What evidence would it take?

[Lewis C]

If a bloodstained knife had been found in Druitt's lodgings, Abberline would have known about it and not have said of Druitt: 'there is absolutely nothing beyond the fact that he was found at that time to incriminate him.'

If there had been paperwork relating to the alleged seaside identification, Macnaghten would have read it and not recorded that he was 'inclined to exonerate' Kosminski.

To me it would seem rather odd if they went to all the trouble involved in bringing the suspect and the witness to the Seaside Home for the identification, but it wouldn't have occurred to anyone that it would be a good idea to take some notes.

[Scott Nelson]

Likely done by the City Police, who conducted the affair. But notes were probably lost in the Blitz.

[Fiver]

Perhaps we should concentrate all our efforts on finding out more about the handful of likely suspects.

How do we decide what makes someone a likely suspect?

Other acts of violence?

Suspected at the time?

Claimed to be the Ripper?

Lack of an alibi?

Died or incarcerated shortly after the death of the last victim?

And some of these questions have different answers depending on how many victims. Macnaghten thought there were five, Reid thought there were nine, Arnold thought there were four.

[Fiver]

Furthermore, we have a suspect who can be placed in London as late as 1891.

We have dozens, possibly hundreds, of suspects who can be placed in London as late as 1891.

[Fiver]

no i got ya. thanks! i would say he recommences with pinchin and mckenzie. And then he stops, for good as far as i can tell.
ive never seen any real good argument or explanation on how two seemingly different murder series, torsoman and the ripper, end at the same time, unless of course they were the same man.

The only similarities between the Torso murders and the Ripper murders are that they occurred in London, the victims were female, and the killer was never caught.

The last known Torso murder was in September 1889. The last of the C5 was in November 1888, 10 months earlier.

[John Wheat]

How do we decide what makes someone a likely suspect?

Other acts of violence?

Suspected at the time?

Claimed to be the Ripper?

Lack of an alibi?

Died or incarcerated shortly after the death of the last victim?

And some of these questions have different answers depending on how many victims. Macnaghten thought there were five, Reid thought there were nine, Arnold thought there were four.

Bury fits all of these points.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

Likely done by the City Police, who conducted the affair. But notes were probably lost in the Blitz.

And the notes, if they ever existed, escaped the attention of Macnaghten, who had access to all the files?

[Fiver]

Bury fits all of these points.

Bury is one of the better suspects, but he doesn't fit all of the points.

Early newspapers reported that Bury claimed to be the Ripper, but from what I can find it appears he did not.

We have only partial information of the police investigation of Bury. We know he was investigated by Abberline, but Abberline thought George Chapman was the most likely suspect. Lacking Abberline's records, we don't know why he dismissed Bury as a suspect. Did Abberline think Bury's MO was too different from the Rippers? Did Abberline think that Bury's personality didn't match the persona of the Ripper letters? Did Abberline think Mackenzie was a victim of the Ripper? Did Abberline find Bury had an alibi for one of the C5? Did Abberline conclude the Ripper had medical knowledge, thus eliminating Bury as a suspect?

[Fiver]

And the notes, if they ever existed, escaped the attention of Macnaghten, who had access to all the files?

So you are suggesting that none of the police involved in the Ripper investigation took any notes or filed any reports?

[John Wheat]

Bury is one of the better suspects, but he doesn't fit all of the points.

Early newspapers reported that Bury claimed to be the Ripper, but from what I can find it appears he did not.

We have only partial information of the police investigation of Bury. We know he was investigated by Abberline, but Abberline thought George Chapman was the most likely suspect. Lacking Abberline's records, we don't know why he dismissed Bury as a suspect. Did Abberline think Bury's MO was too different from the Rippers? Did Abberline think that Bury's personality didn't match the persona of the Ripper letters? Did Abberline think Mackenzie was a victim of the Ripper? Did Abberline find Bury had an alibi for one of the C5? Did Abberline conclude the Ripper had medical knowledge, thus eliminating Bury as a suspect?

Could you explain how Bury doesn't fit all the points?

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

So you are suggesting that none of the police involved in the Ripper investigation took any notes or filed any reports?

I have never suggested that.

[John Wheat]

Bury is one of the better suspects, but he doesn't fit all of the points.

Early newspapers reported that Bury claimed to be the Ripper, but from what I can find it appears he did not.

We have only partial information of the police investigation of Bury. We know he was investigated by Abberline, but Abberline thought George Chapman was the most likely suspect. Lacking Abberline's records, we don't know why he dismissed Bury as a suspect. Did Abberline think Bury's MO was too different from the Rippers? Did Abberline think that Bury's personality didn't match the persona of the Ripper letters? Did Abberline think Mackenzie was a victim of the Ripper? Did Abberline find Bury had an alibi for one of the C5? Did Abberline conclude the Ripper had medical knowledge, thus eliminating Bury as a suspect?

The chalk messages are a sort of confession. I don't buy the ludicrous suggestion that they weren't written by Bury. Bury was suspected at the time. As Abberline didn't really know what he was doing in a serial killer murder investigation his opinion doesn't carry that much weight. Bury reportedly had no alibi's for the C5. It's unlikely that the Ripper wrote any of the Ripper letters. It's unlikely Mackenzie was a Ripper victim. So we have a suspect who fits all your points.

[Aethelwulf]

The chalk messages are a sort of confession. I don't buy the ludicrous suggestion that they weren't written by Bury. Bury was suspected at the time. As Abberline didn't really know what he was doing in a serial killer murder investigation his opinion doesn't carry that much weight. Bury reportedly had no alibi's for the C5. It's unlikely that the Ripper wrote any of the Ripper letters. It's unlikely Mackenzie was a Ripper victim. So we have a suspect who fits all your points.

I'd agree with most this but it is right to say we only know what Abberline thought in 1903 after Chapman was arrested. With the passage of over a decade and Bury not producing the apparently expected day of executuion confession, there was no answer, despite all of the important circumstatntial evidence the police had discovered. Without a proper end, and with Chpaman arrested, it is perhaps understandable why Abberline concentrated on him. Abberline didn't dismiss Bury, he just didn't mention him.

As you know I'm a sucker for the ripper messages. I think the majority of them are fake, but I think a handful could also be genuine. I think the ripper was trying to dominate the police as he dominated women. I think he obviously wrote those Dundee messages. As the GSG was said to look fresh, the messages in Dundee were said to look older than the crime and scene was guarded after the discovery. Ellen was said to write ill and wouldn't have known how to produce them. We know Bury had the hand writing forgery skills and he was said to be a 'very communictaive man'.

[John Wheat]

I'd agree with most this but it is right to say we only know what Abberline thought in 1903 after Chapman was arrested. With the passage of over a decade and Bury not producing the apparently expected day of executuion confession, there was no answer, despite all of the important circumstatntial evidence the police had discovered. Without a proper end, and with Chpaman arrested, it is perhaps understandable why Abberline concentrated on him. Abberline didn't dismiss Bury, he just didn't mention him.

As you know I'm a sucker for the ripper messages. I think the majority of them are fake, but I think a handful could also be genuine. I think the ripper was trying to dominate the police as he dominated women. I think he obviously wrote those Dundee messages. As the GSG was said to look fresh, the messages in Dundee were said to look older than the crime and scene was guarded after the discovery. Ellen was said to write ill and wouldn't have known how to produce them. We know Bury had the hand writing forgery skills and he was said to be a 'very communictaive man'.

Hi Aethelwulf

I don't dismiss the GSG and of course if the GSG was written by the Ripper that's potentially another plus point for Bury being the Ripper with the chalk graffito at the Dundee flat.

Cheers John

[Lewis C]

How do we decide what makes someone a likely suspect?

Other acts of violence?

Suspected at the time?

Claimed to be the Ripper?

Lack of an alibi?

Died or incarcerated shortly after the death of the last victim?

And some of these questions have different answers depending on how many victims. Macnaghten thought there were five, Reid thought there were nine, Arnold thought there were four.

This is a pretty important question - should probably have its own thread. Here are my criteria for a credible suspect roughly in order of importance (need not be all of these):

1. Doesn’t have an alibi for any C5 murder, and ideally not for the Tabram or McKenzie murders
2. Lived in the area, ideally a little NE of Mitre Square
3. Was male and heterosexual
4. Was known to be either insane or criminally violent
5. Was 22-38 years old in 1888; the closer to 30, the better
6. Has a known connection to the case, especially one that raises suspicion
7. Had at least rudimentary anatomical knowledge

I don't think claiming to be JtR counts for much. There were lots of false confessions.