OK whos your favored suspect/s and why?

[MrBarnett]

Young Man !!!

You'd need Lech at the start at least, to find a ball to play with.

Young man ???

[Fisherman]

Thanks! I now see that the name Warren shows up in this connection!

https://forum.casebook.org/forum/ripper-discussions/motive-method-and-madness/11405-practicality-or-madness?p=729514#post729514

M.

THERE you go, then!

[Fisherman]

Young man ???

It´s ripperology, Gary. Prove him wrong! (I dare you)

[Harry D]

He mentions Kloswoski some years later after he had retired and he had presumebly eliminated Bury by that time

But his trip to Scotland was seemingly while he was a serving officer.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

But that's my point. Why was Abberline convinced Kloswoski was "their man" when he was just a serial poisoner, but had no interest in the mutilator who fled the East End a couple months after the C5? Doesn't make sense.

[Astatine211]

But that's my point. Why was Abberline convinced Kloswoski was "their man" when he was just a serial poisoner, but had no interest in the mutilator who fled the East End a couple months after the C5? Doesn't make sense.

IMO Abberline was probably struggling with the case being unsolved so having a serial killer who lived in Whitechapel during the crimes, arriving and leaving in a similar time frame to them that was executed gave him the closure he needed to move on from the case.

[Herlock Sholmes]

I did the same thing and came to the same conclusion.

How anyone can make an objective assessment of all the suspects and arrive at any other conclusion than Bury is beyond my naive and simple mind.

You will find some people make a lot of the fact that the police supposedly 'exonerated' Bury. Whilst I'll agree this could be the case, I find it less likely than more likely. The police waited to hear his last words - to me, this says ruled in to the extent that they thought he might confess. He also had an untestable alibi:

Police officer: where were you on x, y, z dates and times:
Bury: at home, in bed, with my wife. Why don't you ask her......

As suggested by others, they could have followed up on something later. I still think it is more likely that Bury said nothing, he was tried, found guilty and executed. Would the police have wasted resources on chasing a dead end?

It has also been pointed out that the police would have gone to any lengths to charge Bury if they thought him guilty. And yet people insist they knew it was Kozminski from the 'ID' and kept quiet about it!

Case closed for me, Bury all day long.

Sorry Wulf but you must be very easily convinced. To claim this you have to ignore all of the points against him and it’s those points against which raise very valid doubts. Whenever we look at any kind of case and find that the police questioned a suspect and dismissed him at the time should we then automatically assume that they didn’t know what they were doing or were just wrong for any reason? At the very least this should leave us wondering why they dismissed him? And as they were absolutely desperate to find the most hated and wanted man in the country is it at all likely that they’d have questioned him in the cursory fashion that you mention above? Isn’t it likely that he’d have been questioned closely? I’d say that we would be on pretty safe ground to say that they wouldn’t have sent 2 officers all the way to Dundee (with the expense that this would have entailed) just to say “are you Jack the Ripper?” So it’s entirely possible that they had good reason to dismiss him. I can’t state this as a fact of course but it’s a very serious possibility.

Add that to the very significant differences and and we have a suspect worthy of further research and interest but far from proven guilty.

[Fiver]

Whenever we look at any kind of case and find that the police questioned a suspect and dismissed him at the time should we then automatically assume that they didn’t know what they were doing or were just wrong for any reason? At the very least this should leave us wondering why they dismissed him? And as they were absolutely desperate to find the most hated and wanted man in the country is it at all likely that they’d have questioned him in the cursory fashion that you mention above? Isn’t it likely that he’d have been questioned closely? I’d say that we would be on pretty safe ground to say that they wouldn’t have sent 2 officers all the way to Dundee (with the expense that this would have entailed) just to say “are you Jack the Ripper?” So it’s entirely possible that they had good reason to dismiss him. I can’t state this as a fact of course but it’s a very serious possibility.

Add that to the very significant differences and and we have a suspect worthy of further research and interest but far from proven guilty.

A some period police would do a lot more than that to "solve" the case. In the 1930s, the Cleveland Torso Killer terrorized that American city. A 52 year old bricklayer was arrested, confessed, and conveniently hung himself. Inconveniently, an autopsy showed the man had acquired 6 broken ribs while in police custody.

[Abby Normal]

But that's my point. Why was Abberline convinced Kloswoski was "their man" when he was just a serial poisoner, but had no interest in the mutilator who fled the East End a couple months after the C5? Doesn't make sense.

because Bury didnt confess to being the ripper, nor was he absolutely cleared. later when abberlines chum snagged Kloswoski, he opted for him. Abberline explains his reasoning in his Pall Mall articles. In which klos peaked cap was also a reason he favored him!

[Guest]

That Duncan Fbi profile on jtr mentioned it was likley jack was questioned but overlooked during the investigation. As has happend in other such cases, so I don't consider it a show stopper that bury was interviewed but dismissed,

Berry said they had no doubt it was him, but he was about to be hanged and they couldn't get anything out of him,
Besides that he detectives were looking for a jew from witness reports.
There is a newspaper report that bury had a Jewish appearance from the side.

[MrBarnett]

It´s ripperology, Gary. Prove him wrong! (I dare you)

I hope you appreciated that I didn’t italicise young.

[Fisherman]

I hope you appreciated that I didn’t italicise young.

I did indeed, Gary. Not sure all and sundry had that same feeling of appreciation, though ...

[Pcdunn]

The ghostly Hound

He's fictional. Try Black Shock, accompanying the Scarecrow of Romney Marsh!

[Pcdunn]

From what I remember, John Cleary (aka John Arnold, aka Denis Lynch) went into a newspaper office saying he'd been informed by a police inspector that Jack the Ripper's latest victim was found at Back Church Lane. Halfway through, he changed the story to an ex-member of the police force. When the reporters hurried to the murder site, Cleary did a runner. They didn't find anything at the site, but two days later the Pinchin St torso was found nearby (Back Church Lane runs into Pinchin Street).

When they eventually tracked Cleary down, he changed his story again to say that a man dressed as a soldier told him about the murder, and the only reason Cleary ran away is because his lodgings were closing shortly.

Just a curious tale all around. I also understand that another one of the Thames Torso murder sites was predicted before it happened.

I wouldn't be surprised if Cleary was connected to the Torso murders. Perhaps he resented the attention JtR was receiving, so tried drumming up interest in his own work.

Doubt he was Jack, though.

[Pcdunn]

FWIW I believe Blotchy to be Jack and in cahoots with Astrakhan at Miller's Court.

Not wishing to complicate things but just my take.

Hmmm.... What if Hutchinson WAS Blochy, he made up the story of watching Mary Jane's house out of whole cloth, as well as the story of Astrakan Man, and was taking his time after MJK fell asleep. ( Just a speculation. Ignore if silly.)

[Pcdunn]

Hi George,

It’s a while since I discussed this with Richard. I think part of his argument is that Thompson could only have stayed at the Providence Row Refuge in November/December 1888, so he couldn’t have been in hospital at the time. But the fact is that he could have stayed there the previous year, and in fact there is no evidence that he actually stayed there at all, just an essay he wrote that describes the scene outside the refuge. And Richard has not seen the full essay.

Gary

I recall previous posts on the Thompson thread here, where Mr. Patterson thought FT was a patient who might have been allowed to "come and go" from the asylum or hospital, so it still might have fitted. Discussion about what type of place he was sheltered in then ensued.