Does anything rule Bury out?

[John G]

I think the graffiti evidence is extremely interesting. Thus, at the foot of an old door in the tenement were William and Ellen resided "Jack Ripper (sic) is at all he back of this door" was written in chalk. And, at the back of this door, "Jack Ripper is in this seller (sic)" was written.

Now, it must be significantly more likely that Bury was responsible for the graffiti than, say, JtR was responsible for the GSG, i.e. because of the direct connection.

And this would mean that Bury was either JtR or a copycat. But doesn't the single killer argument postulate that there couldn't be a copycat killer because it would be far too unlikely?

[Harry D]

I think the graffiti evidence is extremely interesting. Thus, at the foot of an old door in the tenement were William and Ellen resided "Jack Ripper (sic) is at all he back of this door" was written in chalk. And, at the back of this door, "Jack Ripper is in this seller (sic)" was written.

Now, it must be significantly more likely that Bury was responsible for the graffiti than, say, JtR was responsible for the GSG, i.e. because of the direct connection.

And this would mean that Bury was either JtR or a copycat. But doesn't the single killer argument postulate that there couldn't be a copycat killer because it would be far too unlikely?

William Waddell (Jane Beadmore's murderer) was a copycat contemporaneous with the Ripper.

[John G]

William Waddell (Jane Beadmore's murderer) was a copycat contemporaneous with the Ripper.

Perhaps, but there's no association with the East End of London-this murder happened hundreds of miles away in Durham.

[curious]

maybe he was satiated for a while.

If McKenzie were a victim of JtR, then I suspect this may be why. I obsessively searched for the family of one of my great-grandmothers -- back in the day long before computers. Once I found her, I was satiated and no longer needed to research anything else in my family tree -- for a few years in fact.

So, if JtR were satiated, he could have come back after awhile, but without the same fervor.

And I see McKenzie as the only possible reason to rule Bury out.

However, she was killed directly under a street lamp -- doesn't sound much like our boy, does it?

Plus, he left fingernail marks on her stomach . . .

However, just for the hey of it, let's say Alice was killed by JtR, thus throwing Bury out as the Ripper, don't we then have to believe the victims were groomed? Alice had something going on the day before her murder and even the very day she was killed.

So did Catherine Eddowes. If you pay attention to all the clothes of Mary Kelly, so did she. Liz did, too.

So, if we rule McKenzie in and Bury out, were the women groomed?

curious

[Abby Normal]

If McKenzie were a victim of JtR, then I suspect this may be why. I obsessively searched for the family of one of my great-grandmothers -- back in the day long before computers. Once I found her, I was satiated and no longer needed to research anything else in my family tree -- for a few years in fact.

So, if JtR were satiated, he could have come back after awhile, but without the same fervor.

And I see McKenzie as the only possible reason to rule Bury out.

However, she was killed directly under a street lamp -- doesn't sound much like our boy, does it?

Plus, he left fingernail marks on her stomach . . .

However, just for the hey of it, let's say Alice was killed by JtR, thus throwing Bury out as the Ripper, don't we then have to believe the victims were groomed? Alice had something going on the day before her murder and even the very day she was killed.

So did Catherine Eddowes. If you pay attention to all the clothes of Mary Kelly, so did she. Liz did, too.

So, if we rule McKenzie in and Bury out, were the women groomed?

curious

What do you mean groomed?

[curious]

What do you mean groomed?

Look at their last days. Things that seem unusual were going on hours before they were killed.

Alice McKenzie had not been going to work, according to her common law husband. She had been out alone late the night before. Then the day of her death, she took a blind boy somewhere and he heard her ask a strange man to buy her a drink. Had she gone to meet him? Was that man her killer? Was he JtR? She led the blind boy home, her friends saw her going somewhere hurriedly . . .

She had something going on.

Eddowes supposedly had no money but got gloriously drunk the evening of her death. How? She left John, supposedly going to her daughter's. What was she really doing?

Mary Kelly was seen dressed up, even wearing a bonnet, going out. We know she had serial live-in lovers. Did she think she had someone else lined up? Is that why she was undressed and probably asleep in her bed? Her new man was there?

Liz Stride took particular care with her appearance before going out. There is some suggestion she had plans, and she had not made plans to go back to her boarding house that night.

Even poor Polly had her "jolly bonnet." The only one of the C-5 who seemed hopeless was Annie Chapman, but she had some recently acquired rings.

So, were they being "played" with as a cat plays with a mouse? Or were they ambushed by an opportunistic JtR?

curious

[John Wheat]

I think the graffiti evidence is extremely interesting. Thus, at the foot of an old door in the tenement were William and Ellen resided "Jack Ripper (sic) is at all he back of this door" was written in chalk. And, at the back of this door, "Jack Ripper is in this seller (sic)" was written.

Now, it must be significantly more likely that Bury was responsible for the graffiti than, say, JtR was responsible for the GSG, i.e. because of the direct connection.

And this would mean that Bury was either JtR or a copycat. But doesn't the single killer argument postulate that there couldn't be a copycat killer because it would be far too unlikely?

Yes the graffiti is interesting and the usual peddled guff about it being most likely it was school children is just that guff. If you look at Bury logically he's either Jack or a copycat.

[Harry D]

Bury is the only named suspect who committed a Ripper-esque murder who can be placed in the East End during the killings. He arrives in London in 1887, he leaves in January 1889. No more Ripper murders before or after that, aside from the contestable Alice McKenzie. What are the odds?

[John Wheat]

Bury is the only named suspect who committed a Ripper-esque murder who can be placed in the East End during the killings. He arrives in London in 1887, he leaves in January 1889. No more Ripper murders before or after that, aside from the contestable Alice McKenzie. What are the odds?

Odds on he's the Ripper.

[Sam Flynn]

He arrives in London in 1887, he leaves in January 1889. No more Ripper murders before or after that

What was he doing until August 1888? Thinking things through?

[Michael W Richards]

Bury is the only named suspect who committed a Ripper-esque murder who can be placed in the East End during the killings. He arrives in London in 1887, he leaves in January 1889. No more Ripper murders before or after that, aside from the contestable Alice McKenzie. What are the odds?

Actually Vasiliev is the only suspect who killed street prostitutes with a knife prior to these murders.

[Joshua Rogan]

Actually Vasiliev is the only suspect who killed street prostitutes with a knife prior to these murders.

Wasn't he fictional?

[Sam Flynn]

Wasn't he fictional?

He was fictional the last time I looked.

[johns]

What was he doing until August 1888? Thinking things through?

Hi Sam. Hope you're well

Bury wasn't doing anything much except marrying a prostitute, catching VD, smacking his wife about and spending her money and his time getting drunk. A rollercoaster of self destruction.

[Herlock Sholmes]

He was fictional the last time I looked.

Does that discount him Sam