William Bury: Jack the Ripper

[Herlock Sholmes]

Do we know how tall Kelly was? Or Chapman and Eddowes? It would seem unlikely that a killer would tackle a victim that he wasn’t confident that he could easily overcome. There’s always the element of the bully with killers. Personally, on the subject of the cry of “murder” I’d have to ask if the killer would really have stayed trapped in that room with a dead body after the cry had gone out with the risk of a concerned neighbour or two arriving at any time?

[Ms Diddles]

Do we know how tall Kelly was? Or Chapman and Eddowes? It would seem unlikely that a killer would tackle a victim that he wasn’t confident that he could easily overcome. There’s always the element of the bully with killers. Personally, on the subject of the cry of “murder” I’d have to ask if the killer would really have stayed trapped in that room with a dead body after the cry had gone out with the risk of a concerned neighbour or two arriving at any time?

Hi Herlock!

I seem to recall reading that MJK was around 5ft 7 (quite tall for a woman in such a deprived area during the LVP).

I can't recall the exact heights of Annie or Kate, but I do remember thinking that they were wee ( 5ft 1 to 5ft 3??).

I imagine that the element of surprise probably counts for a lot and I presume that the killings would likely be accompanied by a strong surge of adrenalin for the killer which could explain it.

You make an interesting point about the cry of "murder!" .

It seems that nobody paid it much heed as such cries were ubiquitous at the time.

Perhaps the killer was confident that this would be the case, went on guard for a bit, but when there were no footsteps or responses to the cry, resumed his work?

Unless of course the witnesses who reported seeing MJK up and about the following morning were actually correct, and the cry of "murder!" was completely unrelated.

But that's a whole other can of worms.....!

[Ms Diddles]

On reflection, I can't recall where I got this information regarding the victim's heights from, so can't be sure of it's veracity.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Hi Herlock!

I seem to recall reading that MJK was around 5ft 7 (quite tall for a woman in such a deprived area during the LVP).

I can't recall the exact heights of Annie or Kate, but I do remember thinking that they were wee ( 5ft 1 to 5ft 3??).

I imagine that the element of surprise probably counts for a lot and I presume that the killings would likely be accompanied by a strong surge of adrenalin for the killer which could explain it.

You make an interesting point about the cry of "murder!" .

It seems that nobody paid it much heed as such cries were ubiquitous at the time.

Perhaps the killer was confident that this would be the case, went on guard for a bit, but when there were no footsteps or responses to the cry, resumed his work?

Unless of course the witnesses who reported seeing MJK up and about the following morning were actually correct, and the cry of "murder!" was completely unrelated.

But that's a whole other can of worms.....!

Hi Ms D,

As you say, I don’t think that we can be certain that the cry came from Kelly but if she had cried out then the killer would have had to have silenced her. Either by killing her or holding his hand over her mouth until he felt safe. But if a neighbour had turned up what could he have done? How long would he have waited before she’d went away and when would he have been sure that she hadn’t just gone to get help? He surely couldn’t have opened the door and hoped that Kelly would have played ball by saying that everything was ok?

We can’t know how the killer would have thought of course but it makes me think that the cry probably came from elsewhere if it existed at all. I’ve always thought that we have to give the killer the ‘credit’ of cunning at least. It’s why I’ve always doubted that BS Man was the ripper. Would he have gone on to kill on the same spot after being seen by 2 people at fairly close hand? Likewise Astrokhan Man. Would he have gone on to murder Kelly after being seen by Hutchinson so closely the he’d stopped down to look into his face?

[Dickere]

On reflection, I can't recall where I got this information regarding the victim's heights from, so can't be sure of it's veracity.

Not Father Ted hopefully

[Ms Diddles]

Not Father Ted hopefully

Hahahahaha!

Nice one, Dickere!

Perhaps they were just very far away......!!!

[Ms Diddles]

Hi Ms D,

As you say, I don’t think that we can be certain that the cry came from Kelly but if she had cried out then the killer would have had to have silenced her. Either by killing her or holding his hand over her mouth until he felt safe. But if a neighbour had turned up what could he have done? How long would he have waited before she’d went away and when would he have been sure that she hadn’t just gone to get help? He surely couldn’t have opened the door and hoped that Kelly would have played ball by saying that everything was ok?

We can’t know how the killer would have thought of course but it makes me think that the cry probably came from elsewhere if it existed at all. I’ve always thought that we have to give the killer the ‘credit’ of cunning at least. It’s why I’ve always doubted that BS Man was the ripper. Would he have gone on to kill on the same spot after being seen by 2 people at fairly close hand? Likewise Astrokhan Man. Would he have gone on to murder Kelly after being seen by Hutchinson so closely the he’d stopped down to look into his face?

As you say, Herlock,

We can't know how the killer thought.

Agreed that it would be a pretty bold man who would go on to commit murder after he knew he had been witnessed with the victim shortly beforehand, however some of the murder scenes would perhaps indicate that he was not entirely risk averse.

If just one of the neighbours had looked out their window at Hanbury St.....

If Cadosh had stuck his nose over the fence to investigate the noise.....

If one of the members had happened to pop out of the International Working Mens Club at just the wrong moment.....

and so on......

I've never been sure of the extent to which the fact that Jack was never caught in the act was due to cunning or sheer luck.

As with so much else, I swither on that!

In fact, I'm tempted to change my name to "Ms Switherer Diddles" or "Switherer Didsy" at this rate.

Edit: Jill Swithers has a certain ring to it.......

[Fogelpa]

Welcome to the forum Fogelpa. Lawende and Schwartz are the popular choices. Harris is almost never mentioned but Joseph Levy was suspiciously secretive and is included in a study that proposes Joseph was a cousin of Jacob Levy, and that Joseph recognised Jacob as the man talking to the woman near the Mitre Square murder site. There is a recently published book "The Crimes of Jack the Ripper" by Paul Roland that sets out the case. There is also one other suggestion that it was an un-named PC that was the witness. The bottom line is, because of the secrecy of Anderson and Swanson, the identity of the seaside witness is pure speculation.

Cheers, George

Cheers for the welcome George!

[Aethelwulf]

Who was this fellow of Kelly's timeline? Could be......

11:00 PM: It is said she is in the Britannia drinking with a young man with a dark mustache who appears respectable and well dressed. It is said she is very drunk.

Mustache seems to be the wrong colour but it is always worth treating thinks like colour with a pinch of salt - especially in artificial light.

I reckon we could stretch 28 to 'young man' and he was described as well dressed and respectable looking when he got his hands on Ellen's dosh. Just the sort of sly ploy he might have used - introduce himself early so he isn't a complete stranger when he sidles up in the early hours.

[Astatine211]

Plus Ellen saying "Jack the Ripper is quiet now" and "Jack the Ripper is taking a rest".

And the chalk graffiti "Jack Ripper is in this seller” and "Jack Ripper is at the back of this door” written before Ellen's murder.

http://williambury.org/blog6/2019/04/24/some-handwriting-characteristics-of-the-princes-street-graffiti/

None of the other suspects have this kind of direct evidence against them except for Cutbush's drawings of mutilated women.

[Aethelwulf]

Plus Ellen saying "Jack the Ripper is quiet now" and "Jack the Ripper is taking a rest".

And the chalk graffiti "Jack Ripper is in this seller” and "Jack Ripper is at the back of this door” written before Ellen's murder.

http://williambury.org/blog6/2019/04/24/some-handwriting-characteristics-of-the-princes-street-graffiti/

None of the other suspects have this kind of direct evidence against them except for Cutbush's drawings of mutilated women.

The amount of quite serious circumstantial evidence that people are prepared to overlook with Bury always amazes me. As you say, there is no other suspect that has anything like Bury's level of highly suspicious attributes.

Can you imagine the bed-wetting hysterics if Druitt had been found with two cheap metal rings on his person (tucked alongside his Bradshaw, of course)? Or if there was any evidence whatsoever that Lechmere was a psychopath?

Bury is too inconvenient. No one wants the mystery to be over and linked to someone so absolutely ordinary.

[Ms Diddles]

The amount of quite serious circumstantial evidence that people are prepared to overlook with Bury always amazes me. As you say, there is no other suspect that has anything like Bury's level of highly suspicious attributes.

Can you imagine the bed-wetting hysterics if Druitt had been found with two cheap metal rings on his person (tucked alongside his Bradshaw, of course)? Or if there was any evidence whatsoever that Lechmere was a psychopath?

Bury is too inconvenient. No one wants the mystery to be over and linked to someone so absolutely ordinary.

Hi Wulf,

I really don't think Bury is considered "too inconvenient" on these boards.

With the exception of people who are emphatic in backing their own suspect, the responses to Bury have been overwhelmingly positive.

The general concensus (in as far as it's possible to achieve such a thing on here) seems to be that he's a decent suspect.

Contrast that with the wailing and gnashing of teeth whenever anyone puts Druitt in the frame or backs the Lechmere theory.

Admittedly he's one of the less glamorous suspects (just a nasty, violent little p#@%k of a man), but I really don't think he is discounted on that basis.

You say hedunnit.

I'm more circumspect and say, he might have dunnit.

He is certainly worthy of consideration.

[Dickere]

Hi Wulf,

I really don't think Bury is considered "too inconvenient" on these boards.

With the exception of people who are emphatic in backing their own suspect, the responses to Bury have been overwhelmingly positive.

The general concensus (in as far as it's possible to achieve such a thing on here) seems to be that he's a decent suspect.

Contrast that with the wailing and gnashing of teeth whenever anyone puts Druitt in the frame or backs the Lechmere theory.

Admittedly he's one of the less glamorous suspects (just a nasty, violent little p#@%k of a man), but I really don't think he is discounted on that basis.

You say hedunnit.

I'm more circumspect and say, he might have dunnit.

He is certainly worthy of consideration.

C'mon Ms D, I'd hate you to get too many splinters in a painful place...

To me, he's a good suspect. But you then need to discount the later killings and also the torso killings which will upset Fish... Are you prepared to do that ?

[Herlock Sholmes]

The amount of quite serious circumstantial evidence that people are prepared to overlook with Bury always amazes me. As you say, there is no other suspect that has anything like Bury's level of highly suspicious attributes.

Can you imagine the bed-wetting hysterics if Druitt had been found with two cheap metal rings on his person (tucked alongside his Bradshaw, of course)? Or if there was any evidence whatsoever that Lechmere was a psychopath?

Bury is too inconvenient. No one wants the mystery to be over and linked to someone so absolutely ordinary.

Sorry Wulf but this is an all too often employed ‘get out’ clause when someone finds his point of view disagreed with. I call it the Marriott Defence. If you’d seen the ‘hysterics’ that have occurred at the merest mention of Druitt as a suspect then I wonder if you would be as quick to make such statements. I want the mystery solved. But I want it solved with incontrovertible evidence not with a theory and with exaggeration.

You claim to be amazed that people are prepared to ‘overlook’ circumstantial evidence but I’d respond by stressing how surprised I’ve been how those that claim that it’s game over are quite prepared to overlook the very obvious differences. Why shouldn’t ignore the very obvious which, in my opinion, considerably outweigh any others.

[Ms Diddles]

C'mon Ms D, I'd hate you to get too many splinters in a painful place...

To me, he's a good suspect. But you then need to discount the later killings and also the torso killings which will upset Fish... Are you prepared to do that ?

Ha! You're quite right Dickere!

I do indeed have a marked tendency to sit on a fence which I've yet to get off of!

Owing to the plethora of suspects and huge holes in the evidence, I tend to rule everyone in (apart from the really silly suspects).

I simultaneously like Bury for it, and quite fancy the torso-ripper theory, even though those two lines of thought are completely incompatible!!!

It's not a very discriminating approach, I'm afraid, but personally I favour it over counting suspects out for relatively flimsy reasons.

Naturally my five a side ripper team has an inordinately large number of players "on the bench"!!