OK whos your favored suspect/s and why?

[Aethelwulf]

There is plenty of circumstantial evidence Bury was Jack.

Some points, there may be others I have missed:

1. Opened victim's abdomen, mutilated privates in an almost identical way to Eddowes; engaged in further stabbing and cutting (piquerism). Notable stabs to the groin, similar to tabram
2. Strangulation, strongly suspected in ripper murders
3. Chalk messages in a good school boy hand with spelling and grammar errors. Same vertical blocky structure as reported for GSG. Sister in law testified Bury could write in several different hands.
4. Early hours of the morning murder, burned victims clothes in fire (Kelly)
5. Presence/absence in east end consistent with timing of murders
6. Suspicious departure from east end at the right time
7. Missing from home on the murder nights and behaving suspiciously, known to visit whitechapel
8. Police thought he had the opportunity to commit the crimes so must have been located close by (at the other address(es) he was using)
9. Police though he looked like the man talking to Kelly and two other witness descriptions
10. Fits many aspects of physical description
11. Very close fit to the FBI profile of the killer
12. Caught a sexually transmitted disease and passed to his wife, suggest use of prostitutes
13. Numerous examples of misogynistic behaviour
14. At some level, police thought he was the killer
15. Contemporaries described him as 'cunning' and he would 'conceal his temper before people'
16. There is also that seemingly anomalous 5.30 am ToD for Chapman. There is an example of Bury up and about at 5.30 am wandering the streets on a dark winter morning repeatably punching his wife in the face.

I certainly can't think of another suspect who you can say did anything like this. There is the case for the 'unknown suspect', but that would mean dismissing a perfectly viabale suspect for what are always poor reasons. There are issues, but they are in no way deal breakers. Also, as I said before, the police investigated Bury objectively and certainly believed he was the killer. They obviously considered any differences and didn't rate them.

Obviously, any credible assessment of suspects should begin with the only suspect that actually mutilated a woman with the same signature as the ripper. In a case like this with such rare characteristics, form for a similar crime should be a key factor. Strangely, it is never considered to be important though.

It is worth repeating this important point: Bury, the only known sexually motivated murdered on the suspect list, was missing from his lodgings on the nights in question - he is in the east end, his exact location isn't known but he must be very near the crime scenes as he was thought to have had the opportunity to commit the crimes.

[DJA]

he is in the east end, his exact location isn't known but he must be very near the crime scenes as he was thought to have had the opportunity to commit the crimes,

[Aethelwulf]

he is in the east end, his exact location isn't known but he must be very near the crime scenes as he was thought to have had the opportunity to commit the crimes,

It's not difficult to follow. The police traced his addresses, in the east end, he wasn't at his lodgings, the police, talking to neighbours, found out he would have had the opportunity to commit the crimes. Therefore he must be either in or very close to Whitechapel for that to be the case.

Come on then Dave, it is Friday so give us all a cracking good laugh and outline the case against Sutton, or are you too busy polishing that monumental IQ you so lovingly boast about all the time.

Never mind, I will outline the case against Sutton for you:

[John Wheat]

There is nothing whatsoever to connect Henry Gawen Sutton to the Ripper murders except in your fantasies whereas with Bury there is a load of circumstantial evidence. See Aethelwulf's last post.

[John Wheat]

Some points, there may be others I have missed:

1. Opened victim's abdomen, mutilated privates in an almost identical way to Eddowes; engaged in further stabbing and cutting (piquerism). Notable stabs to the groin, similar to tabram
2. Strangulation, strongly suspected in ripper murders
3. Chalk messages in a good school boy hand with spelling and grammar errors. Same vertical blocky structure as reported for GSG. Sister in law testified Bury could write in several different hands.
4. Early hours of the morning murder, burned victims clothes in fire (Kelly)
5. Presence/absence in east end consistent with timing of murders
6. Suspicious departure from east end at the right time
7. Missing from home on the murder nights and behaving suspiciously, known to visit whitechapel
8. Police thought he had the opportunity to commit the crimes so must have been located close by (at the other address(es) he was using)
9. Police though he looked like the man talking to Kelly and two other witness descriptions
10. Fits many aspects of physical description
11. Very close fit to the FBI profile of the killer
12. Caught a sexually transmitted disease and passed to his wife, suggest use of prostitutes
13. Numerous examples of misogynistic behaviour
14. At some level, police thought he was the killer
15. Contemporaries described him as 'cunning' and he would 'conceal his temper before people'
16. There is also that seemingly anomalous 5.30 am ToD for Chapman. There is an example of Bury up and about at 5.30 am wandering the streets on a dark winter morning repeatably punching his wife in the face.

I certainly can't think of another suspect who you can say did anything like this. There is the case for the 'unknown suspect', but that would mean dismissing a perfectly viabale suspect for what are always poor reasons. There are issues, but they are in no way deal breakers. Also, as I said before, the police investigated Bury objectively and certainly believed he was the killer. They obviously considered any differences and didn't rate them.

Obviously, any credible assessment of suspects should begin with the only suspect that actually mutilated a woman with the same signature as the ripper. In a case like this with such rare characteristics, form for a similar crime should be a key factor. Strangely, it is never considered to be important though.

It is worth repeating this important point: Bury, the only known sexually motivated murdered on the suspect list, was missing from his lodgings on the nights in question - he is in the east end, his exact location isn't known but he must be very near the crime scenes as he was thought to have had the opportunity to commit the crimes.

Great post Aethelwulf however it is almost definate that the Ripper strangled his victims. And as I have mentioned previously there is evidence to suggest the Ripper used a ligature.

Cheers John

[Aethelwulf]

Great post Aethelwulf however it is almost definate that the Ripper strangled his victims. And as I have mentioned previously there is evidence to suggest the Ripper used a ligature.

Cheers John

Cheers John. Don't be too harsh on DJA, he is clearly a child.

Yes, to be done so quickly and quietly he must have been an accomplished strangler. Question for me is, when did he become so good at it? Was it first time lucky with Tabram or had he been doing this before on hist travels?

[mpriestnall]

There is plenty of circumstantial evidence Bury was Jack.

OK John. I looked through Aethelwulf's list and coudn't see any thing of a substantial nature.

Let's agree to disagree on this anyway.

[John Wheat]

OK John. I looked through Aethelwulf's list and coudn't see any thing of a substantial nature.

Let's agree to disagree on this anyway.

Fair enough mpriestnall. Cheers John

[Aethelwulf]

OK John. I looked through Aethelwulf's list and coudn't see any thing of a substantial nature.

Let's agree to disagree on this anyway.

You obviously have a high bar for substantial nature. A sexually motivated murderer-mutilator absent from his lodgings (which must have been close the murder sites) on the nights in question. The problem is, posts like yours just show a childish lack of objectivity. The police didn't need to accommodate such rubbish to shift the goal posts for other suspects.

[DJA]

Great post Aethelwulf however it is almost definate that the Ripper strangled his victims. And as I have mentioned previously there is evidence to suggest the Ripper used a ligature.

Cheers John

Source regarding ligature?

[John Wheat]

Source regarding ligature?

Sources for all the bullshit about Sutton?

[andy1867]

Favoured suspects?

ALL 300 odd of them

Why?

Cos I keep reading this forum!!

[John Wheat]

Favoured suspects?

ALL 300 odd of them

Why?

Cos I keep reading this forum!!

Only one suspect can be Jack though.

[John Wheat]

he is in the east end, his exact location isn't known but he must be very near the crime scenes as he was thought to have had the opportunity to commit the crimes,

Are you talking about Sutton again? It strikes me that Sutton is very similar suspect to Gull. Both ageing physicians with bugger all to link them to the Ripper murders in terms of being suspects.

[Fernglas]

More evidence your knowledge is limited. There is absolutely know proof the ripper had medical knowledge or skill.

The throat cutting is part of the method killing, not the signature, which is what Bury did. He is the only suspect that has a signature match to the ripper.

Just behave Ferny, do one, and stop annoying me!

Most definitely not! Just because you have Scheuklappen (blinkers) on when it comes to a crucial area of existing(!) evidence, the Ripper had provenly some medical skill, what he did at Mitre Square is something no amateur could pull off in near darkness, is no reason to stop writing about it. Besides, your phenomeninal politeness (Achtung, Irony is on) does nothing to endear me to follow your "advice".