Why William Henry Bury may have been Jack

[Herlock Sholmes]

Fallacies are being perpetuated here just because someone desperately wants to eliminate Bury from a list of suspects. In any list and in any poll conducted among any group of people with a knowledge of the Whitechapel murders Bury would be included, and usually near to the top. Find me any poll with no Bury in it.

Bury can’t be eliminated from any list unless that list is tailored specifically to eliminate him; which is what is being done here. How happy would some people be if the rest of us said that Coles was undoubtedly a victim, therefore we eliminate Kosminski? Would that be considered a fair and reasonable statement? Of course it wouldn’t, but it would be fair for someone to say ‘it’s my opinion that Coles was a victim so I personally have to eliminate Kosminski from my own list.’ So the same should only be said regarding Mackenzie - ‘it’s my opinion that Mackenzie was a victim so I personally have to eliminate Bury from my own list.’

Balance is often a problem. Ripper suspects aren’t football teams or family members and shouldn’t be defended as such. We don’t know who the ripper was and probably never will. Could it have been Bury? Yes. Could it have been Kosminski? Yes. Could it have been Cohen? Yes. Could it have been Kelly? Yes. Could it have been Druitt? Yes. Could it have been Levy? Yes. Could it have been Tumblety? Yes……And so on…..

[The Baron]

Didn't the committee of coroners finally agree that the knife wounds had been made within ten minutes of her death?

I don't recall the source, (else I'd cite it...) but I'm sure that I read that the initial examination concluded the ten minute thing.
Then a more senior pathologist examined her a day or so later and said there was a problem with that, and that they were inflicted at a later time, due to the knife wounds not being everted. But then the doctors who did the intial exam pointed out that the wounds HAD been everted at the time of their examination, and the senior doctor basically said, "Oh, in that case then yes... the 10 minute window sounds fair enough"

It stuck in my mind because its one of the few instances where two authorities disagreed on something, then came to a civil and fairly clear agreement after some simple exchange of data... Imagine that!

What amazes me the most about Bury, and I'm in no way convinced he was The Ripper, is that here we have a man who strangles a woman, then cuts her up, then when the option to just leave her body in the street is unavailable, he performs some of the most dehumainsing and despicable acts one can imagine conducting on a stranger let alone a family member, makes several references to Jack the Ripper, jumps in public at the mentioon of Jack the Ripper, and has Jack the Ripper graffiti in his house... and its STILL the guy whose entire case against him consists of, found a body and gave his stepfathers surname at an inquest who has the masses on Youtube crying out for justice.
Weird world...

Hi Tom,

Bury confessed to his crime and took his punishment, he was hanged to death.

But what about the man who performed some of the most dehumainsing and despicable acts on Mckenzie ?!

Why should Bury be hanged twice for something he didn't commit, is it because we cannot find the true perpetrator?


The Baron

[A P Tomlinson]

Hi Frank

It's important to note that the abdominal cuts were made sometime after Ellen Bury had been strangled. Maybe Bury/Jack couldn't resist some mutilation.

Cheers John

Didn't the committee of coroners finally agree that the knife wounds had been made within ten minutes of her death?

I don't recall the source, (else I'd cite it...) but I'm sure that I read that the initial examination concluded the ten minute thing.
Then a more senior pathologist examined her a day or so later and said there was a problem with that, and that they were inflicted at a later time, due to the knife wounds not being everted. But then the doctors who did the intial exam pointed out that the wounds HAD been everted at the time of their examination, and the senior doctor basically said, "Oh, in that case then yes... the 10 minute window sounds fair enough"

It stuck in my mind because its one of the few instances where two authorities disagreed on something, then came to a civil and fairly clear agreement after some simple exchange of data... Imagine that!

What amazes me the most about Bury, and I'm in no way convinced he was The Ripper, is that here we have a man who strangles a woman, then cuts her up, then when the option to just leave her body in the street is unavailable, he performs some of the most dehumainsing and despicable acts one can imagine conducting on a stranger let alone a family member, makes several references to Jack the Ripper, jumps in public at the mentioon of Jack the Ripper, and has Jack the Ripper graffiti in his house... and its STILL the guy whose entire case against him consists of, found a body and gave his stepfathers surname at an inquest who has the masses on Youtube crying out for justice.
Weird world...

[GBinOz]

Hi John,

Even though what you write is true, it doesn't change my view. In fact, with all the writing and verbally suggesting he was the Ripper, the abdominal cuts give me the impression that he did that to suggest he was the Ripper. It all eems a bit too contrived to me. But that's just my view.

Cheers,
Frank

Hi Frank,

That's also my view. Suggestion without admission. Very much contrived. No disrespect to your opinion John.

Best regards, George

[FrankO]

Hi Frank

Fair enough. Obviously I don't agree but fair enough.

Cheers John

I won't hold it against you, John. Everybody has his own views and opinions, that's the problem when the evidence we're left with is so little and regularly contadictive or vague.

Cheers,
Frank

[John Wheat]

Hi John,

Even though what you write is true, it doesn't change my view. In fact, with all the writing and verbally suggesting he was the Ripper, the abdominal cuts give me the impression that he did that to suggest he was the Ripper. It all eems a bit too contrived to me. But that's just my view.

Cheers,
Frank

Hi Frank

Fair enough. Obviously I don't agree but fair enough.

Cheers John

[FrankO]

Hi Frank

It's important to note that the abdominal cuts were made sometime after Ellen Bury had been strangled. Maybe Bury/Jack couldn't resist some mutilation.

Cheers John

Hi John,

Even though what you write is true, it doesn't change my view. In fact, with all the writing and verbally suggesting he was the Ripper, the abdominal cuts give me the impression that he did that to suggest he was the Ripper. It all eems a bit too contrived to me. But that's just my view.

Cheers,
Frank

[Lewis C]

Hi Lewis,

True, but if it’s possible that Stride could have been interrupted then perhaps the same happened to Coles murderer?

I think that it's very likely that Coles' killer was interrupted, but not before he cut her throat twice. My belief is that when the C5 and Mackenzie had their throats cut, they died immediately, but maybe we don't know that for sure.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Hi Herlock,

In addition to the time gap, there's also the fact that Coles wasn't dead when her body was found, unlike the C5, Tabram and Mackenzie.

Hi Lewis,

True, but if it’s possible that Stride could have been interrupted then perhaps the same happened to Coles murderer?

[Lewis C]

Regarding the time gap for Mackenzie, note that the murders of Tabram thru Eddowes all occurred in August or September. Kelly was killed indoors. Maybe JtK was inclined to kill outdoors only when it was fairly warm out. When is the next time that the average temperature in London is as warm as in late September? The first half of May, right? The time gap from then to Mackenzie's murder is a little over 2 months.

[Lewis C]

Just as an aside, people often bring up Mackenzie, it’s debatable and that’s fine. People bring up Tabram, it’s debatable and that’s fine. We discuss Stride (who only had her throat cut) it’s debatable and that’s fine. Why does no one mention Coles? A gap of time…yes, but I could suggest any number of speculated explanations for that.

Hi Herlock,

In addition to the time gap, there's also the fact that Coles wasn't dead when her body was found, unlike the C5, Tabram and Mackenzie.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Just as an aside, people often bring up Mackenzie, it’s debatable and that’s fine. People bring up Tabram, it’s debatable and that’s fine. We discuss Stride (who only had her throat cut) it’s debatable and that’s fine. Why does no one mention Coles? A gap of time…yes, but I could suggest any number of speculated explanations for that.

[John Wheat]

Hi John,

Thanks for your reaction. I can't say that what you say is impossible or implausible from a ration point of view, but I see the Ripper's desire to mutilate as his driving force and from that viewpoint I find it a bit hard to swallow that he would have settled for much less than he could have done and did to the other victims. Taken together with what I wrote in my previous post, I, for one, don't believe Bury was the Ripper. But I might well be wrong.

Cheers,
Frank

Hi Frank

It's important to note that the abdominal cuts were made sometime after Ellen Bury had been strangled. Maybe Bury/Jack couldn't resist some mutilation.

Cheers John

[FrankO]

Hi Frank

I'd suggest that Bury wanted to get away with Ellen Bury's murder and had he gone to town on Ellen Bury he would have no chance of getting away with Ellen's murder.

Cheers John

Hi John,

Thanks for your reaction. I can't say that what you say is impossible or implausible from a ration point of view, but I see the Ripper's desire to mutilate as his driving force and from that viewpoint I find it a bit hard to swallow that he would have settled for much less than he could have done and did to the other victims. Taken together with what I wrote in my previous post, I, for one, don't believe Bury was the Ripper. But I might well be wrong.

Cheers,
Frank

[John Wheat]

Hi George,

I agree with you. Had Bury put his money more where his mouth was - or, as we say in Dutch: no words, but deeds - I might have been able to believe Bury was the Ripper. As it stands, the spoken & written words in the murder on his wife give me too much the impression that Bury wished to convey the notion that he was Jack the Ripper. Why, if he actually was him (or just wanted to be seen as him), didn't he let his knife speak more clearly?

Best regards,
Frank

Hi Frank

I'd suggest that Bury wanted to get away with Ellen Bury's murder and had he gone to town on Ellen Bury he would have no chance of getting away with Ellen's murder.

Cheers John