Mary Jane was murdered between 09.00 and 10.30 am

[Lewis C]

Hi George, that was the view eventually taken by Martin Fido, in his Ripperologist article "Rethinking Cohen and Kosminski".

I however, am still firmly of the belief that the Anderson's suspect is the best suspect for the Ripper, not just Stride.
Who that suspect actually was is a different matter.

Steve

In that article, Fido mentioned an article that he planned to write called "A Train of Research". Do you know if he ever wrote that article?

[Aethelwulf]

What I read was the Scottish police called Scotland Yard and requested they come and look at some evidence, was it some of his writing?
I could be misremembering, but if this is correct, Scotland Yard were only responding to a request, they had no opinion one way or the other.
It was only after the interview they let it be known Bury is not a suspect.

Seems I'm still live so i'll just post this but confirms you talk **** John and this place is a waste of time. Journalist Norman Hastings interviewed police that worked on the Bury case. I beleive his notes have been reproduced in ripper notes 2005 (Hastings, Norman. “When the People Were in Terror.” Ed. by Nicholas Connell. Ripper Notes 21 (2005): 67). Hastings thought the ripper was not bury someone that came and went by boat.

So you say the police weren't interested: they had no opinion one way or the other. It was only after the interview they let it be known Bury is not a suspect

vrs his findings (these reproduced on steve Earp's website)

Hastings stated “A dozen experienced men were sent” by Scotland Yard “to make the necessary inquiries”

Scotland Yard detectives who investigated Bury “kept their own counsel, and when Bury came up for trial it was the common opinion that he was guilty of the Whitechapel crimes and would make a full confession in the event of his being condemned to death”

“In height and build he answered the description of the suspect seen after two of the murders”

“On the day before his execution two detectives were sent from London to be present should he make a last statement. This I myself only learned years afterwards, so carefully guarded was the secret, but it shows the importance Scotland Yard attached to their discoveries”

Hastings reported, “the facts they gathered pointed more and more clearly to Bury being Jack the Ripper, but it was a slow task, entailing months of work, and they had been ordered to make nothing public”

Hastings wrote that Scotland Yard had not only been able to establish where Bury was staying on the night of the Chapman murder, but it had also “established where he had been staying on the nights of three other of the Whitechapel murders, and from the recollection of those who lived nearby, it was quite possible that he had the opportunity to commit them

“The home of Bury in the East End at the time of the Hanbury Street murder was traced, and again it was ascertained that on that night Bury had kept away from his home, and his manner on his return home the next afternoon suggested a madman”

Scotland Yard discovered that “he was in the habit of walking about very quietly and had often frightened people by his silent approach”

Scotland Yard learned that “on one occasion when he was definitely known to be staying in the East End at the time of a Ripper crime, he had absented himself from the house for that night in the most suspicious manner”

Scotland Yard learned that after returning to London following his August 1888 trip to Wolverhampton, Bury “had apparently constantly changed his address and although the police were able to trace several of these, there were important gaps in his history which they were never able to fill”

Scotland Yard was not able to establish that Bury actually worked—“if he carried on a business as a sawdust merchant the police were certainly never able to verify it”

Scotland Yard felt that “his description was very like that of the man who had been speaking to the young woman Kelly on the night of the crime”

Scotland Yard “had established the fact that he was missing from his lodgings on the night that Marie Kelly was done to death in her home in Dorset Street”

Scotland Yard learned that Ellen Bury “never used to dare ask” her husband “where he had been when he absented himself at night”

Of course Jon the police had no opinion and he was not a suspect. Stick to inanimate objects like steak knives for your attention John.

[Elamarna]

Hi Steve,

Thanks, I didn't know that Fido drew that conclusion.

I tend to place more credence in the opinions of the actual police investigators, Abberline, Reid, Swanson, than the appointed hierarchy with no police experience such as Anderson and Warren. But I wouldn't argue against your belief either. Anderson would have been informed by the investigators, but then formed his own opinions.

Cheers, George

I have long been of the opinion, that Anderson's suspect should actually be called Swanson's suspect.

I would suggest that the vast majority of the info Anderson used come via Swansons desk.

Steve

[GBinOz]

I have long been of the opinion, that Anderson's suspect should actually be called Swanson's suspect.

I would suggest that the vast majority of the info Anderson used come via Swansons desk.

Steve

Hi Steve,

I agree. However, as can be seen on this forum, many different opinions can be derived by accessing the same information. I think that Swanson's marginalia was expanding the details of Anderson's opinion without necessarily concurring with those opinions. In his book Anderson was saying that while he knew the identity of Jack he wasn't telling. Didn't Abberline and Reid both imply that Anderson only thought he knew the identity of JtR, but actually didn't?

Cheers, George

[Michael W Richards]

Hi Michael

You are right to highlight some of the reasons to think Liz Stride was not murdered by the Whitechapel Murderer, but there are factors to support that she may have been. In addition to the factors I previously mentioned and those you list, which are quite compelling in my view - I have a couple of additional comments:
a) there were cachous found in her hand, which would tend to suggest she may have been soliciting or at least for some reason was considering at least one customer
b) you mention there was not evidence that abdominal mutilations would be the next step taken and so implying that was not evidence that this murder was going to develop into a ripper type murder - and you are of course right about the absence of mutilations - but there was the statement by Dr. George Bagster Phillips describing when the body was found that which is a position the ripper had used with other victims and was presumably a pre-requisite to the mutilations. Nowhere near conclusive - else there would not be a debate about including Stride as a ripper victim - but another factor that points to the possibility of her inclusion.

The fact that he head was closer to the gates seems to me an indication that she was facing in that direction when attacked, and I think the drawn in legs is something that can be understood when people have sudden severe injury. Some tend to curl into themselves. Since there is no evidence she thrashed around on the ground, or actually moved at all after being dropped there, so I think that drawing extremities into ones self is just reflective of a human reaction to injury.

But I appreciate the magnanimous tone of your post.

[Elamarna]

Hi Steve,

I agree. However, as can be seen on this forum, many different opinions can be derived by accessing the same information. I think that Swanson's marginalia was expanding the details of Anderson's opinion without necessarily concurring with those opinions. In his book Anderson was saying that while he knew the identity of Jack he wasn't telling. Didn't Abberline and Reid both imply that Anderson only thought he knew the identity of JtR, but actually didn't?

Cheers, George

Hi George,
Again it's interesting how we all interpret things.

For me, Swanson writing essential for himself, certainly not for anyone outside his family, is confirming what Anderson wrote, if he didn't agree he would say so in my humble view, there is NO indication of that at all.

I find the view that he is not endorsing Anderson truly astounding, that's not a go at you George, I simply cannot comprehend that view, which is why it's always so interesting how we all interpret reports and writing differently.

With regards to other officers, my opinion on this is I think well known.

A very small circle of officers and officials were aware of the whole case claimed by Anderson in my view.

In addition, a few would know parts of the case, for instance any watching the suspect or any involved in the claimed ID, but NOT all of it.

Abberline would certainly have been in the know, IF he had still been on the case when the conclusion was reached. However, I believe he had long moved on before then, which I place between 1890 and 1892/3.

Reid I suggest was not in the link, neither were the likes of Littlechild.
Clearly they all knew some of Anderson's theory, but not the details I submit.

I always say on this, I am 95% convinced that Swanson and Anderson believed they knew who the killer was.

However, I also accept they could have been mistaken.

I submit, we simply can't and shouldn't discount Anderson suspect, because we don't like it, or it does fit our view or own theories.

But we are now way off topic. So let's leave it there I suggest.

Steve

[Fleetwood Mac]

Kosminski is highly regarded

On what basis though, that's the question.

When you unravel the why, it's not convincing.

[Scott Nelson]

But we are now way off topic. So let's leave it there I suggest.

Yes, but I should just like to add that I agree Swanson does support Anderson. While other detectives like Abberline, Reid, Littlechild, etc. weren't fully in the final information loop, closed off by legal technicalities initiated by the suspect's family.

[Wickerman]

Seems I'm still live so i'll just post this but confirms you talk **** John and this place is a waste of time. Journalist Norman Hastings interviewed police that worked on the Bury case. I beleive his notes have been reproduced in ripper notes 2005 (Hastings, Norman. “When the People Were in Terror.” Ed. by Nicholas Connell. Ripper Notes 21 (2005): 67). Hastings thought the ripper was not bury someone that came and went by boat.

So you say the police weren't interested: they had no opinion one way or the other. It was only after the interview they let it be known Bury is not a suspect

vrs his findings (these reproduced on steve Earp's website)

Hastings stated “A dozen experienced men were sent” by Scotland Yard “to make the necessary inquiries”

Scotland Yard detectives who investigated Bury “kept their own counsel, and when Bury came up for trial it was the common opinion that he was guilty of the Whitechapel crimes and would make a full confession in the event of his being condemned to death”

“In height and build he answered the description of the suspect seen after two of the murders”

“On the day before his execution two detectives were sent from London to be present should he make a last statement. This I myself only learned years afterwards, so carefully guarded was the secret, but it shows the importance Scotland Yard attached to their discoveries”

Hastings reported, “the facts they gathered pointed more and more clearly to Bury being Jack the Ripper, but it was a slow task, entailing months of work, and they had been ordered to make nothing public”

Hastings wrote that Scotland Yard had not only been able to establish where Bury was staying on the night of the Chapman murder, but it had also “established where he had been staying on the nights of three other of the Whitechapel murders, and from the recollection of those who lived nearby, it was quite possible that he had the opportunity to commit them

“The home of Bury in the East End at the time of the Hanbury Street murder was traced, and again it was ascertained that on that night Bury had kept away from his home, and his manner on his return home the next afternoon suggested a madman”

Scotland Yard discovered that “he was in the habit of walking about very quietly and had often frightened people by his silent approach”

Scotland Yard learned that “on one occasion when he was definitely known to be staying in the East End at the time of a Ripper crime, he had absented himself from the house for that night in the most suspicious manner”

Scotland Yard learned that after returning to London following his August 1888 trip to Wolverhampton, Bury “had apparently constantly changed his address and although the police were able to trace several of these, there were important gaps in his history which they were never able to fill”

Scotland Yard was not able to establish that Bury actually worked—“if he carried on a business as a sawdust merchant the police were certainly never able to verify it”

Scotland Yard felt that “his description was very like that of the man who had been speaking to the young woman Kelly on the night of the crime”

Scotland Yard “had established the fact that he was missing from his lodgings on the night that Marie Kelly was done to death in her home in Dorset Street”

Scotland Yard learned that Ellen Bury “never used to dare ask” her husband “where he had been when he absented himself at night”

Of course Jon the police had no opinion and he was not a suspect. Stick to inanimate objects like steak knives for your attention John.

Hearsay.

Scotland Yard detectives were not permitted to discuss cases with reporters while in service to the department.

Lets see copies of police memo's, not vague, possibly exaggerated accounts that cannot be verified.

[Wickerman]

The fact that he head was closer to the gates seems to me an indication that she was facing in that direction when attacked, and I think the drawn in legs is something that can be understood when people have sudden severe injury. Some tend to curl into themselves. Since there is no evidence she thrashed around on the ground, or actually moved at all after being dropped there, so I think that drawing extremities into ones self is just reflective of a human reaction to injury.

But I appreciate the magnanimous tone of your post.

You're correct that some victims tend to coil into the fetus position after a severe assault, but Stride's feet were towards the gate, her head nearest the house wall. Which is not what you appear to indicate in the first line.

[GBinOz]

You're correct that some victims tend to coil into the fetus position after a severe assault, but Stride's feet were towards the gate, her head nearest the house wall. Which is not what you appear to indicate in the first line.

Jon is correct. This is Fisherman's drawing from:https://www.casebook.org/dissertatio...isherman2.html



Berner St would be towards the bottom of the drawing.

Guys, shouldn't this discussion be over on the concurrent Stride thread?

Cheers, George

[Wickerman]

My opinion is that it wasn't Kosminski nor any of Anderson's 'low class Polish Jews'.

But, statistically, serial killers are most likely to begin in their twenties; and obviously that excludes murders that weren't linked to them.

Here are some serial killers whose first known murder was before they reached 30 years old:

Graham Young (aged 14), Edmund Kemper (15), Jeffrey Dahmer (18), Rose West (18), Myra Hindley (19), Steven Grieveson (19), Patrick MacKay (21), Robert Maudsley (21), Beverley Allitt (22), David Berkowitz (22), Kenneth Erskine (22), Kristen Gilbert (22), Cynthia Coffman (24), Peter Bryan (24), Richard Ramirez (24), H H Holmes (25), Ian Brady (25), Robert Napper (26), Fred West (26), Rodney Alcala (27), Judy Buenoano (28), Ted Bundy (28), Peter Manuel (29), Trevor Hardy (29), Dennis Rader (29), Peter Sutcliffe (29), John Wayne Gacy (29), Harold Shipman (29).

I get your point, but you are throwing a wide net, wider than necessary.
When in actual fact the age of the suspects seen by witnesses in these Ripper murders range between 28-40.
It could be argued the murderer was not seen by anyone, that all the suspects described by witnesses had nothing to do with any murder.
Was BS-man only 23?
Was Mrs Long's "Foreigner" only 23?
How about Astrachan, or the Bethnal Green Botherer only 23?

Even in poor light people look younger than in daylight, not older. This is demonstrated by every witness who first came across a victim; Nichols, Chapman, Stride or Eddowes, they all guessed they were younger than their true ages.
So, if we have a perpetrator that is 23, he will look something like 18/19, not in his 30's.

It has nothing to do with whether a 23 yr old can kill, it has everything to do with the suspects that were seen with the victims.

[Wickerman]

23 years old? a kid??? no, especially if he was local and raised in the east end. are you kidding me?

Theres been very young serial killers, even starting in there teens, the most famous being Jeffrey Dahmer-who also is very close to the ripper in terms of sig(post mortem mutilation, removal of body parts) And MANY serial killers in their twenties-Ted Bundy (27-first confirmed, but the consensus is he started much earlier), Robert Maudsley (21), David Berkowitz (22), Kenneth Erskine (22), Peter Bryan (24), Richard Ramirez (24), H H Holmes (25), Ian Brady (25), Robert Napper (26), Fred West (26), Rodney Alcala (27). And theres much much more.

you really are having a bad day.

You're not thinking Abby.
See my last post.

[Fleetwood Mac]

I get your point, but you are throwing a wide net, wider than necessary.
When in actual fact the age of the suspects seen by witnesses in these Ripper murders range between 28-40.
It could be argued the murderer was not seen by anyone, that all the suspects described by witnesses had nothing to do with any murder.
Was BS-man only 23?
Was Mrs Long's "Foreigner" only 23?
How about Astrachan, or the Bethnal Green Botherer only 23?

Even in poor light people look younger than in daylight, not older. This is demonstrated by every witness who first came across a victim; Nichols, Chapman, Stride or Eddowes, they all guessed they were younger than their true ages.
So, if we have a perpetrator that is 23, he will look something like 18/19, not in his 30's.

It has nothing to do with whether a 23 yr old can kill, it has everything to do with the suspects that were seen with the victims.

Which suspects though, Jon, in the sense of being meaningful?

The only decent, valuable sightings known to us are Blotchy, PC Smith's man and Lawende's man.

Astrachan and the BGB are straight out of the little book of nonsense.

And, Annie had lost her life long before Long turned up in the street.

[Wickerman]

Which suspects though, Jon, in the sense of being meaningful?

The only decent, valuable sightings known to us are Blotchy, PC Smith's man and Lawende's man.

Astrachan and the BGB are straight out of the little book of nonsense.

And, Annie had lost her life long before Long turned up in the street.

No, we can't accept that.
All evidence is given in good faith, this is how the police look at it and unless we have any indications to the contrary, we should look at it the same way.
If we do not then we are not being professional.

No-one seen by any witness could remotely be said to be 23 yrs old. In fact I dare say a 44 year old, or 47 year old, prostitute is not going to be approached by a 23 yr old. The most he can expect to get is a clip around the ear.
Alternately, if the victims were say between 18-25, then ok, lets look at a younger perpetrator.