WH Bury Problems

[Fisherman]

Have answered many times and so have a lot of people here. You keep on ignoring our answers.

Pierre

And he tries it again, and guess what?

It fails again.

Still no acknowledgement from Pierres side that he was wrong. A lame suggestion that the answer has already been delivered is all there is, and that is a blatant lie.

[John Wheat]

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°

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

[John Wheat]

And he tries it again, and guess what?

It fails again.

Still no acknowledgement from Pierres side that he was wrong. A lame suggestion that the answer has already been delivered is all there is, and that is a blatant lie.

Of course some on this thread know all about lying.

[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

[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.

[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.

[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]

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]

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°

[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, don´t´cha 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 killer´s 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 I´d 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!

[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

[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

[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 wife´s 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 Ripper´s 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]

Oh, how SUBTLE you are, John!

I am also a transvestite-hater and a good many other derogatory things, don´t´cha 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 killer´s 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 I´d 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]

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

I agree - I was just as astonished by that as you are. Its Dusty´s 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, there´s an apt playmate for William Henry...