Bury's handwriting

[Wyatt Earp]

Great spot Wyatt?, can you see anything else?

Thank you Boggles and Ashkenaz. According to Bates' I.S.Q.D., "One of the most telltale strokes which will give away the forger is the t-crossing; another is the i-dot. No matter how careful the imitator may be, he will have a hard time not leaving his own characteristics behind in making these strokes" (2005, pages 13 and 14). One of the things you will learn from this book is that there are a lot of ways of dotting an "i" and crossing a "t."

Looking at the Lusk letter, it's immediately apparent that there are a number of different forms of the t-bar (including one "form" where there is no t-bar at all). When there are multiple forms of the same letter, that is a signal that the Lusk letter could be a specimen of disguised handwriting. Certainly the initial t-bar in "tother" looks very much like a Bury t-bar. The problem, of course, is that there is no way of knowing which if any of the forms is the writer's natural t-bar and which are the phony ones.

If you look at Bury's handwriting samples, it's clear that his i-dot tends high and toward the right, although on occasion it does drift back to the left (see the words "intention" and "penitent" in the confession letter, and the word "it" in "it is a very clean town" in the letter from Ellen). Bury's characteristic i-dot is well in evidence in the Lusk letter.

I think it is of some interest that we can say "could be Bury" for both the t-bar and i-dot formations in the Lusk letter.

[Ashkenaz]

It's about time you were promoted to Inspector Wyatt !

I am now sure it was Bury thanks.

People in that part of the world do speak like this, the sort of marry two words together.

A gift for you Inspector Wyatt : http://www.bbc.co.uk/blackcountry/fe..._dialect.shtml

[Boggles]

I think it is of some interest that we can say "could be Bury" for both the t-bar and i-dot formations

Thanks Wyatt.

What about the slant, you dont see much of this i would say it is very varaiable in both letters?

Handwriting aside what about the size & type of paper used vs corney letter. And whats your opinion on the pen (is there a way you can tell is the writing tools were the same).

[Wyatt Earp]

Thanks Wyatt.

What about the slant, you dont see much of this i would say it is very varaiable in both letters?

Handwriting aside what about the size & type of paper used vs corney letter. And whats your opinion on the pen (is there a way you can tell is the writing tools were the same).

I lack the expertise to comment on these issues.

[Wyatt Earp]

I am now sure it was Bury thanks.

The handwriting characteristics I mentioned are consistent with Bury, but they're a far cry from fingering him. They're not sufficiently unique to do that. It would be great if a trained forensic document examiner took an interest in comparing Bury's handwriting samples to the handwriting of the Lusk letter.

[Ashkenaz]

The handwriting characteristics I mentioned are consistent with Bury, but they're a far cry from fingering him. They're not sufficiently unique to do that. It would be great if a trained forensic document examiner took an interest in comparing Bury's handwriting samples to the handwriting of the Lusk letter.

He ticks all my boxes . It began when it went to the East End, it stopped when he left. His general description fits. His age fits. The FBI profile fits. From the way he abused his wife fits. Here is our woman hater. He passes the profile for a psychopath described by O’Hare. Your stuff fits well . The MO for Ellen’s killer is that of JtR.

Sure, there were quite a lot of weirdo’s at that place, at that time. Cream like to watch his victims suffering while being slowly poisoned, Chapman was similar. They both enjoyed this, and were unlikely to deviate from the MO without a good reason. But there was only one man who enjoyed cutting women up, stabbed them repeatedly, and cannibalising them.

For sure, I will wait for the trained forensic document examiner too ! But for me, the case is over.

[John Wheat]

An excellent post Ashkenaz, as you rightly point out Bury is a very strong suspect indeed. Its surprising how little he's mentioned on these boards. The only real argument against Bury is that Bury's murder of Ellen isn't as brutal as Mary Jane Kelly's murder. But he wasn't going to hang himself. And as you know he nearly got away with Ellen's murder.

[Bridewell]

It began when he went to the East End, it stopped when he left.

We don't know, with any degree of certainty which of the Whitechapel Murders were by the same hand. Until such time as we do, I don't see how it's possible to know when 'it began' or when 'it stopped'. If Alice McKenzie was a Ripper murder (and the contemporary medical opinion was very much divided on that) Bury has a cast-iron alibi.

Regards, Bridewell.

[Boggles]

Good point, anyone looking at bury should be looking at Mckenzie in a great deal of detail and perhapes this deserves a whole new trhead discussion?

My own view is no - this is basically because purpertrator was not targeting the kind of areas that the Ellen Bury murder or other jtr murders (and because the best suspect was dead at the time of course )

[Cogidubnus]

Blimey Will - talk about a self-perpetuating argument! (OK I know you were kidding!)

Mind you, perhaps we ought to be asking Bridewell, whether, regardless of Bury, he actually believes Alice was a ripper victim (and his reasons) ?

All the best

Dave

[Boggles]

Just another point on Burys handwriting - you have to read at the bottom of this snippet from Evening Telegraph October 1913 but apparently according to Berry the London police at the time thought Burys handwriting a good match with the Ripper's. Though specify exactly which of the ripper letters they compared it with.

[Wyatt Earp]

Just a few observations on the handwriting in these messages, which were chalked at the back of Bury’s residence in Dundee. For anyone who might not be familiar with Bury, there was testimony at his trial that he could write in “several hands.”

In both messages the i-dot is missing from the word “Ripper” but is present for every other lower case “i.” The handwriting people will tell you that behavior with the i-dot is an area where a person can give himself away. I think this identical pattern in both messages is evidence that they were written by the same person—Bury. (There is no reason for a schoolboy to chalk messages in two different hands, and Ellen Bury would not have needed to chalk more than one message to incriminate Bury.)

This is really just an aside, but look carefully at the behavior with the t-bar in the message on the left. The t-bar is absent in the word “the” but appears to be present in the word “at” (unfortunately it’s hard to tell which is the case with the word “this”). You see this same sort of behavior with the t-bar in the Lusk letter—sometimes absent, sometimes present.

[Cogidubnus]

Hi Wyatt Earp

As has previously been quite forcefully pointed out to me in the past, these are not photographically accurate reproductions of the graffiti...nor are they necessarily even artistically correct...they are merely journalistic interpretations.

Any attempt at handwriting analysis is, (as I was previously forced to accept), therefore, totally meaningless...

Unless of course you can prove the journalists in question produced a really accurate representation of the graffiti concerned...

Sorry

Dave

[Wyatt Earp]

Hi Wyatt Earp

As has previously been quite forcefully pointed out to me in the past, these are not photographically accurate reproductions of the graffiti...nor are they necessarily even artistically correct...they are merely journalistic interpretations.

Any attempt at handwriting analysis is, (as I was previously forced to accept), therefore, totally meaningless...

Unless of course you can prove the journalists in question produced a really accurate representation of the graffiti concerned...

Sorry

Dave

Dave, I've been proceeding on the basis of what William Beadle has in his 2009 book, Jack the Ripper Unmasked: "During the course of the day, the Advertiser's reporter was taken down the back steps of number 113 to photograph the two Ripper messages. Facsimiles appeared in the newspaper the following day. The page cutting is carefully preserved among the Police files on the Bury case" (pp.248-250). In a footnote he adds: "According to a journalist friend, the facsimiles would be obtained by reversing the negatives of the photographs" (p.279).

If you believe that Beadle has it wrong, please elaborate on that.

[GUT]

Just a few observations on the handwriting in these messages, which were chalked at the back of Bury’s residence in Dundee. For anyone who might not be familiar with Bury, there was testimony at his trial that he could write in “several hands.”

In both messages the i-dot is missing from the word “Ripper” but is present for every other lower case “i.” The handwriting people will tell you that behavior with the i-dot is an area where a person can give himself away. I think this identical pattern in both messages is evidence that they were written by the same person—Bury. (There is no reason for a schoolboy to chalk messages in two different hands, and Ellen Bury would not have needed to chalk more than one message to incriminate Bury.)

This is really just an aside, but look carefully at the behavior with the t-bar in the message on the left. The t-bar is absent in the word “the” but appears to be present in the word “at” (unfortunately it’s hard to tell which is the case with the word “this”). You see this same sort of behavior with the t-bar in the Lusk letter—sometimes absent, sometimes present.

I really can not accept that the examples in the photos are even in the same Hand, look at the J in Jack and the R in Ripper or even the T in the, aside from the cross-bar the shape of the letter is all different, and the "pp"'s are very dissimilar.