WH Bury Problems

[Rainbow]

Side note, Tabram had recieved 9 stabs in her neck.


Rainbow

[Fisherman]

Rainbow,

I happen to believe that she was a ripper victim, however that is a belief, and is not the general accepted view.

it is wrong to say she is a ripper victim, she is a possible ripper victim.

And if she is, we can remove, Bury, Druiit, Tumblety, Levy and several others

But it is not proven and we should not assume she is until such time..

Incidentally the research I began last week, after Fish gave his opinion that the Neck wounds were secondary in the Nichols case has lead to some interesting places.

yes we have the often cited apparent similarity between Mackenzie's and some of the Nichols wounds.

However there are also possibilities, which may link Maczenkie not just to Nichols, but Chapman and Eddowes.

Not sure how long this will take me, and will probably end up as a series of posts. .


Steve,

Can I ask you, Steve, what is your professional background?

[Elamarna]

Alice Mackenzie is a Ripper victim until proven otherwise.



Rainbow°

Rainbow,

I happen to believe that she was a ripper victim, however that is a belief, and is not the general accepted view.

it is wrong to say she is a ripper victim, she is a possible ripper victim.

And if she is, we can remove, Bury, Druiit, Tumblety, Levy and several others

But it is not proven and we should not assume she is until such time..

Incidentally the research I began last week, after Fish gave his opinion that the Neck wounds were secondary in the Nichols case has lead to some interesting places.

yes we have the often cited apparent similarity between Mackenzie's and some of the Nichols wounds.

However there are also possibilities, which may link Maczenkie not just to Nichols, but Chapman and Eddowes.

Not sure how long this will take me, and will probably end up as a series of posts. .


Steve,

[Fisherman]

Harry D: You choose to interpret 'drunken' as paralytic.

No, that was YOU interpreting it for me and putting words in my mouth, as per usual.
Under influence must not mean drunken, but drunken must mean under influence.

No, it doesn't. Quite the opposite.

Aha - so violent drunkards ARE silent, stealthy, careful people.

Geez - you learn something new every day.

[Fisherman]

Bullshit. You're wrong. A 1 in 2 chance of being under the influence of alcohol. And the comparative sloppiness in some of the cuts of some of the victims suggests various states of inebriation in the murders of different victims.

Do you think you can manage to produce a post where you don´t write "bullshit"? It seems a bit limited to me.

As for statistics, John, they do not work the way you suggest. Less than ten per cent of all serial killers are eviscerators. Do you think it therefore applies that the Ripper wasn´t one?

You can cut extremely sloppily and be completely sober. It is very much harder to cut extremely skilfully and be drunk.

[Rainbow]

He didn't kill Mackenzie...

Mackenzie is more a ripper victim than some of the C5 plus Tabram...

Let the man rest in peace.... We should remove him from the list of suspects..



Rainbow°

[Harry D]

And what would you do, kill him twice ?!

Very droll. If Bury was the Ripper, he took that secret to his grave and the victims never found official justice.

[Rainbow]

If Bury was the Ripper, he did escape justice for those crimes.

And what would you do, kill him twice ?!

[Harry D]

Alice Mackenzie is a Ripper victim until proven otherwise.

That's highly debatable.

He confessed to his guilt, we are looking for that one who escaped justice.

If Bury was the Ripper, he did escape justice for those crimes.

Move on...

No one's stopping you.

[Rainbow]

Alice Mackenzie is a Ripper victim until proven otherwise.

He confessed to his guilt, we are looking for that one who escaped justice.

Move on...



Rainbow°

[Harry D]

"Drunken" is not compatible with a stealthy, cautious and meticulous pattern of acting.

You choose to interpret 'drunken' as paralytic. All it means is that he was under the influence, as Bundy admitted to being when he was killing.

It can be added that both Burys employer and his landlady apparently described him as a violent drunk - and that at the very least seems incomparable with the killings of the Ripper.

No, it doesn't. Quite the opposite.

Why is Bury even in the suspects list ?!

Let's see...

Known murderer, committed abdominal mutilation, lived in the East End during the Autumn of Terror, left London shortly after the last canonical murder. If we're basing our analysis as objectively as possible on the known facts (and not our imaginations *cough*) then no one can deny that Bury is the most fitting of the named suspects available.

[Rainbow]

Why is Bury even in the suspects list ?!

Better to remove him from here..

The man had killed his wife while he was drunk, went to the police at his free will, confessed to his guilt and payed his life for it.

End of the story.

Move on gentlemen......


Rainbow°

[John Wheat]

Am I? I would say that if there was a 9 out of 10 chance that the Ripper drank before he murdered, it would still apply that this killer probably belonged to the last tenth.
Statistics are useful many times, but in this case, we have specific reasons to think that the killer was not drunk. The total lack of noise, the ability to sneak in and out unnoticed, the skilful cutting performed all speak of a killer who was not under the influence.

I know that you really, really, really, REALLY want me to be wrong, John, and I can only say that it didn´t work this time either.

Maybe in the future, though! Who knows?

Bullshit. You're wrong. A 1 in 2 chance of being under the influence of alcohol. And the comparative sloppiness in some of the cuts of some of the victims suggests various states of inebriation in the murders of different victims.

[Fisherman]

The term "drunken" is a relative one, Fish.

"Drunken" is not compatible with a stealthy, cautious and meticulous pattern of acting.

However, it is utterly stupid to prolong the debate. The killer was in all probability not acting as a drunken man, but he could have been under the influence of alcohol nevertheless.

There, Harry. It is that simple.

It can be added that both Burys employer and his landlady apparently described him as a violent drunk - and that at the very least seems incomparable with the killings of the Ripper.

[Fisherman]

Elamarna:

True, but we also have Richardson, who's statement fits far better with Cadosch and Long than with Phillips.

Been over that a thousand times. And each of those thousand times, Phillips has always seemed the sensible man to me. Richardson was all over the place, with the possible exception of the backyard stairs...


Having worked with several alcoholics over the years, they often appear sober, and certainly are not loud when in their normal condition

There are all sorts of drunkards, but what is involved in the characterization of "drunken wife-beater" is not a cautious, careful and silent man. That´s all I´m saying.


I tend to agree with you about drunks Fisherman.

Alcoholics are a different matter as I mentioned above.

And indeed, "drunken wife-beater" was the description I reacted to.

Indeed the two I worked with for many years, could only perform there jobs correctly when not sober, they were very well organized and able to carry out complex procedures in the laboratory.

To those who did not know them they would appear not to be drunk,it would only be when one got close enough to smell the alcohol on their breath that one would know they had been drinking.

They were what I gather are called functioning alcoholics and the same could not be applied to all obviously.

All of this is quite well-known. Steve. Once again, they would not be described as drunken.

Can I see the killer as a casual drunk? possible but unlikely, given all the killer had to do.

Can i see the killer as a functioning alcoholic,...... certainly.!

Can I see the killer as a "drunken wife-beater"? No.