Was Jack The Ripper Actually Caught?
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 28 เม.ย. 2024
- In 1888 and 1889, a vicious serial killer haunted the streets of London. Five women were brutally murdered in Whitechapel, and all except one of the five victims - Elizabeth Stride - were horribly mutilated. And those are only the murders officially linked to the killer; it’s likely he took the lives of many more. To this day the identity of the murderer is unknown, but he has a name - Jack The Ripper. One theory is that he was the convicted killer William Bury.
Unlike most of the suspects, Bury was hanged for murder after brutally killing and disfiguring his wife. The similarities between the brutalities inflicted on Mrs Bury and those suffered by the Ripper victims are remarkable. And when Bury handed himself in to police in Dundee, claiming that his wife had committed suicide, he said he was worried that people might think he was Jack the Ripper.
Today we restage the trial with new witnesses and new evidence. In the very same courtroom that Bury was tried in, we sit as the jury on the case with modern technology and forensic experts. HistoryHit.TV have teamed up with the forensic science unit at the University of Dundee, and legal teams from the University of Dundee and the University of Aberdeen to see if we can, at long last, find the truth. Did William Bury, hanged for the murder, kill his wife? And was he Jack the Ripper?
Discover the past on History Hit with ad-free exclusive podcasts and documentaries released weekly presented by world renowned historians Dan Snow, Suzannah Lipscomb, Lucy Worsely, Mary Beard and more. Watch, listen and read history wherever you are, whenever you want it. Available on all devices: Apple TV, Amazon Prime Video, Android TV, Samsung Smart TV, Roku, Xbox, Chromecast, and iOs & Android.
We're offering a special discount to History Hit for our subscribers, get 50% off your first 3 months with code TH-cam: www.historyhit.com/subscripti...
#historyhit #jacktheripper #victorianlondon
Getting Aberdeen vs Dundee Unis students to retrial Bury is such a great idea - and great experience for the students. Very impressive!
I would like to see more of these type of documentries, very interesting and well done
Charles Allen Lechmere.
I loved the student lawyers ❤
@@margaretlumley1648 Watch "The Missing evidence: Jack the Ripper"
But I do t think they did a thorough job - burnt clothes in the hearth rope on the floor mutilated body in box ? So much more evidence And William should have been called to testify
Incredible to see how modern forensic analysis can still shed new light on cases over a century old. It's like watching history and science collide right before our eyes!
I studied law and a mock case like this one are a great way to learn. Would be fun to see History Hit do something like this again. Perhaps even with medical students.
"Was Jack The Ripper Actually Caught?" Yes, both literally and metaphorically. His name was Charles Allen Lechmere (the guy who was found at the scene of Polly Nichols murder). QC James Scobie agrees the evidence collected is sufficient for a modern murder trial.
False. The so called case against Lechmere is based on make belief. It's all about he could have done this and he could have done that. As for actual evidence to tie him to the murders there is none.
Pretend time is not the same as factual evidence. We don't have anything to link Lechmere to The Ripper murders. Nothing and if you claim there is then spit it out. I've watched the house of Lechmere channel. Same thing, make belief and could have and nothing more.
The only suspect who can be linked to two of the murders more than Lechmere mind you is the man who is the prime suspect. Kosminski, and even with the DNA on the shawl connected to the Eddowes murder, even with the witness probably Schwartz identifying Kosminski as the man who attacked Liz Stride. Even with that we still can't say it was him.
I'm surprised the graffiti on the wall and the door was not compared to William Bury's handwriting and to Jack the Ripper's letters.
Of course it wasn't - it was washed off almost as quickly as it was written on
@@simonortonthe text of the message was transcribed by a policeman so as to preserve the message so there would have been no original suspect handwriting to match
Plus they were never able to prove the writing on the wall was by jack or was just random graffiti…. They washed it off to prevent public uproar
@@triplesunofone spot on
The letters could have been compared. However, nothwithstanding the fact that no one knows who wrote three or four most important letters, before the deluge of fake letters after the police shared knowledge of the original letter's existence, I suspect a comparison was done and no comparison made.
Moreover, like the graffito in London, who knows if these two scribblings were recorded. If not, we do not know they even existed. But the inclusion of the tour guide talking about the Jack letters, for me, points to a failed comparison being made.
Bury didn't commit the Ripper murders.
The MO just does not match. And there's no solid evidence at all.
I think I could stand only around 5 mins with the author/tour guide lol
I was knackered just listening to him. Slow it down mate!
There is another suspicious character who killed his wife who was also from Bow at one time. His name was William Burrett and you can find his crime on the old Bailey. He disembowelled his partner and he was living with her while her job was as a prostitute. He hanged for his crime against his partner. The women were asked to leave the courtroom because the details of the case were so grim. The fatal wound was that in her abdomen and she had been stabbed 7 times.
I hadn’t heard about this bloke! Down the Rabbit Hole I go! Is there a specific page, Book or documentary on William Burrett that you can recommend? Thanks
The attempt to hide the body is a signature not associated with the ripper murders. So I could see two reasons for this: attempts to disguise a suicide for the victim to receive proper burial or an opportunist trying to mimic ripper murders that has more remorse than the actual ripper murder.
The fact it was his wife might have forced him to go to these means though because it’s far not likely he would get connected the death and blamed for her death
I dont think the Ripper had a sense of remorse. Its likely he wanted the bodies to be found. I don't think remorse was a sensation he would have been familiar with in any part of his life.
Yes that’s what I’m saying-he attempted to hide the body/stage the scene this time because he knew he would be connected to the murders. Nothing to do with remorse.
I’m definitely not saying he is Jack the Ripper but I’m just saying we shouldn’t right it off because the actions after the killing and placement of the body was different to the others-I’m just saying that there is a possible explanation for this difference that doesn’t neccassarily discount him from the other murders.
@@pheart2381 agreed
There's a pretty obvious difference between this and the ripper murders though, if Bury was the ripper. All the victims in London were prostitutes not connected with him ... this was HIS wife ... in HIS home
Thank you thank you thank you for not making this documentary all about the crime scene photos!
Excellent episode. The forensic rehash was fantastic.
This absolutely fascinating...I would like to see more of this re-trial in it's whole. Thank you for this video.
another great program! enjoyed the uni kids' mock court session
Background music too loud and distracting from the narrative. Otherwise, great!
I went on a Jack the Ripper tour in the early 1980's and my interest in the subject was fuelled from then on.
It's fascinating how people comment on an hour long vid negatively only 6-8 minutes with it only being posted 10 minutes ago. Interesting.
FYI: Some channel patrons may get early access to these videos. They may comment on them before the videos goes public. The comments are then published when the video is published. This is true for me on another channel.
@@jprehberger Indeed, however they are usually marked as such. Not two minutes into the video.
Lol good catch! Too many assume then assert 😉. I enjoy reserving conclusions until I get all info.
@@kariannecrysler640 I kinda chock it up to trolldom or keyboard warriors of some sort, but I agree.
@@Hillbilly001 lol
They haven’t mentioned society’s attitude and the laws attitude about suicide, it was illegal in those days, including attempts.
Correct. Suicides could end up being buried in an independently run place,such as the one in Dicken's Bleak House.
It’s still illegal. It’s still murder.
@@andrewleah1983 sorry, but it’s not still illegal or murder and even the Catholic Church has changed its stance and allows burial on sanctified ground. Nobody EVER gets prosecuted for suicidal thoughts or attempts nowadays.
@@andrewleah1983 dosent matter if its illegal and a person does it, if they do, the law enforsment cant do anything
Thank you for such an awesome video! ❤
Excellent post, thank you. Jack got away with it. I really did like the mock court case as this shows how learning and experience can change things.
Production specific comment, not video specific. You guys desperately need someone to help you improve the quality and consistency of your videos' audio (I'm not looking for a job lol). The content is outstanding, but the audio is sometimes a huge pain. Just because the in-camera and narrative voices sound good on one system in one environment, doesn't mean that quality translates to others. It's frustratingly inconsistent between and within different videos you post. The start of this video sounds great on headphones, but terrible on laptop speakers. The background music stomps all over Dan's narration. The audio problems you're facing are not new problems, they've been solved many (many) times before.
I'm a big fan of Dr Richard Shepherd, his book Unnatural Causes has to be one of the best-written and most fascinating books I've read. Brilliant to see him here giving evidence and bringing this case to life.
Very interesting and well presented recreation of a cause celebre from long ago. My one problem was that the captioning had a great difficulty with the Scottish dialect. I hope those needing captioning were not put off by the sometimes bizarre captions 😮
What is that hand held projector the tour guild is using?
Wherever the absolutely BRILLIANT Prof. Sue Black is involved, I want to be there.
I love when Dr. Dame Sue Black makes an unexpected appearance!
He isn’t Jack the Ripper
I agree. I know.
I remember reading that not long after the murders stopped a series of almost identical killings happened in a foreign city ( i cannot recall which one ) and some believe this was Jack having escaped justice here…..
Was it in New York in the US?
New Jersey.
@@lindahodge5024 Thanks!
Impressive dramatic representation of these tragedies ⚖️
🙏✝️
Love a documentary on JTR.
Really enjoyed that! I'd have doubt too.
Gawd, I could listen to Dr Shepherd read a phone book ❤❤❤❤
Well may be, may be not? It's likely that Jack looked very ordinary and was probably a labourer. He was apt at using a knife, and I'm sure he had severe mental health problems.
I've read so many books on Jack the ripper, but this story is by far the sorriest case of a suspect, there's nothing at all to suggest William Bury was jack the ripper,,,,it's pathetic
Neither was back then, but when he said himself that he murdered his wife and how, it was clear that he wasn't Jack the Ripper.
Wasn’t pathetic at the time as back in 1888 they sent inspector abberline to investigate bury himself
@@danwelham shows how much idea abberlibe had doesn't it,,,, again pathetic
@@Heygoodlooking-lk9kg bury wasn’t the Ripper police did decent job an every chance they stoped jack an sent him to asylum serial killers don’t just stop killing Jacob levy for me was more likely jack
@@Heygoodlooking-lk9kg What I think the programme demonstrates is that evidence for any individual being Jack the Ripper is scant. A list of potential suspects is reeled off and the only evidence against them is circumstantial. Same with Bury. He was in the right place at the right time. The murders ceased when he moved to Dundee. When his wife died he mutilated the body in a manner similar to The Ripper. The graffiti on the walls is suggestive but no more. Was Bury The Ripper? He could have been but so could hundreds of others. More interesting was the trial and the forensic evidence. The Ripper aspect is secondary really.
They keep missing the most important reason for disfiguring a suicide in those days would be the shame of a suicide. It just doesn't have the same stigma today. Although he was an angry sick bastard, I don't think he was Jack.
Having watched the whole thing I really don't understand why the jury had any doubt at all.
A really bad prosecution witness with the medical examiner did the trick. He was def very unsure of himself and flip floppy. He also didn't give good explanations for his findings which created the reasonable doubt. He kinda of talked about this when he said SLIGHTLY but he should have and could have said even if it was a door handle or something else in the house the ligiture mark still would have been higher than where it was based on the angle and the place was said to be bare so what reasonable explaination is there for those marks other than him. That coupled with the dismemberment and body placement he was DEF guilty. The 1st jury got it RIGHT imo
any chance you can get a balance with the volume. Narrator is twice the volume of anyone else
Please someone tell Mick Preicely he needs to slow down when his speaks during his tour. It’s impossible to follow him!! How can tourists whose first language isn’t English understand a word he says? 😂
English in England What says you ¿ .
I thought the same thing, even for people speaking English it's way too fast you can't reflect or think on anything he says, might as well go to a library and read books on it, then go to these locations.
lol just me watching this video on 2x speed and keeping up just fine
I’m from Glasgow, he was speaking too slow
he is either on speed or just super duper nervous.
This shows us that cases are won and lost on presentation of the case, not necessarily on the facts. The circumstances of this clearly and strongly suggest the man murdered his wife. His refusal to try and account for why he had mutilated her corpse and packed her into a box, only give more support to murder.
If I were trying this case I would paint a plausible narrative. The wife is upset with being moved away from home and lodged in a squalid flat, her husband drinking away her money, and the subsequent violence. In a rage he strangles her and mutilates her body. Perhaps he was Jack the Ripper, maybe he confessed to her and she wrote it on the walls. Maybe he did so in his drunken state. He packs her body up with the idea of smuggling it out and dumping it, before fleeing town. As he sobers up, he realized how implausible that he could get rid of her body without notice, or have enough resources to get far away without being caught. So he concocts a tale of suicide and hopes for a lucky jury.
In the second trial, that is what he got.
This is a good illustration of why you don't just rely on forensic experts: they're never going to say that something *couldn't* happen, which leaves too much room for doubt in the jury's mind. The prosecution needed to present a theory and they also needed to remind the jury that Elizabeth was a victim even before she died. As we saw in America at the O.J. Simpson trial, if the jury has more sympathy for the accused than they do for the victim, they are likely to ignore all kinds of evidence, no matter how conclusive it is. But of course this was for an anatomy program, so of course the forensic pathologists ran the show.
I can't get past the mutilation - you don't mutilate a suicide victim. Especially your wife. That's very clearly rage.
The audio is an issue. The music and background sound drown out the voices speaking.
Really interesting, never heard of this one before
I had to skip that tour guide...
Talked wayyyy too fast. In a very annoying voice. I would have wanted my money back if I was in that tour.
Given their history, she may have been intoxicated when she was strangled or strangled herself. The mutilation does seem to point to something more sinister. Very interesting. While I doubt he was the Ripper, he may have been influenced by the news accounts, especially since he lived in the area. The bruises are also interesting. And a slight rise in a ligature could also be caused by someone taller standing or even kneeling behind the victim.
If I’m pushed, I’d say Bury is my most likely suspect. The sudden departure to Dundee after Kelly’s murder as well as his regular drinking binges and staying away from home for nights on end while they lived in East London don’t bode well for him. However I can’t help thinking he may have been a Ripper copycat seeking to elevate his notoriety. Either way he’s by far the most likely known name of all the supposed Ripper suspects to be the guilty party.
Bury wrote a letter of confession to be read after his death admitting that he strangled his wife. It's in the Scottish Archives and there are photos of it online. The mock trial fails to mention this. Total waste of time other than to show jack the ripper almost walked out of there.
Hellsteeth Illustration does a fantastic map of the Whitechapel murders.
It's interesting to see they have the original constable who escorted William Bury into court.
Or she could have taunted him, written the slogans,he's come home , angry he has strangled her while saying to her "Ripper,Will give you Ripper" and then proceeded to copy the horrific wounds inflicted on genuine Ripper victims.....as it's known,their relationship wasn't a calm one.....just another scenario for this crime
a good video, and a fun addition of a "trial". But i find that they left out many key questions in their questioning of the experts. And also the question, could he have been framed. It sound like its all a work based on the assumption "he did it" now find me the evidence to sentence him. Instead of investigating and ruling out all possible alternatives. Sure it could have been done, but left out of this video.
But going back to the "trial" i still feel like it was done bad over all, and the students should have gone a bit further in their questions to the experts. And no one brings up the other stuff, even the jury in the video have a talking point "he said to the police he found her on the floor, if she had hanged he should have found her haning by the rope". Well not if some else one cut the rope and later mutilated her and stuffed her into the box. This case with the lack of information in the video, is far from "he did it", and come across with a huge tunnel vision of "he did it".
And when we talk about jack the ripper", It more plausible that Francis Tumblety was "jack the ripper" than this guy.
Any way a good and interesting video even though i having more questions of how the people in it can be so sure he murdered his wife. =)
Wonderful historical coverage video about [Jack the ripper] story ....a horrible story created by wavering wagged amongst ( harlots murdered, a newspaper 📰 exploited, location in dirty - night darknesspoorly-humbled habitant streets in London... 19th century years...
If you watch the documentary The Missing Evidence: Jack the Ripper. They have the best case that it was Charles Allen Lechmere a so called passer by. It absolutely has him on the scene or nearby for every murder.
I agree hes the best suspect by miles.
Absolutely Charles cross . No other suspect comes close
Another one who wants to play make belief. They can't connect Lechmere to any of the murders. Not one single one of them. They sure try. When they do it sounds something like this, Lechmere could have done this, he could have been in the area at the time. It's all pretend. Nothing ties him to the murders absolutely nothing.
Sure you can pretend otherwise like so many other fans of the Lechmere theory do. But you just like them fail when it comes to actually proving Lechmere WAS there when the murders were committed. Not that he "could" have been there. Could have does not count as evidence of any kind. You either put him there at the times of the murders, by facts. By evidence. Not by hypothetical theories. Or you admit you can't.
An honest man would simply admit they can't, which is the truth and so Lechmere is not The Ripper. Because if he was you can prove it, and you can't.
Yes I agree. It’s not certain obviously, but Charles Lechmere is in my opinion, the best candidate.
Ambience music is too high...
Nice Sharing good velog ♥️❤️
Pls stay connected
The is some analysis of Francis Tumblety, a quack Doctor and salesman. Apparently the "from Hell" letter is consistent with Francis Tumblety's writing, and contains Irish contractions that he would think of.
Four Jack experts were asked who they thought Jack was. Two believed it was Francis Tumblety, an American. One declined to say. The fourth expert's suspect was easily the least plausible of all those ever cited. The circumstantial evidence pointing to Tumblety is overwhelmingly convincing and the Metropolitan Police have for well over a century known this, having fluffed their only chance to arrest him.
The house of letchmere TH-cam channel sheds light on Charles Allen letchmere aka Jack the Ripper.
I honestly think that it is H.H. Holmes
if it doesnt fit, you must acquit
interesting how Bury, did not commit any "Ripper" style murders on the streets of Dundee. Considering serial killers don't just stop. And the only killing in all the days there was of his wife.
I would like to hear a profiler comment on if Bury's personality matches the one the ripper would likely have.
Id love to do that tour.
Beardy Joe the tour guide, seems like a poor substitute for Martin Fido.
I expected the judge to say "The bad news is you were already executed 130 years ago" 😄
"To be on the safe side I'm going to convict you of murder anyway." 😆
I have my doubts of him being Jack the Ripper...trying to hide the body was different...but then again, Jack likely never murdered someone that was in direct association with him either. I'm curious if there was ever a toxicology report in Bury's murder...it wouldn't be outside the possibility that he made her unable to fight back with all sorts of chemicals or poisons, thus invalidating the defense's primary case. It's definitely a case where you cannot reasonably that Bury for-sure killed his wife. Incredibly interesting video!
There'd be no need for toxicology. What isn't mentioned is that in the end Bury wrote a letter confessing that he killed his wife by strangulation. If you consider how Bury cut open his wife's privates and backside, as detailed in the official medical reports, it's the same as the ripper:
Ellen Bury: ‘On the inner side of the right labium was a wound 2 inches in length, penetrating the skin. Beginning about an inch behind the anus was an incised wound running forwards and to the left, into the perinaeum, and dividing the sphincter muscle'; Running downwards from the centre of the pubis to the outer side of the left labium was an incised wound 2 ½ inches in length, penetrating the skin and fat.
Eddowes: ‘The incision went down the right side of the vagina and rectum for half an inch behind the rectum'
Eddowes had a stab to her groin; Bury stabbed each groin on Ellen once. He penetrated through her abdominal wall and created a rip with a jagged edge. There were numerous other cuts and stabs.
Martha Tabram had a three inch cut to her privates.
Bury was clealry the ripper
I didn't expect the graphic details about the poor mutilated women. 😳
I remember good old Sawdust 💯
Yes murder was quite common back then especially unsolved murder. Unless they basically caught you in the act or you had a strong eyewitness you couldn't be convicted of a crime. That was even if I'm not mistaken before fingerprints. The only thing that said Jack the ripper report the one thing that made his murders still remembered today while the other unsolved murders are not remembered, is Jack the ripper mutilated. Also he took body parts away something the average killer did not do. Jack the ripper was a thrill killer while the average murder in London at the time was probably profit motivated.
I don't think I have ever heard this one.
Nothing was ever mentioned about the fact his mother was incarcerated in a mental hospital. Im sure that would be brought up in a modern trial in case of mental illness.
Another point that could connect to jtr is the saw dust trade. He would have seen butchers at work all time on his deliveries and their techniques.
The opening statement in this video is incorrect. Or at least, unknown so speculative at best.
“In 1889….”
The murders happened in 1888, so there’s nothing to suggest that JtR was still in the area during the following year.
The number one suspect at the time was chased to America.
Nobody should form an opinion as to the identity of Jack the Ripper without reading Trevor Marriot's book on the subject.
JOCK the Ripper?
Nice one.
Bury was from Wolverhampton...
@@davekeating. Jack the Wolverine then.
The defense managed to distill this down to single point: the ligature marks having an upward slope or note. But that isn't all the evidence you had.
You haven't got a body an inconclusive ligature mark. You've got a body stuffed in a box, that's been mutilated, and has a plethora of injuries over and above that one point. Why is this woman, who allegedly hung herself, stuffed in a box with multiple wounds?
Because she was murdered, that's why.
The defense managed to burn this down to a single point of contention, and the prosecution did a terrible job letting them get away with it.
But no, he wasn't Jack the Ripper. He was just an abusive spouse who murdered his wife. As abusive spouses often do.
I think Bury was guilty of murdering his wife but I don't think he was Jack the Ripper.
😐😳 this video makes it way more interesting and intense. But now I’m just wondering if the killer or killers were caught or what
Brilliant i had 1 thought! What if the wife wrote the messages on the wall?
The main thing with Jack the Ripper is I think it was mutiple different people the last of the canonical five Marry Jane Kelly was obviously the boyfriend.
I would ask if there was a height difference between husband and wife. If the husband was taller, and came from behind, that could cause a subtle rise in the ligature mark
Hanged not hung! (Referring to the plaque in the alley...not your fault!)
That tour guide was really off-putting.
I thought the basement flat didn't have a fire ?
Thanks for the good & enthralling show.More of such shows,pls.My guess:He was guilty.Another interesting explanation=He took the heat for The Ripper because he was a fan of The Ripper but the explanation has “holes”.
You really should do proper subtitles for people out of scotland...you cant understand them if your not english :/
I thought the case had been closed?
I guess “Ripper Tours” are still a thing in the old Whitechapel area.
I've done one, too bad there isn't much left of the old days.
Mitre Square was still pretty spooky.
🗡
Seriously, who needs to go on a Ripper tour with crowds of other people with another tour following just behind? Just do it yourself and at a quieter time. Information is easily found on the internet.
@@lyndoncmp5751 it's a tourist experience, really.
@@kevinb9830
Yeah I know the streets well. Was there only just earlier this year (I live just 20 miles to the southwest). You can literally see one JTR tour group ahead of you and another tour group behind you..... with probably another tour group behind that. Yikes!!! They are like buses. One after the other.
Yes, why is that strange?
You ever have people use the wrong words and you just feel the need to correct them?
People are hanged, not hung.
If isn't, 'she hung herself.' It is, 'she hanged herself.'
"Coats are hung. Men are hanged." That was the phrase that used to be used to distinguish the two.
That mistake irks me for some reason too.
Because people are stupid and the influence of Americanisms being inflicted upon this country.
@runlarryrun77 to be fair, some men are hung too. I'd say people are hanged
@@Byrenious To be fair, I was directly quoting the old saying which is why I said "men" & not "people".
I knew someone would get *hung* up on that aspect though.
I like too be corrected,I want to know,correct me😅
A lot of people believe H.H. Holmes was Jack the Ripper.
Because they dont read up on HOW he "became a suspect" 🤦♂️😂😂😂 .... a living family member wrote it in a book yearrrrrrrs after he died (as a way to make money), he was never a suspect by police? 0 proof he was in england at the time? Plus his crimes and the rippers had total different M.O's 🤦♂️😂😂😂😂
Holmes was an organised killer, whoever the ripper was wasn't. All the evidence points to him being a disorganised opportunistic killer who lived locally.
The concentration of whole trial was basically on the slight difference in angle of the ligature mark but nothing on the rope on the floor, burnt clothes in the hearth and mutilated body in the box
Why if she hanged herself successfully why wasn’t she found hanging? And why did William ‘go mad’ had he been drinking killed his wife and tried to cover it up then once he became sober realised he couldn’t get rid of the body in the box up a flight of basement steps in a populated area Lots of questions - William should also have been called to testify
So much was left unexamined in the trial - very superficial effort from law students on both sides
I would have said he was definitely guilty
I believe he strangled her whilst carrying out the rest of the attack, it’s not impossible to do more than one thing at a time, and crammed her into the box to get rid of her…
Definitely guilty!
We have so much better science today. Not foolproof, of course, but the doctors and crime lab people would have given the jury many more facts than could be had in 1888. Fascinating to see what the doctors were able to conclude from the autopsy files.
David Cohen aka Nathan Kaminsky was Jack the Ripper
(David Cohen was used as ‘John Doe’ in Victorian England)
I think your certainty is unwarranted.
@@kevinb9830
Thanks, your comment was unwarranted.
Now please fuck off huh
Unless you have a time machine, you don't know that for sure.
Here's the honest truth, we never got him
Never heard of him. People keep adding suspects every week with no proof that they are Jack the Ripper.
I could have doubt if he only tried to hide the body. It’s the mutilation that convinces me of his guilt.
It's a bit macabre to call the experience of retrying such a brutal case "wonderful". There's a bit too much glee on her face saying that. Forensic people are weird!
A great book is Jack the Ripper, a New Investigation. It names someone (not Lechmere) as the most likely subject.
Frankly, this suicide notion is a bit insulting to the poor woman, a victim of domestic violence & murder. She was murdered, he would have no reasonto hide her body even out of 'shame' (if he were capable of that), as he'd be the beneficiary of her wealth. The MO is totally different for Jack, he doesn't hide the bodies, he severely mutilates the women (esp sexual organs), he uses sex workers & strangles them from behind, knocking them to the ground where he disembowels them. He is superficially charming, not an (obvious) alcoholic, has enough money to lure the women away & dress well enough not to stand out or look too posh. He is not threatening initially, unlike this DV guy. He would likely not confess to the murders, as he gained immense sexual gratification & power from them. He isn't going to give that up due to anxiety over his wife being found murdered.
This and Lizzy Borden are fascinating.
Tour guide is so annoying
I really like to take a tour with Mick exellent tour guide
Commentator needs to get his facts correct about the year of the 5 murders, it wasn’t 1889 it was 1888
My theory. It’s way out there, but hear me out. Jack the Ripper was actually a woman. She had knowledge because she was around a dr perhaps. Perhaps she was a nurse or drs daughter. She contracted syphilis by her husband perhaps. And was angry with prostitutes assuming that’s how it came to be. Jack the Ripper was never found because they were looking for a man. Which would make sense how that policeman one time stumbled upon a freshly killed body and couldn’t see a ‘man’ in sight. Jack the Ripper then died of the disease (after the spree). Also, people not only wouldn’t be looking for a woman, but would stay away from someone looking diseases. Wouldn’t give them a second thought.