WH Bury Problems

[Fisherman]

Are you joking? Bury is clearly the best Ripper suspect by several country mile whereas Lechmere as a Ripper suspect is laughable. As for me insulting you, you have over stepped the mark too many times with me. Therefore you'll have to deal with that.

I have pointed out that you behave like a football hooligan. You do.

I have pointed out that you prefer to attack me on a personal level to discussing the case facts. You do.

There, dealt with.

If Bury and Lechmere were stood side by side before the police, and if the police were told that Bury had killed his wife and cut her stomach open, whilst there was no information about Lechmere having performed any criminal act, the police would ask "So what is Mr Lechmere doing here?", and they would think that Bury was the best bet.
Once they learned that Bury could not be proven to have been anywhere near any of the murder sites, whereas Lechmere was found alone with one of the victims, the blood running from her neck and pooling on the ground, they would ask Bury to leave and not interfere with the investigation.

You cannot understand this. Fair enough. Not everybody is cut out to comprehend more complex matters. And those who canīt would do well not to use words as "laughable" and "bullshit", since it reflects badly on themselves.

[John Wheat]

Oh, how SUBTLE you are, John!

I am also a transvestite-hater and a good many other derogatory things, donītīcha know? WHy, I even dislike rabbits! And I have actually shot a number of rats dead in my days, with an air rifle, murderous bastard that I am, picking on helpless rats.
Not that all of this changes the fact that Bury is a bad bid and Lechmere a very good one for the killerīs role. But since you have obviously long ago abandoned the hope of salvaging your theory and instead opted for a measly attempt at character assassination (more of your home turf, perhaps?), I thought Iīd might as well help you along a little with that part.

So that you can have a little something that goes your way for a change. Go on, John!

Are you joking? Bury is clearly the best Ripper suspect by several country mile whereas Lechmere as a Ripper suspect is laughable. As for me insulting you, you have over stepped the mark too many times with me. Therefore you'll have to deal with that.

[John Wheat]

You can say that to one of the doctors who examined Mackenzie's murder, and accepted her to be the work of the same hand as the C5

Tabram was also stabed 9 times in the neck..

You are just sewing a ascenario to make Bury look more like the Ripper..

I want to see what you are going to do, when Pierre's suspect turns to be not Bury!

we will have a great deal of fun here ...



Rainbow°

I am not sewing a scenario to make Bury look more like the Ripper I don't need to. however that's what every Lechmere supporter does all the time.

I know Pierre's suspect isn't Bury. I couldn't care less.

[Fisherman]

Columbo: You hate Transvestites? That's an odd one.

I agree - I was just as astonished by that as you are. Its Dustyīs invention (Dr VERY Strange), and he is very adamant that I am a transvestite-hater, so I guss that must be right.

I don't think Bury's any better or worse a suspect, just not a readily accessible one. If he had been found with a body then he would go up the scale of course.

Provided that it was one of the Ripper bodies, yes, I agree. If that was the case, and if he subsequently killed his wife, he would be a VERY probable Ripper, instead of a very improbable one.
If Bury had been a very probable Ripper, Lechmere would be a total riddle, of course.

Each suspect has problems but I don't rule Bury out of the running. He's got some good points going for him as the suspect.

Not really, no. Well, if we favour a propensity for violence as a Ripper trait, then yes, he did have that "quality". But he was not exactly alone about it. If we reason that killing is something the fewest do, and that this ties Bury and the Ripper together, then Mr Brown, who killed HIS wife by cutting her neck on the night of the double event is just as good - or bad - suspect as Bury is. If cutting the abdomen open is what gives away a Ripper deed, then Bury should be considered. But it is very much about HOW the abdomen is cut that tells the story, that and to which degree organs go lost. And Bury fails miserably on those scores.
He is a man the police needed to check out, but I strongly believe they departed for Dundee with very little hope to find the Whitechapel killer.

His peculiarities can be interpreted and stretched as is done with other suspects, but some are unique to him and I think these peculiarities keep him an interesting person to look at.

Which specific peculiarity/ies are we speaking about?

Not near as interesting as the Prince but you never know.

Clarence? Now, thereīs an apt playmate for William Henry...

[Columbo]

Oh, how SUBTLE you are, John!

I am also a transvestite-hater and a good many other derogatory things, donītīcha know? WHy, I even dislike rabbits! And I have actually shot a number of rats dead in my days, with an air rifle, murderous bastard that I am, picking on helpless rats.
Not that all of this changes the fact that Bury is a bad bid and Lechmere a very good one for the killerīs role. But since you have obviously long ago abandoned the hope of salvaging your theory and instead opted for a measly attempt at character assassination (more of your home turf, perhaps?), I thought Iīd might as well help you along a little with that part.

So that you can have a little something that goes your way for a change. Go on, John!

You hate Transvestites? That's an odd one.

I don't think Bury's any better or worse a suspect, just not a readily accessible one. If he had been found with a body then he would go up the scale of course.

Each suspect has problems but I don't rule Bury out of the running. He's got some good points going for him as the suspect.

His peculiarities can be interpreted and stretched as is done with other suspects, but some are unique to him and I think these peculiarities keep him an interesting person to look at.

Not near as interesting as the Prince but you never know.

Columbo

[Fisherman]

Hi John,

Not sure I agree with that. There are reports that police at the time were looking for deranged maniacs from asylums and the like. It sounds like they did look at other criminals back then as well.

Columbo

First and foremost, we know that the police DID look into Bury, and that would be on account of how he cut his wifeīs abdomen open. So speculating that the police missed an opportunity to put Bury on trial for the Ripper murders is wrong - the satisfied themselves that he was nothing but another one of all those domestic killers, although he had apparently made a nod in the Ripperīs direction.

The vistorian police was interested in any person who had wielded a knife, but they were much more prejudiced against a number of "types" of people than todays police. They preferred knifemen of foreign extraction and even more so if these men were mentally challenged.

[Columbo]

I have mixed feelings about Pierre. On the one hand he should publish his theory but on the other he has rightly identified what a **** suspect Lechmere is.

He may have but it would be nice if we could have a thread based on the actual suspect and not drag Lechmere into every one of them.

Columbo

[Columbo]

Yes they do now in 2016. However in 1889 that was obviously not the case. Otherwise Bury would have been tried for the Ripper murders.

Hi John,

Not sure I agree with that. There are reports that police at the time were looking for deranged maniacs from asylums and the like. It sounds like they did look at other criminals back then as well.

Columbo

[Fisherman]

Of course some on this thread know all about lying.

Oh, how SUBTLE you are, John!

I am also a transvestite-hater and a good many other derogatory things, donītīcha know? WHy, I even dislike rabbits! And I have actually shot a number of rats dead in my days, with an air rifle, murderous bastard that I am, picking on helpless rats.
Not that all of this changes the fact that Bury is a bad bid and Lechmere a very good one for the killerīs role. But since you have obviously long ago abandoned the hope of salvaging your theory and instead opted for a measly attempt at character assassination (more of your home turf, perhaps?), I thought Iīd might as well help you along a little with that part.

So that you can have a little something that goes your way for a change. Go on, John!

[Rainbow]

You can say that to one of the doctors who examined Mackenzie's murder, and accepted her to be the work of the same hand as the C5

Tabram was also stabed 9 times in the neck..

You are just sewing a ascenario to make Bury look more like the Ripper..

I want to see what you are going to do, when Pierre's suspect turns to be not Bury!

we will have a great deal of fun here ...



Rainbow°

[John Wheat]

No but McKenzies Killer stabbed the throat rather than used strangulation. Also your comment about Pierre having a more womanly tone is frankly a bit weird.

[Rainbow]

Harry's right you're wrong deal with it.

Did you find Mackenzie's killer yet John,?!

Try to look for him in prisons.. those are parts of history you know...

You can ask for the help of the great historian Pierre too, since you both seem very much in harmony, to a dgree that I can not always tell the difference between your post's and his.. except that his posts have more womanish undertone.

Ya, let's see what you may bring to lights together


Rainbow°

[John Wheat]

Pierre, I agree:

For research: criticize!

SO PUBLISH YOUR RESEARCH, stop being a snivelling coward and hypocrite. Until you have the guts to open up your suspect to objective investigation and rebuttals as Fisherman does, shut the eff up and get lost, you little turd.

I have mixed feelings about Pierre. On the one hand he should publish his theory but on the other he has rightly identified what a **** suspect Lechmere is.

[John Wheat]

Sorry Rainbow but that's actually how police do investigations. If they can't tie anyone the victim knows to the crime they look at criminals who may have caused the crime, especially those that have a similar MO, unless they already have a suspect in mind. Bury would be one they would look at.

Columbo

Yes they do now in 2016. However in 1889 that was obviously not the case. Otherwise Bury would have been tried for the Ripper murders.

[Columbo]

Do you know what that means ?!!

That means, everytime you have a series of murders, look among those who are well known convicted criminals, the one who's mureder looks most like this series, is your guy

So, if Bury was the Ripper but he didn't kill his wife and go to the police, we will be now looking for the second most likely convicted criminal.

You know what, you are saying, I don't want to be a detective, I have other better things in life to do... bring us some guy who has been convicted before for a' similar' crime, and hang him.

If we say it is similar, but not the same, you will say, whatever, he is already a criminal and he deserves it !!!

If we say , there was also a similar murder after this guy was caught, you will say ... a copycat killer ?!

Let us now look for this copycat killer, and of course, he must be convicted before....

Life is easy... let's have some fun!




Rainbow°

Sorry Rainbow but that's actually how police do investigations. If they can't tie anyone the victim knows to the crime they look at criminals who may have caused the crime, especially those that have a similar MO, unless they already have a suspect in mind. Bury would be one they would look at.

Columbo