Is it even possible?

[clark2710]

Well the logical suspect is William Henry Bury all things considered. It's not case closed though.

With respect, I've heard many a theory regarding other suspects people had spoken of in the same way, where the speaker will swear their suspect theory makes sense and why. I've seen whole books written on why person x or a is the Ripper, and if you talk to some and read their books it's gibberish, but others make a more compelling case. I don't consider any suspect off the table except for the obvious. or I should rather say, except for the less likely

[The Rookie Detective]

A good example would be Samuel Little, he confessed to killing over 90 women, and when asked why he went after prostitutes he basically said that they were the easiest target, no one is going to miss them, the police aren't as likely to pursue it as heavily than if you murdered say a Senator's daughter. That's a paraphrase, but Little and the Ripper may share that ideal, that prostitutes were convenient and easier to get hold of.

I agree, but I would add to that the idea that the killer specifically targeted fallen women.


When we look at all of the alleged victims, we see that they were all women who had either been divorced, widowed, or who had turned to prostitution after having once known a better life of relative stability.

Rather than attack relatively younger women who had been long term prostitutes since their teens; he instead murdered older women (excluding Kelly) who had resorted to prostitution as a means of survival and largely as a result of alcoholism and having come out of a relatively stable relationship.

There's potentially an element of religious and ethical fanaticism to that way of thinking.
A man on a mission, so to speak.

And we see distinct recent changes in some of the victims personal circumstances, I.e. Kelly has just split from Barnett, and Stride has just split from Kidney

These timings may be relevant as it may indicate that the killer knew of Kelly's and Stride's recent relationship breakups and by proxy indicating that he knew them, and that they weren't random strangers.

If that's the case, then we need to look for any potential connections between the victims.
We know that Stride, Eddowes and McKenzie all worked for the Jewish community for example.
That doesn't make the killer Jewish, but it perhaps suggests that the killer had a connection to the women who worked within the Jewish community.

And in terms of the injuries inflicted by the killer, we can see that he primarily targeted his victim's reproductive organs; the uterus, the womb etc...
He appears to have attacked these areas specifically and this is perhaps a window into the killer's mindset.
It's not really about sex; it's about the control he had over a woman's reproductive organs; ergo, her ability to hold and grow new life; and that is particularly significant.


IMO for a man to make those choices when dispatching a chosen victim, it suggests that he wasn't picking random women through an impulsive desire to attack an easy target; but rather that he also had a need to punish women who had once had stability and who had fallen from grace.

That may imply that the killer had a particular hatred for a woman who had loose morals and perhaps in his eyes, he felt they were abusing their natural biological God-given ability to carry children, by having countless men use their bodies as vessels for carnal desires.

And so, while I agree that the killer chose relatively easy targets first and foremost; it is also right to acknowledge that the killer also focused on a woman's natural biological attributes; and perhaps he felt aggrieved by seeing women who presented themselves with no self dignity or respect for their own bodies.

He was punishing women who had chosen; in his eyes; to degrade themselves.

Of course, many people will say that he only chose prostitutes because they were easy targets, because that's an easy fix.
However, I would ask this question...

Would Kelly or Stride have been Ripper victims IF they had still been with their respective partners?

I believe the answer is a resounding NO.

It would appear that Eddowes was the only victim who was actively in a relationship with a man at the time she was murdered, and seeing that it was alleged that she stated that she knew the killer; this may also be significant, especially when she gave the name of Mary Kelly; that name then matched the next victim.
A striking coincidence.


The evidence suggests that the real killer targeted his victims, perhaps stalked them, got to know their movements, engaged with them to a point that they felt safe... and then picked his moment to strike.

The idea that the killer randomly picked his victims, and for no other reason than they were simply easy targets, is a means of sweeping things under the carpet and acts as a convenient fix that misses the point of the murders having occurred in the first place.


Lots to ponder.

[John Wheat]

With respect, I've heard many a theory regarding other suspects people had spoken of in the same way, where the speaker will swear their suspect theory makes sense and why. I've seen whole books written on why person x or a is the Ripper, and if you talk to some and read their books it's gibberish, but others make a more compelling case. I don't consider any suspect off the table except for the obvious. or I should rather say, except for the less likely

Hi Clark

If you want to know more about Bury read The Trial of Jack the Ripper by Euan MacPherson. It will give you a view of why Bury could quite easily have been Jack. It is certainly not gibberish. I recommend the book. By reading it you can then make your own mind up about Bury as a suspect. Cheers John

[A P Tomlinson]

I agree, but I would add to that the idea that the killer specifically targeted fallen women.

..........

But DID he?
I still think it's a reach to say he was "targeting" anyone specifically.
I think there's an equal likelihood that any woman would have done, he wasn't looking for anyone who would put up a fight, so I doubt there was any taunting or accusations of their evil ways before he got to work... but Whitechapel after dark presented a better hunting ground than anywhere else.

[Patrick Differ]

Anger is a reason for revenge and it makes you wonder what really triggered the JTR murders? Was it one thing or a combination? If a combination then what was it? Prostitutes, police, the Crown, the Judicial system or all of the above? For me, I can envision a person like Levy, clearly suffering neuro syphilis, becoming completely unhinged after being set up by Sampsons man Phillips, convicted to 12 months hard labor for what he called " a lark", hauled off to Chelmsford where he tried to commit suicide like his brother ( or faked it ), and then sent to Essex Asylum . That was 11 months of pure insanity in itself. Levy's wife said he was once " a shrewd businessman".
With one bad decision he loses everything? Was he shrewd enough to fake his suicide in prison and somehow manage to get released from Essex? Imagine how embarrassed the Crown would be if the population knew it was they who released JTR on the East End? Where JTR likely lived and worked. Impossible to prove maybe but Anger is a strong trigger for a motive like revenge. The victims were low hanging fruit indeed. Only a local in my opinion would be comfortable to risk these murders in a 30 minute window by metro police and a 15 minute window by London City.
What did JTR set out to do and accomplish?

[Scott Nelson]

Yes, anger is a reason for revenge. I wonder if the victims had to do with it, other than just being 'in the way', so to speak.