed himself shortly thereafter. whatever he appeared to be (or was) that all changed during the fall/winter of 88 and he was obvioulsy in some kind of psychological downward spiral. Gacy was a pillar of society, bundy was highly respected by many in the upper eschelons of society, HH holmes was seen as a succesful businessman. Yes alot of serial killers are low lifes or perceived as at least as avg joes, but not all, by any means. I dont think you can really rule out or judge validity of suspects based on their public persona. but thats just me.

Yes Abby, correct
Funny how Charles Cross is pronounced the ripper and a psychopath in spite of no evidence at all, he could easily be the ripper while being a hardworking family man, in fact it is more likely that he was a psycho because it’s clear he was just pretending to be normal. Whereas MJD couldn’t possibly be a psychopath because there’s no evidence of it.