Name the Name with a short answer why please :D

[clark2710]

Bury was a violent murderer who murdered his ex prostitute wife by strangling her and then performed some post mortem mutilations on his wife in Dundee Scotland. Which they had relocated to shortly after Mary Kelly's murder. Before this Bury had been in Bow, London which is close to Whitechapel. Bury also fits the psych profiles remarkably well. That's just for starters. Bury is a suspect I recommend you look into. As very few Ripper suspects are proven violent murderers.

I'll do that thank you

[John Wheat]

I'll do that thank you

No problem.

[Abby Normal]

Hi clarke
I got hutch and blotchy 1 and 1a.
after that Chapman, Bury, James kelly, koz and lech. (pretty much in that order)

a bit further down i got druitt, barnett, tumblety (working with someone else) richardson, bowyer.

IMHO all the suspects are weak, some just less weak but with all the names above i think we have a slightly better than 50/50 chance the ripper is one of them.

I know you only asked for one, sorry, this just how me brain works.

[Ms Diddles]

1) unknown local / non-local
2) Koz
3) Druitt
4) Lechmere
5) Bury

That's my current five aside team.

There are a few others on the bench who get substituted every so often!

[Scott Nelson]

Joseph Barnett - I don't consider him as a suspect but I just want to know why an envelope that belonged to Barnett was found in the courtyard of Hanbury Street after the murder of Annie Chapman???

That's a new one on me. What envelope that belonged to Barnett?

[Wickerman]

Now that’s a theory and half.

I think I know to whom you may infer. You think he fabricated the whole thing, I would ask why? If he is as respected as I think him to be, would that not simply ruin his reputation as a well respected researcher?

It would be the death knell of his career. A career where he has always aimed to remain impartial wherever possible.

I personally struggle greatly with this one.

I understand your position. The fact remains, there only ever was one person (one author) with more than enough inside knowledge of both subjects to have been the principal source behind the deception.
Every time a fraud is uncovered, whether it be a work of art, a book, or an ancient antique, invariably we find a range of reasons why they did it. It isn't always for money, quite often it is for the challenge, which may not make sense to some, but it doesn't have to.
If the creator never does make money or receive any kind of material benefit they have thee best alibi - "It wasn't me, had no reason to do it" - which is precisely your position, which is also what the creator is relying on.

To simply have deceived some of the best minds in the world can be a huge gratification for some.

[erobitha]

I understand your position. The fact remains, there only ever was one person (one author) with more than enough inside knowledge of both subjects to have been the principal source behind the deception.
Every time a fraud is uncovered, whether it be a work of art, a book, or an ancient antique, invariably we find a range of reasons why they did it. It isn't always for money, quite often it is for the challenge, which may not make sense to some, but it doesn't have to.
If the creator never does make money or receive any kind of material benefit they have thee best alibi - "It wasn't me, had no reason to do it" - which is precisely your position, which is also what the creator is relying on.

To simply have deceived some of the best minds in the world can be a huge gratification for some.

Well, I hope for my sanity you are wrong.

[JeffHamm]

That's a new one on me. What envelope that belonged to Barnett?

There was a piece of envelope found with Annie Chapman, but it wasn't Barnett's. She was seen at the doss house with a box of pills, which broke, and so she picked up a piece of envelope to put the pills in (it's in the inquest testimony). It's unrelated to JtR, though the police at the time thought it might be a lead as it was an envelope from a military establishment (a barracks or base of some sort, I forget the regiment offhand). Given that Tabram was seen with soldiers (and at that time Tabram was though part of the series), it was at first thought this might possibly have been dropped by her killer. So it was considered a lead and they followed it up, but it ended up leading them back to her doss house, not to her killer.

- Jeff

[Astatine211]

There was a piece of envelope found with Annie Chapman, but it wasn't Barnett's. She was seen at the doss house with a box of pills, which broke, and so she picked up a piece of envelope to put the pills in (it's in the inquest testimony). It's unrelated to JtR, though the police at the time thought it might be a lead as it was an envelope from a military establishment (a barracks or base of some sort, I forget the regiment offhand). Given that Tabram was seen with soldiers (and at that time Tabram was though part of the series), it was at first thought this might possibly have been dropped by her killer. So it was considered a lead and they followed it up, but it ended up leading them back to her doss house, not to her killer.

- Jeff

I assumed it had to be a different envelope because how someone could seriously connect that envelope to Barnett is beyond me.

[JeffHamm]

I assumed it had to be a different envelope because how someone could seriously connect that envelope to Barnett is beyond me.

As far as I know, that's the only envelope connected to the Chapman case, and how it came into her possession is known. I, too, can't fathom how it could have been suggested it was connected to Barnett, but perhaps it's in a "Barnett as JtR" suspect book? If so, it's undoubtedly an incorrect inference.

- Jeff

[Wickerman]

Well, I hope for my sanity you are wrong.

It was my sanity I had in mind when I left all Diary threads 20+ years ago. Never returned to any of them, Caz knows my views (being the person I made any comments to on the subject), the only reasonable interest I can see for anyone is to figure out the minute of how it was done.

[DJA]

Diary intolerant

[Wickerman]

Diary intolerant

Less tolerant for stupidity the older I get.
I couldn't say which is worse, Stephen Knight's The Final Solution, Royal Conspiracy crap or, Shirley Harrison's The Diary of Jack the Ripper, deceptive nonsense.
Sorry, just passing through a senior rant here....
I just get tired of hearing about diaries, royal princes & black magic rituals.
Maybe there'll be a laxative available someday.....

[DJA]

Meh,made it into my 70s with an IQ in the half percentile ..... tell me about it ...... nah,don't

[erobitha]

Meh,made it into my 70s with an IQ in the half percentile ..... tell me about it ...... nah,don't

Explains so much. I am obviously not as bright as others. My IQ is sadly only 115 which only makes me inside the top 16%. Maybe if I work harder on getting my score up, perhaps I can get to see the logic in Henry G Sutton. It’s just obviously a lack of my IQ that I can’t.