The Escape Of Jack The Ripper ( Hainsworth & Agius, 2020)

[Michael Banks]

Home truths?

Anyone that is aware, as I and others are, of you’re attitude toward Druitt as a candidate cant fail to see and understand the undercurrent in your post. Those that promote do so. Do those that promote often exaggerate for effect? I think that we all know the answer to that one. It’s therefore rather a coincidence that the book that you choose to vent your righteous anger over is, surprise, surprise a book on Druitt rather than, say, Rubenhold.

You claim that no one appears to want this kind of promotion stopped? I’d say that it would be more accurate to say that we would have more chance of changing the colour of the moon. It’s at best a minor irritant entirely unworthy of any sustained anger. To say that it’s conning the public is a huge exaggeration of course. Do we spend our lives being angry at every over promoted product on the market? Or do we just buy the product and see if it matches up to the hype? Most do the latter. Or even ignore the product entirely.

You say - .. I’m not going to let the public get hoodwinked yet again based on a false, unproven statement that ‘Druitt was the ripper.’ - Well unless ‘the public’ are all reading this excellent Forum your heroic act of self righteousness might well have been misplaced. And do we genuinely believe that the non-Ripperological public simply take as gospel every piece of publicity that they read? That they have no sense of judgment? Come on.

Again, like most, I’ll wait until the book arrives. Then I’ll buy it. Then I’ll read it. Then I’ll judge it. And let’s face it, there’s virtually nothing that Jon Hainsworth could write, no evidence that he could produce that could sway you from your rigid belief that Druitt couldn’t have been guilty.

[Trevor Marriott]

Home truths?

Anyone that is aware, as I and others are, of you’re attitude toward Druitt as a candidate cant fail to see and understand the undercurrent in your post. Those that promote do so. Do those that promote often exaggerate for effect? I think that we all know the answer to that one. It’s therefore rather a coincidence that the book that you choose to vent your righteous anger over is, surprise, surprise a book on Druitt rather than, say, Rubenhold.

You claim that no one appears to want this kind of promotion stopped? I’d say that it would be more accurate to say that we would have more chance of changing the colour of the moon. It’s at best a minor irritant entirely unworthy of any sustained anger. To say that it’s conning the public is a huge exaggeration of course. Do we spend our lives being angry at every over promoted product on the market? Or do we just buy the product and see if it matches up to the hype? Most do the latter. Or even ignore the product entirely.

You say - .. I’m not going to let the public get hoodwinked yet again based on a false, unproven statement that ‘Druitt was the ripper.’ - Well unless ‘the public’ are all reading this excellent Forum your heroic act of self righteousness might well have been misplaced. And do we genuinely believe that the non-Ripperological public simply take as gospel every piece of publicity that they read? That they have no sense of judgment? Come on.

Again, like most, I’ll wait until the book arrives. Then I’ll buy it. Then I’ll read it. Then I’ll judge it. And let’s face it, there’s virtually nothing that Jon Hainsworth could write, no evidence that he could produce that could sway you from your rigid belief that Druitt couldn’t have been guilty.

The trouble is, and has always been even with television documentaries that the general public believe what they see and hear

That is why we get books and documentaries on who it was, but never any on who it wasn't, and that is what I have precisely done in my book "Jack the Ripper the real truth"

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Jack-Ripper...5752176&sr=8-2

[Anna Morris]

Personally I feel very guilty for not having bought Jonathan's first book and I think my credit card and address are sorted out good enough now that I can order books.

I don't want to enter any arguments brewing here but as I have commented about HR's book and sales methods, many times promotion and blurbs are created by editors and advertising executives. I know we have many authors here on the forum. Some of the best books on Ripperology have sincerely presented research. Other valuable books have proposed claims that the research did not, IMO, verify.

Still, one of my favorite Ripper books is Tully's book about James Kelly. Accept Kelly as the Ripper or not--I do not--but there is tremendous information otherwise and I still refer to that book. I had long wanted such a book about Druitt because I think he was an interesting individual though I do not think he was JtR. Maybe others at the time thought he was JtR but I do not at this time.

I am still angry about a suspect book entitled Uncle Jack or something similar because I felt the hype was better than the crumbs of information in the book. I felt I had wasted my money and I have no idea how the authors could have the guts to make big claims over the paucity of information available to them. Yet I feel I got more than my money's worth in Tully's book. I do not plan to buy HR's book. (Why encourage sensationalized incompetence?) I look forward to buying Jonathan's books because the historical information will be worth every penny and more.

Personally, I have close contacts to the publishing and film worlds and I just don't pay attention to hype which is what is shovelled out to the public. Also, personally, I have a strong feeling the real JtR is unknown to us so I do not expect to find him in a book that tells the story of an original suspect. Maybe JtR was an unknown Polish or Russian immigrant, maybe even named something like Kosminski, but I think he was not Aaron K. and I feel strongly that we have never even heard his name.

[Michael Banks]

Personally I feel very guilty for not having bought Jonathan's first book and I think my credit card and address are sorted out good enough now that I can order books.

I don't want to enter any arguments brewing here but as I have commented about HR's book and sales methods, many times promotion and blurbs are created by editors and advertising executives. I know we have many authors here on the forum. Some of the best books on Ripperology have sincerely presented research. Other valuable books have proposed claims that the research did not, IMO, verify.

Still, one of my favorite Ripper books is Tully's book about James Kelly. Accept Kelly as the Ripper or not--I do not--but there is tremendous information otherwise and I still refer to that book. I had long wanted such a book about Druitt because I think he was an interesting individual though I do not think he was JtR. Maybe others at the time thought he was JtR but I do not at this time.

I am still angry about a suspect book entitled Uncle Jack or something similar because I felt the hype was better than the crumbs of information in the book. I felt I had wasted my money and I have no idea how the authors could have the guts to make big claims over the paucity of information available to them. Yet I feel I got more than my money's worth in Tully's book. I do not plan to buy HR's book. (Why encourage sensationalized incompetence?) I look forward to buying Jonathan's books because the historical information will be worth every penny and more.

Personally, I have close contacts to the publishing and film worlds and I just don't pay attention to hype which is what is shovelled out to the public. Also, personally, I have a strong feeling the real JtR is unknown to us so I do not expect to find him in a book that tells the story of an original suspect. Maybe JtR was an unknown Polish or Russian immigrant, maybe even named something like Kosminski, but I think he was not Aaron K. and I feel strongly that we have never even heard his name.

Hi Anna,

To be honest Anna I don’t want to get into any arguments either after some of the surreal stuff on Casebook’s Druitt thread. I think that most people that are interested in the case, whether they have a preferred suspect or not, do try to keep an open mind. Most suspects after all can’t be categorically disproven so we are left to weigh up the likelihood’s based on our own judgment. We all have our biases even if it’s only about what type of person the ripper was.

I remember really enjoying Tully’s book at the time and it’s certainly a book that I keep intending to revisit. I’ve still got John Morrison’s pamphlet Jimmy Kelly’s Year Of The Ripper Murders somewhere. We still get suspects like Hardiman though who should cause far more irritation than Druitt.

It’s only my opinion but I feel that Druitt is the best of the named suspects. I’ll admit though that maybe some of that is down to the mystery surrounding his sacking and death. I just think that MacNaghten might have had valid reasons for naming him (after all he wouldn’t have been short of anonymous deceased criminals or incarcerated lunatics to sacrifice to his ‘better than Cutbush’ list. But of course I could be completely wrong.

I really liked Jon Hainsworth’s first book and I’m looking forward to his second.

[Michael Banks]

The trouble is, and has always been even with television documentaries that the general public believe what they see and hear

That is why we get books and documentaries on who it was, but never any on who it wasn't, and that is what I have precisely done in my book "Jack the Ripper the real truth"

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Jack-Ripper...5752176&sr=8-2

Where you name a suspect

[Phil Carter]

Hello Michael

Most of your reply is again written concerning my personal views on Druitt.

I will again try to just keep to the topic of the thread, having tried to answer those previous comments. If that's OK by you? Thank you.

However, allow me to repeat this. For total clarity. Whomever an over promoted, "Final solution-like" claim concerns. I will stand against it, especially pre publication, based, as they always are, on lack of documentary fact.
Had there been, in this promotion, revelation of hitherto unseen official documentation, I too would have been most engrossed, in a positive way. I'd actually be delighted if this "whodunit" subject could be closed. I fear it will never happen though.

For the record, if you care to look on the thread on here re "The Five", I, like many others, objected to that book too, on different grounds, I might add. So it isn't just "Anything Druitt" related. I've objected to the books, after publication, please note, on Tumblety. I spent many years researching stuff about Kosminski, and came out against it. Sickert, PAV, and most on all other suspects. I was one of the first to write of my disgust about " The Shawl", and stood firm, very very firm, on that too. It was I, sir, that attracted this site, and Howard Brown, to the sake of that "letter" recently sold at auction from Australia. I did it privately, in a pm, please note. Not much self righteousness there either.. I took no enjoyment nor credit in seeing yet another tit bit of potential con trick happening. Oh, and you can ask Mr. Marriot if I happened to contribute, with two others, hundreds of hours helping him when he tried in vain to have the Special Branch ledgers made public a few years ago. Something I'm very proud of, I might add.

So again, you are wrong. Because I choose to voice opinion about a book promotion, that just happens, this time, to be Druitt, is neither here nor there. So don't try to deflect upon me being "Anti" anyone imparticular. This time its THIS promotion of THIS book. Period.

Oh, and I'm not angry, or arguing. Sorry to disappoint you. I admit I seem to have a tendency to appear crass when writing, for which, I also believed I apologised for, as it is not the case. You are forgiven for thinking otherwise. I assure you, I'm as calm as a summers day. This may disappoint you. But anger isn't me, unless under extreme provocation. I'm too old to respond in anger. Sorry.
Therefore, summing up, I believe, over the course of many years, I've contributed opinion against many such theorist books, or even documentaries. Others will confirm this. Both pre and post publication.

So.. I'm not on here looking for an argument. But I will insist upon my right to stand in the corner with those utterly sick and tired of "X, Y, Z or AA" IS "Jack the Ripper".. End of" books and documentaries. Its been said many many times by many many people.. Normally accompanied by "Oh God, no" "Not another one" "Here we go again".

It is utterly tiresome for one having had an interest of over 50 years in the subject, having read hundreds of books, researched thousands of documents and newspaper articles, in at least 6 languages, here and there, and have written a few dozen articles too. Without any material gain of any sort, I might add. I have also helped authors with contributions, and insisted upon anominity for the most part.

Finally Michael. I suggest you send an email to Mr Hainsworth himself, asking him to confirm that a few years ago, I tried, in vain, sadly, to contribute some help to him with his research, involving me travelling from my home here in Norway, to England, spending 2 weeks travelling around England, to various families, in order to try and find correspondence between those families and others, re Druitt. I did this all out if my own pocket, all in the interests of helping Mr. Hainsworth. (Because of his location in the other side of the world, I offered to help)
Now, you, and everyone on here learn of this for the first time. I only now say it, to prove a point.
Your labelling me as "Anti-Druittist" remark, is way off the mark. Please do feel free to ask Mr Hainsworth to confirm. Oh, and while you are at it, ask a few other known authors if I've helped them anonymously too.
I believe you will be surprised. No self righteousness here either. Sorry to disappoint you. Not to put my own name forward at all, I might add, many many researchers help others all the time, quietly, in the background. Many far far better than I.

Now if you don't mind. Let us finally get back to the topic of the thread. Unless, of course, you just don't happen to want to? Your choice. I've tried.

Phil


PS Email Mr. Hainsworth, there's a good chap.

[Abby Normal]

If I was of a more Politically Correct bent I’d be tempted to introduce a new word to the Ripperological lexicon. Druittophobia. We’ve been treated to a very fine example of it here. Very recently Phil, along with a handful of other posters over on Casebook, worked themselves up to a state of near apoplexy at the mere suggestion that Druitt might have been too easily dismissed as a suspect. Even bemoaning the fact that he was given suspect as a title! Posters like myself, Paul Begg, Wickerman and Roger Palmer all felt that Druitt is worthy of consideration and further research. Posters like Sam Flynn and Abby Normal (neither of whom feel that Druitt is a good suspect) felt the same. But no, the rabid anti-Druittists (Phil included) were adamant. They knew. Druitt definitely wasn’t guilty or even worthy of consideration. So much so that it was worth asking why they even bothered discussing him? After all it’s why most of us don’t spend much time on Lewis Carroll threads!
To them Sir Melville MacNaghten was either a liar (despite there being no evidence for this) or that he was a moustache twirling Victorian villain or even that he was a complete imbecile so denuded of reason that he was utterly incapable of receiving or assessing evidence. Even the very mildest of suggestions regarding Druitt or MacNaghten were treated as if they should have been shelved along side the Flat Earthers!
Have we come to this when can utterly dismiss and insult a book eight months before it’s publication? Is it reasonable to get so angry purely because a writer/researcher has a level of confidence in his work? Or that a publisher looks to sell the book to the public? Why does Druitt drive posters to such hysterical pronouncements about ‘con merchant language’ when it’s simple and understandable promotion?
I would have thought, and even hoped, that to all of us who are interested in this case any new information would have been welcomed? Not to Phil (and no doubt others) apparently. To them Jon Hainsworth and Christine are guilty of foisting some con on the unsuspecting public. Open minds are not required apparently.
Taking exception to the line - This is the real story of Druitt he Ripper - is, at the very least, disproportionate. At most it’s pure bias. Then again, from recent experience, proportionality is not something that I expect from some quarters on this particular topic. If Jon and Christine’s new research stand up to scrutiny (and scrutinised they will be) then they will be a welcome expanding of our knowledge of Druitt. They may cause some to alter their opinion of Druitt as a ripper suspect. Some opinions might not change and I wouldnt out of hand call them biased for that. Unbiased opinions should always be considered.

Will this book strengthen the case against Druitt? Will it give us new information? Will it be a good book? Who knows? We haven’t read it yet.

hi herlock
thanks for mentioning me! its not that i think druitt is not a good suspect. quite the contrary. i think he is one of the least weak suspects. but then again i think they are all weak. some just less weak than others. so in this context, i think hes a good suspect i guess just not one of my least weak if that makes sense. neverthe less he is mentioned by a cop at the time and was in the area and nothing rules him out so yes suspect he is and remains.

however these burbs, are quite extraordinary, are they not? caught red handed by police and talked his way out? really lol. camt wait to see the evidence on that! but i guess we have to wait god knows how long to see what the author has to say to back that up since the book isnt out for awhile. its reminiscent of smiths claims (wait sorry, the publisher)about his latest edition of the maybrick nonsense that all got subsequently shot down once it came out, or whatever the latest suspect book to come out. like the latest one on hardiman that you rightfully ripped. its all just too much for me.

im no anti druitst, but i do understand somes frustration on this stuff. its rather a tad too much carnival barker is it not?

[Trevor Marriott]

Where you name a suspect

Yes, a suspect who has some evidence to support his suspect status, which is more than can be said for all the other band of merry suspects who sit high on the suspect list !


www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Michael Banks]

Yes, a suspect who has some evidence to support his suspect status, which is more than can be said for all the other band of merry suspects who sit high on the suspect list !


www.trevormarriott.co.uk

In your opinion Trevor.

[Howard Brown]

Folks :
Please keep the discussion focused on Jon's book from now on.
Thanks a lot !

[Michael Banks]

hi herlock
thanks for mentioning me! its not that i think druitt is not a good suspect. quite the contrary. i think he is one of the least weak suspects. but then again i think they are all weak. some just less weak than others. so in this context, i think hes a good suspect i guess just not one of my least weak if that makes sense. neverthe less he is mentioned by a cop at the time and was in the area and nothing rules him out so yes suspect he is and remains.

however these burbs, are quite extraordinary, are they not? caught red handed by police and talked his way out? really lol. camt wait to see the evidence on that! but i guess we have to wait god knows how long to see what the author has to say to back that up since the book isnt out for awhile. its reminiscent of smiths claims (wait sorry, the publisher)about his latest edition of the maybrick nonsense that all got subsequently shot down once it came out, or whatever the latest suspect book to come out. like the latest one on hardiman that you rightfully ripped. its all just too much for me.

im no anti druitst, but i do understand somes frustration on this stuff. its rather a tad too much carnival barker is it not?

I certainly understand and accept the point Abby. Advertising and promotion certainly goes over the top in all spheres. I guess the way that I look at it though is that it’s simply a fact of life that we’re never going to change.

[Michael Banks]

Folks :
Please keep the discussion focused on Jon's book from now on.
Thanks a lot !

Understood How.

[Michael Banks]

All that I’ll say then is that I’m certainly looking forward to this book. I fully admit that I may be more interested in Druitt than most but I certainly don’t say that it’s game over. I agree with Phil and Abby and anyone about OTT promotion and advertising but I just feel that, in this day and age, it’s pretty much par for the course and that there really is nothing that any of us can do about it.

[Abby Normal]

I certainly understand and accept the point Abby. Advertising and promotion certainly goes over the top in all spheres. I guess the way that I look at it though is that it’s simply a fact of life that we’re never going to change.

hi herlock
yup unfortunately your probably right. the problem is that for the average fan like me theres been too much crackpot books coming out-cornwalls sickert books, the five, the endless diary sillines , recent hardiman book etc etc etc etc. once bitten twice shy and these extraordinary blurbs that come out with them just turns me off.

we need less of this stuff and more levelheaded scholarly examination imho.

[Michael Banks]

hi herlock
yup unfortunately your probably right. the problem is that for the average fan like me theres been too much crackpot books coming out-cornwalls sickert books, the five, the endless diary sillines , recent hardiman book etc etc etc etc. once bitten twice shy and these extraordinary blurbs that come out with them just turns me off.

we need less of this stuff and more levelheaded scholarly examination imho.

Hi Abby

We’ve certainly had a deluge of books over the last few years. Plenty of rehashes but worst of all ludicrous ones. I foolishly bought an ebook recently which promised that it was a result of something like 15 years of research. It was 500+ pages so I was stupidly optimistic. The guy had obviously done a lot of work on it but it turns out that murders were definitely Freemasonic and that the ripper was Sir Frederick Treves! Obviously.:

The Drew Gray book was a missed opportunity. The Torso Murders deserve a good book where the case can be made for the possibility of a joint TK/Ripper. He just fell into this trend for selecting someone that was vertical at the time and then using any contortion to shoehorn him into place. Rubenhold (which I haven’t read yet) openly had an agenda from the outset of course. It’s not so often these days that we have a book to look forward to. In my opinion we now have two. The Escape and Adam Wood’s book on Swanson. Maybe we’ll get a Lechmere book in the near future? The last one that I enjoyed was False Flag (even though I don’t go for the premise it was a well written book. I know that you agree on that one.)