Why William Henry Bury may have been Jack

[Herlock Sholmes]

Hi Mike,

There are references to a Kosminski suspect by Macnaughten and Swanson, but only by surname. The only real tie to Aaron Mordke Kosminski is that Fido was only able to find one record of a Kosminski in asylum records, that being Aaron. The police house to house search after the murder of MJK was in the area in the purview of the City police, which included Scion Square, but Aaron's family did not live in Scion Square until 1891. Curiously there was a Kosminski family living with the limits of the City police at #76 Goulston St. The head of that family was Isaac Abrahams (Kosminski), Aaron's older brother. Since this is off topic, I'll finish here with a recommendation towards several excellent dissertations by Scott Nelson.

https://www.casebook.org/dissertations/dst-isaac.html

https://www.casebook.org/dissertations/kosfinal.html

Cheers, George

Cheers George. I’ve read all of the dissertations on here but it’s been over quite a few years. I’ll give those two another read over the weekend.

[The Baron]

If Bury was Jack the Ripper, he wouldn't have killed his wife and walked to the Police himself thinking, yes, I will tell them she hanged herself and they will believe me, I will just add a couple of stabs here and there to show them I was realy realy angry with her, as if there were no hunt for a Jack the ripper, they will investigate and know we have just arrived from London, and they will discover how many times I assaulted her and threatened her with my special set of knifes, but the Jury and the Judge will have no choice but to believe me, yes the court wouldnt allow me to speak, but when they look deep in my eyes they will just believe me..


No serial killer will think like this, I wonder how Buryians could face Lechmerians with this line of thinking keeping a straight face

From many of the testimonies we hear that Bury was almost always drunk, I think he was genuinely not sure what did just happen.


The Baron

[The Baron]

Bury was not the ripper.

The Police didn't consider him a viable suspect.



The Baron

[A P Tomlinson]

If Bury was Jack the Ripper, he wouldn't have killed his wife and walked to the Police himself thinking, yes, I will tell them she hanged herself and they will believe me, I will just add a couple of stabs here and there to show them I was realy realy angry with her, as if there were no hunt for a Jack the ripper, they will investigate and know we have just arrived from London, and they will discover how many times I assaulted her and threatened her with my special set of knifes, but the Jury and the Judge will have no choice but to believe me, yes the court wouldnt allow me to speak, but when they look deep in my eyes they will just believe me..


No serial killer will think like this, I wonder how Buryians could face Lechmerians with this line of thinking keeping a straight face

From many of the testimonies we hear that Bury was almost always drunk, I think he was genuinely not sure what did just happen.


The Baron

I don't think I've come across anyone who thinks that.
Certainly never come across anyone who SAID that they think that.
Have you?

[Herlock Sholmes]

Bury was not the ripper.

The Police didn't consider him a viable suspect.

Strong evidence, because the police have never been wrong have they?

The Baron

You missed a bit..

“Bury was not the ripper in my opinion.”

[S.Brett]

RE: Isaac Kosminski, Goulston Street, 1891:

It is possible that his usual name was Isaac Joseph. His wife Elizabeth was a born Levy, children were Michael and Betsy. Records show different surnames of Michael and Betsy: Michael Joseph and Betsy Kosminski. Maybe Elizabeth was once married to a Kosminski, daughter Betsy, one cannot be sure, just conjecture.

Karsten.

[The Baron]

RE: Isaac Kosminski, Goulston Street, 1891:

It is possible that his usual name was Isaac Joseph. His wife Elizabeth was a born Levy, children were Michael and Betsy. Records show different surnames of Michael and Betsy: Michael Joseph and Betsy Kosminski. Maybe Elizabeth was once married to a Kosminski, daughter Betsy, one cannot be sure, just conjecture.

Karsten.

Great to have you Karsten, thanks



The Baron

[rjpalmer]

Goulston Street would be in Met territory, not the City of London.

[The Baron]

>> If he had butchered Ellen the way he butchered Kelly, he would have made it clear to everyone that he was the Ripper.

>> So we know that Bury was the Ripper because he did not kill like the Ripper did?


This is exactly the contradiction and twisted logic Buryians don't get, they shouldn't be mad of the Lechmerians when they themselves have the same approach to their suspect.



The Baron

[Herlock Sholmes]

Are the two emboldened sentences above quotes? If they are who were they from?

[GBinOz]

Goulston Street would be in Met territory, not the City of London.

Hi RP,

Quite correct, nor was Scion Square. I stand corrected.

Cheers, George

[The Baron]

And let's not forget that Bury has now been acquitted.

Not guilty.

And the police at the time investigated him in relation to the Whitechapel murders and found nothing.

Everything remains is merely theorising, nothing more, which makes Bury a person of interest and not a serious suspect.



The Baron

[GBinOz]

And let's not forget that Bury has now been acquitted.

Not guilty.

And the police at the time investigated him in relation to the Whitechapel murders and found nothing.

Everything remains is merely theorising, nothing more, which makes Bury a person of interest and not a serious suspect.



The Baron

Bury was acquitted of murdering his wife in his recent retrial, on the basis of conflicting medical testimony. In his original trial he was found guilty of murdering his wife, but with a recommendation of mercy, again based on conflicting medical testimony, but the judge over-ruled the recommendation and after reconsideration by the jury, the final verdict was an unqualified guilty of murdering his wife, and the Judge pronounced the death penalty on this verdict .

Neither of these trials concerned themselves with whether Bury was involved in the Whitechapel murders. The latter consideration is proffered on the allegation that the M.O. of Ellen's murder was similar to that of the Ripper. I do not see that similarity, and I have a sufficiency of persons of interest to occupy my time rather than pursuing persons that I don't find of interest, but that is JMO. YMMV.

Cheers, George

[The Rookie Detective]

And let's not forget that Bury has now been acquitted.

Not guilty.

And the police at the time investigated him in relation to the Whitechapel murders and found nothing.

Everything remains is merely theorising, nothing more, which makes Bury a person of interest and not a serious suspect.



The Baron

Putting too much faith in the judgement of thr police at the time is a bit like putting faith in a political party by voting for them; safe in the knowledge that they'll get the job done.

its nieve


At the time there was a lot of anti semitic rhetoric that guided the police into searching for a Jewish lunatic.

The Ripper was likely neither of those.


If Bury had of been Jewish, he would have charged for the Ripper murders the moment he was found to have mutilated his wife post mortem.


The idea that a recent review chose to acquit him is on par with a parole panel allowing out a convicted mass murderer on the premise that he has been behaving well and is no longer a harm to the public.

it's absolutely nonsense.

Bury was an evil ba**ard who took pleasure in what he did and no modern jury can alter the truth of reality for the sake of it.

The only reason he wasn't taken seriously as the Ripper.. was because he wasn't Jewish and it didn't play into the rhetoric of the time.


RD

[The Baron]

Unbelievable.. everytime one says Bury has been now acquitted of his crime, someone has to say but he was convicted in the first trial ....

Astonishing really, the land who convicted him first time later converted the verdict at the same exact spot and in the same court room of the first trial, he is now found NOT GUILTY.

Does a retrial means there was no first trial???

Does converting a verdict mean the recent verdict is the same as the old one????



The Baron