Why William Henry Bury may have been Jack

[A P Tomlinson]

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

He didn't exactly confess to his crime though, did he.
He made up some half-arsed **** and bull story about discovering her body following her committing suicide, and that he felt compelled to poke a few holes in her with a knife. He then snapped her bones and hid her in a box... because it suddenly occured to him that that whole business of him slicing her torso and attacking her genitals with a knife might get him into trouble. (I wonder why he thought that???)

Bury, along with quite a few others, assumed he would avoid the hangman's rope.
He "took his punishment" in the same way that one might take a bird dumping a turd on them from overhead... didn't see it coming till it was too late to avoid.

[GBinOz]

Hi George,

Accepted of course but the point that I was trying to make is that ‘we’ cant assume that he wasn’t a murderer. The mutilation of her body after death must add weight to the suggestion that he was also her killer?

Ive also got no issue with your assessment on likelihood of him being the ripper. I suppose that a phrase that might reflect the situation more accurately could be that he is ‘one of the less weak suspects?’

Hi Herlock,

I am experiencing some concern that you may have formed the opinion that I am suggesting that Bury may have been innocent of his wife's murder. I can offer an absolute assurance that I do not believe this to be the case. The defence did an excellent job of creating doubt in the mind of the jury on the basis of the conflicting medical opinion, but the Judge rightly instructed them that it was their job to deliver a guilty or not guilty verdict, and his job to determine the sentence based on the presented evidence.

While I don't have a list of suspects for the Whitechapel murders, I do have a list of persons worthy of further consideration. I am aware of the fact that my exclusion of Bury from that list places me in the minority, but I have never felt uncomfortable with membership of that group.

Cheers, George

[GBinOz]

The jury is out on Bury but I feel the more recent mock trial that George mentions, is nothing more than smoke and mirrors and is based on the fact that the initial jury were indeed torn about whether to convict a guilty without mercy verdict.
Bury deserved no mercy for what he did to his wife post mortem; whether he strangled her or not.

And no modern woke jury is able to use a mock trial to alter the fact he was a vile piece of work that deserved what he got.
We give his wife a great disservice by trying to find excuses for why Bury should have received mercy.

What he deserved was to be hanged and to fade into obscurity.

RD

Hi RD,

A well assessed and balanced post. The retrial provided an opportunity for a modern forensic assessment of the evidence, but it turned out to be very similar to the original. I struggle to believe that a man in possession of his faculties could image that he could convince anyone that the mutilation of his wife's body was a reasonable re-action to her suicide. Had he not done this, and reported the death immediately, the jury may well have acquitted him. Such is the price of an anticipated place in history, which he appears to have acquired.

Cheers, George

[Herlock Sholmes]

Hi Herlock,

I am experiencing some concern that you may have formed the opinion that I am suggesting that Bury may have been innocent of his wife's murder. I can offer an absolute assurance that I do not believe this to be the case. The defence did an excellent job of creating doubt in the mind of the jury on the basis of the conflicting medical opinion, but the Judge rightly instructed them that it was their job to deliver a guilty or not guilty verdict, and his job to determine the sentence based on the presented evidence.

While I don't have a list of suspects for the Whitechapel murders, I do have a list of persons worthy of further consideration. I am aware of the fact that my exclusion of Bury from that list places me in the minority, but I have never felt uncomfortable with membership of that group.

Cheers, George

Hi George,

I didn’t think that you were suggesting Bury’s innocence. I wasn’t helping matters in terms of clarity because I was talking of the opinion of another poster whilst not mentioning him. My overall point is that it shouldn’t be assumed, or suggested with any great authority, that Bury might not have killed his wife purely on the basis of an opinion to the contrary.

I certainly have no issue with you not having Bury on your list George because i know that you won’t have formed your opinion in line with an agenda. It’s an honestly held opinion based on your own judgment and experience. 136 years and we really don’t have a strong suspect. We have a long list composed largely of ‘suspects’ for whom there’s no reason to suspect them of being involved. And a few of greater interest to some but not all. I do agree that there’s little point in debating one suspect against another though as it’s the equivalent of you and Frank staying silent for a month and the rest of us heatedly debating which of you owns the most pairs of shoes.

[GBinOz]

I certainly have no issue with you not having Bury on your list George because i know that you won’t have formed your opinion in line with an agenda. It’s an honestly held opinion based on your own judgment and experience. 136 years and we really don’t have a strong suspect. We have a long list composed largely of ‘suspects’ for whom there’s no reason to suspect them of being involved. And a few of greater interest to some but not all. I do agree that there’s little point in debating one suspect against another though as it’s the equivalent of you and Frank staying silent for a month and the rest of us heatedly debating which of you owns the most pairs of shoes.

Well.....Frank may own more pairs of shoes....but mine are definitely more stylish....just kidding, of course.

A thoughtful and well measured post Mike.

Cheers, George

[Herlock Sholmes]

Well.....Frank may own more pairs of shoes....but mine are definitely more stylish....just kidding, of course.

A thoughtful and well measured post Mike.

Cheers, George

And I haven’t mentioned Afghanistan once George.

Sorry George, I couldn’t resist it. Hats off to Afghanistan though they are definitely an emerging team and we may see them playing test cricket in the not too distant future. They are certainly no pushover these days and the Aussies won’t be the last top team that they beat. I’m unsure about England v India though(just about to start) it’s a tough one to call. I make India slight favourites but you never know in T20.

[The Baron]

I believe there is more going against Lechmere than Bury as a suspect in connection to the Whitechapel murders.

No matter how good or bad Bury was, unless you find something that connects him directly to one or more of the Jack the Ripper crimes, the case against him will continue to be non existent.

Maybe thats why Buryians are trying hard to connect Bury to any of those Jack The Ripper letters, which are generally considered fake?!


The Baron

[Herlock Sholmes]

But nothing connects Kosminski to any of the crimes. Zero. Why isn’t he dismissed?

[Geddy2112]

But nothing connects Kosminski to any of the crimes. Zero. Why isn’t he dismissed?

I disagree, he lived in London in the autumn of 1888

[Lewis C]

I believe there is more going against Lechmere than Bury as a suspect in connection to the Whitechapel murders.

No matter how good or bad Bury was, unless you find something that connects him directly to one or more of the Jack the Ripper crimes, the case against him will continue to be non existent.

Maybe thats why Buryians are trying hard to connect Bury to any of those Jack The Ripper letters, which are generally considered fake?!


The Baron

Hi Baron,

If being connected to a Ripper murder necessarily makes one a better suspect than Bury, that would mean that Albert Cadosch and Elizabeth Long are better Ripper suspects than Bury.

I think that the one letter that might have come from JtR is the From Hell letter, so if some are trying to connect Bury to any of the other letters, I'll agree that that's a waste of time.

[Herlock Sholmes]

And I haven’t mentioned Afghanistan once George.

Sorry George, I couldn’t resist it. Hats off to Afghanistan though they are definitely an emerging team and we may see them playing test cricket in the not too distant future. They are certainly no pushover these days and the Aussies won’t be the last top team that they beat. I’m unsure about England v India though(just about to start) it’s a tough one to call. I make India slight favourites but you never know in T20.

England crumbled George. Awful performance.

[The Baron]

Hi Baron,

If being connected to a Ripper murder necessarily makes one a better suspect than Bury, that would mean that Albert Cadosch and Elizabeth Long are better Ripper suspects than Bury.

I think that the one letter that might have come from JtR is the From Hell letter, so if some are trying to connect Bury to any of the other letters, I'll agree that that's a waste of time.

Niether Cadosch nor Long was seen alone near a recently killed woman, the fact that Lechmere was there at that narrow time window is a direct connection that has to be investigated thoroughly, Bury has no such link to the Whitechapel murders.


And yes they are trying to match Bury's handwriting to a lot more than the From Hell letter, and they find matches everywhere, It is next to impossible to convince them it is a waste of time when they are heartily convinced of Bury's guilt.



The Baron

[Herlock Sholmes]

I’ve yet to see the proof of Bury’s innocence and that’s because none exists. Therefore he cannot be dismissed by facts. Whether anyone thinks he’s a strong or a weak suspect is irrelevant. Can we connect him to the murders…no. Can we connect anyone to the murders…no. Do we have evidence that proves him innocent…no.

If we are to be fair and apply the same criteria to all suspects that is being applied here to Bury then we can dismiss every single suspect without exception.

[A P Tomlinson]

Niether Cadosch nor Long was seen alone near a recently killed woman, the fact that Lechmere was there at that narrow time window is a direct connection that has to be investigated thoroughly, Bury has no such link to the Whitechapel murders.


And yes they are trying to match Bury's handwriting to a lot more than the From Hell letter, and they find matches everywhere, It is next to impossible to convince them it is a waste of time when they are heartily convinced of Bury's guilt.



The Baron

But that makes no sense.
Not being seen alone with them is less of an alibi than being seen alone with them... surely?

We have a man who is seen near the body, (if we believe the "theory" he has just brutally attacked and murdered her) he doesn't appear out of breath, dishevelled or have any visible traces of blood, acts perfectly normally and raises zero suspicion in the man who "Caught" him.
Nothing in his behaviour, demeanour, or appearance raises a red flag for a witness who was cautiously aware of people being attacked in that street, when being shown the victim of such an attack, that the man showing him the woman had anything at all to do with it.

We then have four other people who discover bodies who have absolutely NO witnesses to corroborate what they did, or how long they spent with the body. But we are happy to believe their version of what happened because...?

The only difference between them in terms of behaviour is that the other four went and found someone else to show the body to before alerting the Police, while Paul was already walking toward Cross saving him the bother of looking for someone.
The other four people who discovered the body had better opportunity to kill and clean themselves up.

Cross had no oportunity to wash the blood from his hands, (or are we back to "Not necessarily covered in blood" = "Spotlessly clean") tidy himself up or catch his breath following a frenzied blitz attack.
And before we get into "So you think John Richardson..." No I don't believe any of them were the killer either (along with Cadosch and Long) I'm pointing out how ludicrous the case against Lechemere is.

[GBinOz]

But nothing connects Kosminski to any of the crimes. Zero. Why isn’t he dismissed?

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