Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Why weren't the police interested?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Wickerman
    replied
    Originally posted by Michael W Richards View Post

    If you want to look at someone who disappears after a sensational murder, try Joe Issacs of Little Paternosters Row. Right around the corner from Millers Court. He left the night Mary is killed, left some belongings. We hear that he was later caught and cleared of suspicion, but on what grounds?
    Joseph Isaacs left his room in Paternoster Row on Wednesday (7th) and travelled to Barnett, where he took a room for the night at the Green Dragon. In the morning (8th) he left and took with him two coats belonging to the Landlord's son. Isaacs was caught & arrested, spending the next four nights at Her Majesty's Pleasure in Barnett, where he turned up in Court on Monday morning.

    So he certainly had an alibi for the Kelly murder.
    Last edited by Wickerman; 04-02-2020, 11:47 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Michael W Richards
    replied
    Originally posted by Harry D View Post
    Here we have a guy with a reputation for violence who leaves the East End shortly after Mary Kelly's murder and kills his wife in 'Ripper fashion'. I find it hard to believe that Scotland Yard couldn't be assed to send someone to interview him.
    Surely a violent past isnt a requisite for this killer Harry, nor is committing murders later. The slitting of her abdomen, in "Ripper fashion" is surely not something that one would consider an extremely rare event in 1889. It was when Polly was killed. And if Bury ever knew any of the details of any of the preceding eviscerations, its almost understandable that someone obviously not functioning properly might be influenced. He kept the body in his house. He went to the police to give them some poppycock story to explain Ellen in the Trunk. Yes, he was mentally ill. No, his acts and actions dont match the profile created with the first 2 murders.

    The same profile that people ignore, because they must do so, if they go on to include anyone else in the list.

    If you want to look at someone who disappears after a sensational murder, try Joe Issacs of Little Paternosters Row. Right around the corner from Millers Court. He left the night Mary is killed, left some belongings. We hear that he was later caught and cleared of suspicion, but on what grounds?

    Remember that Louis went out with Issac[s]...what if, as Issac K states, that wasnt him? Might we have an Issacs near 2 murder sites?
    Last edited by Michael W Richards; 04-02-2020, 10:22 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Harry D
    replied
    Originally posted by Wyatt Earp View Post
    I have a Victorian police procedure question for anyone who might be willing to take a crack at it.

    During the week following William Bury’s arrest for the murder of Ellen Bury, Frederick Abberline took statements from some people in London who had connections to Bury. He was gathering information that could be used in the prosecution of Bury for his wife’s murder.

    If Abberline was also investigating Bury for the Ripper murders at this time, would he have obtained a single statement from these people that pertained to both the Ellen Bury and the Ripper investigations? Or would he have taken separate statements from them, one pertaining to each investigation? Or could he have done it either way?

    The statements were taken in mid-February, 1889, so Abberline was apparently still on the Ripper case when they were taken.

    Thanks for any help anyone can provide.


    Monty might be able to help you. Isn't this kinda thing in his wheelhouse?

    Leave a comment:


  • Wyatt Earp
    replied
    I have a Victorian police procedure question for anyone who might be willing to take a crack at it.

    During the week following William Bury’s arrest for the murder of Ellen Bury, Frederick Abberline took statements from some people in London who had connections to Bury. He was gathering information that could be used in the prosecution of Bury for his wife’s murder.

    If Abberline was also investigating Bury for the Ripper murders at this time, would he have obtained a single statement from these people that pertained to both the Ellen Bury and the Ripper investigations? Or would he have taken separate statements from them, one pertaining to each investigation? Or could he have done it either way?

    The statements were taken in mid-February, 1889, so Abberline was apparently still on the Ripper case when they were taken.

    Thanks for any help anyone can provide.



    Leave a comment:


  • SirJohnFalstaff
    replied
    Originally posted by Wyatt Earp View Post
    Sir John, the poster Cogidubnus transcribed the Ellen Bury medical reports. You can find them here in the Bury section.
    Thanks.

    Leave a comment:


  • Wyatt Earp
    replied
    Sir John, the poster Cogidubnus transcribed the Ellen Bury medical reports. You can find them here in the Bury section.

    Leave a comment:


  • SirJohnFalstaff
    replied
    Ripper Like...

    I didn't know about this suspect before tonight. I'm not as knowledgeable about JtR than most of you, but there two interesting items for me in there that makes me think this suspect should not be easily dismissed.

    1- Not one, but three autopsies were required on the poor woman's body. Isn't there any paper trail of any of the three that survived? We could see if there are similarities and differences in the plausible range, like most 5 or 6 Whitechapel victims?

    2- Someone earlier mentioned Kemper, the California serial killer. It rang a bell.
    For those saying that his behaviour after killing Ellen was un ripper like, we have to keep in mind that this was someone he knew, shared a large part of his life with. It's not a rule of thumb, but Kemper gave himself up after killing his mother...

    This suspect is, in my humble opinion, very interesting.

    Leave a comment:


  • SirJohnFalstaff
    replied
    Originally posted by Wyatt Earp View Post
    It's a huge mistake to get hung up on how things ended with Bury. Let's imagine for a moment that the California coed killings were never solved, Kemper is sitting in the can right now for his mother and Hallett and that's it, and we're all sitting around here on CCKbook instead of Casebook. If Kemper were argued to be CCK, I can guarantee you there would be a bunch of posters here scoffing at Kemper, "There's no way that CCK would have murdered his mother," "There's no way that CCK would have called up the police and confessed to anything," "Why didn't he confess before? He could have confessed to any of those murders" and yada yada yada...when in fact Kemper was indeed the one who murdered all those women. It is hazardous to try to predict how things are going to end with these guys.
    Interesting. Especially since Kemper gave himself up.

    Leave a comment:


  • Abby Normal
    replied
    Originally posted by Wyatt Earp View Post
    It's a huge mistake to get hung up on how things ended with Bury. Let's imagine for a moment that the California coed killings were never solved, Kemper is sitting in the can right now for his mother and Hallett and that's it, and we're all sitting around here on CCKbook instead of Casebook. If Kemper were argued to be CCK, I can guarantee you there would be a bunch of posters here scoffing at Kemper, "There's no way that CCK would have murdered his mother," "There's no way that CCK would have called up the police and confessed to anything," "Why didn't he confess before? He could have confessed to any of those murders" and yada yada yada...when in fact Kemper was indeed the one who murdered all those women. It is hazardous to try to predict how things are going to end with these guys.
    hi Wyatt
    that's a good point. Another example is Bundy and how he was caught after his atypical rampage in the sorority house.

    If he was never caught, then the MO robots would claim that there is no way it could have been Bundy.

    Leave a comment:


  • John Wheat
    replied
    I believe the police weren't interested in Bury because he was so ordinary. He wasn't a top hated toff and he wasn't the lunatic they were expecting in appearance at least.

    Leave a comment:


  • Wyatt Earp
    replied
    It's a huge mistake to get hung up on how things ended with Bury. Let's imagine for a moment that the California coed killings were never solved, Kemper is sitting in the can right now for his mother and Hallett and that's it, and we're all sitting around here on CCKbook instead of Casebook. If Kemper were argued to be CCK, I can guarantee you there would be a bunch of posters here scoffing at Kemper, "There's no way that CCK would have murdered his mother," "There's no way that CCK would have called up the police and confessed to anything," "Why didn't he confess before? He could have confessed to any of those murders" and yada yada yada...when in fact Kemper was indeed the one who murdered all those women. It is hazardous to try to predict how things are going to end with these guys.

    Leave a comment:


  • John G
    replied
    Originally posted by Harry D View Post
    Hello, John.

    I understand what you're saying but this feels like a bit of a 'cop out' to me. Can you think of any comparable examples where a successful serial killer has willingly gone to the police with a ridiculous cover story?
    Hello Harry,

    But he didn't plead not guilty to serial murder, he pleaded not guilty to murdering his wife. Moreover, as strange as it may seem today, in Victorian times he could conceivably have got away with it. In fact, he nearly did: the jury initially recommended mercy on the grounds of the conflicting medical evidence! The reality was, because of the death penalty, Victorian juries were reluctant to convict the accused of murder if there was the slightest doubt.

    Of course, Dr Bond thought Rose Mylett's death was accidental, as did Anderson, despite the fact that four doctors concluded she'd been murdered, which was the verdict of the inquest. Maybe if Bury had hired Dr Bond or Robert Anderson as expert witnesses he would have been acquitted!
    Last edited by John G; 06-10-2015, 02:21 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Wyatt Earp
    replied
    Originally posted by Harry D View Post
    Hello, Wyatt.

    Did Bury mutilate the body and write the graffiti at the back of the house to make this look like a Ripper murder? Was he drunk out of his skull at the time? Perhaps when he sobered up he had a change of plan, forgot to remove the graffiti, and decided to walk into the cop-shop with his ludicrous cover story? Either way, whether the murder was premeditated or not, whether he was the Ripper or not, his actions defy all explanation.

    One would imagine that an experienced serial killer like the Ripper would've gone on the run, hopped on a boat, something. I know we've been down this road before and you'll argue that Bury was afraid of a manhunt etc. That doesn't ring true to me, why the police would suddenly attribute this to the Ripper simply because the murderer fled the scene. If anything, this line of reasoning invalidates such an argument, because you believe he was the Ripper in spite of the fact he went to the cops.
    Yeah, I agree with you that Bury made a bad call by going to the police with that story. I would say it's possible, however, that by going to the police, instead of fleeing the crime scene, he reduced the likelihood he would be recognized as the Ripper.

    Leave a comment:


  • Harry D
    replied
    Originally posted by John G View Post
    Hi Harry,

    But if Bury was JtR he may have felt driven to act as he did, regardless of the risks he was taking. As for the cover story, serial killers often become arrogant, regarding themselves as invulnerable and the police incompetent. As a consequence, his own arrogance may have lead him to believe that the police would fully accept his story.
    Hello, John.

    I understand what you're saying but this feels like a bit of a 'cop out' to me. Can you think of any comparable examples where a successful serial killer has willingly gone to the police with a ridiculous cover story?

    Leave a comment:


  • John G
    replied
    Originally posted by Harry D View Post
    Hello, Wyatt.

    Did Bury mutilate the body and write the graffiti at the back of the house to make this look like a Ripper murder? Was he drunk out of his skull at the time? Perhaps when he sobered up he had a change of plan, forgot to remove the graffiti, and decided to walk into the cop-shop with his ludicrous cover story? Either way, whether the murder was premeditated or not, whether he was the Ripper or not, his actions defy all explanation.

    One would imagine that an experienced serial killer like the Ripper would've gone on the run, hopped on a boat, something. I know we've been down this road before and you'll argue that Bury was afraid of a manhunt etc. That doesn't ring true to me, why the police would suddenly attribute this to the Ripper simply because the murderer fled the scene. If anything, this line of reasoning invalidates such an argument, because you believe he was the Ripper in spite of the fact he went to the cops.
    Hi Harry,

    But if Bury was JtR he may have felt driven to act as he did, regardless of the risks he was taking. As for the cover story, serial killers often become arrogant, regarding themselves as invulnerable and the police incompetent. As a consequence, his own arrogance may have lead him to believe that the police would fully accept his story.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X