|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Randy Scholl
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 14, 2003 - 3:38 pm: | 
|
A few weeks ago I was reading through this website, and came upon a dissertation by one Roger Barber regarding the strange case of Edward Buchan. (At the time I had been fairly convinced that Tumblety was the most likely suspect, and was even anxiously awaiting the delivery of the book "Jack the Ripper, the First American Serial Killer." My opinion has changed somewhat since then, although I still consider him a viable suspect). But when I came upon the story of Buchan, the implications of it sort of blew me away, for if Buchan was the Ripper, it changes the entire context of the story into something almost poignant, and definitely intense on a psychological level.
Here was a man who, on the day of Mary Kelly's funeral (which incidentally fell on his own birthday) decided to end his own life in a rather unusual and brutal manner, reminiscent of the Ripper crimes, as he cut his own throat severely -- To quote from a news article: "He had nearly severed his head from his body."
Now, if one considers the series of Ripper murders as one of escalating intensity, then the Mary Kelly murder was the coup de gras, and how could one top that? It seems to me that Buchan's suicide topped that in a sense, insofar as it had to have required some pretty amazing stamina and willpower to inflict such grave damage upon oneself, and to my mind it almost seems more shocking.
The psychological scenario I envision from all this, assuming Buchan as the killer, is that he was a tortured soul trying to make some sort of statement to the world, a statement which he himself could not fully articulate, but which expressed itself in the destruction of various innocent victims. And when he had done his greatest damage -- i.e., made his strongest statement -- and was as yet still unfulfilled, he turned to the one act which summed up his career in the most direct and concrete manner, turning his destructive skills onto himself, and in a similar fashion. It almost seems poetic. (I bet it would make for a great novel plot)
At any rate, given the timing and method of the man's suicide, I would assume somebody would have attempted to research further into his case in order to determine whether there is any evidence connecting him with the murders, or at least establishing plausibility. But this website (which is a remarkable repository of knowledge) carries very little information relating to him, other than two brief news articles and the dissertation by Barber. And a websearch on my own has revealed very little. Is it that there really is no further information out there?
|
Roger Barber
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Friday, July 11, 2003 - 8:30 am: |
|
At last someone is taking Buchan seriously. I still believe that the psychological angle has been vastly overlooked and instead of looking at extroverts such as Sickert and Tumblety we should be looking for a loner with low self esteem.
The problem is of course finding more information as I have been unable to find a record of his burial. Most of my efforts have been in trying to trace living relatives but again this has proved very difficult. |
Steve Laughery
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Sunday, February 01, 2004 - 5:34 pm: |
|
Roger & Randy
I know your posts were sent many months ago, but I just now took the time to read them and the related dissertation and newspaper articles (this is a big site, with a wonderful maze of information!), and thought I would send a response (for whatever it may be worth!).
Buchan has serveral things going for him as a Ripper suspect. I agree with those who maintain Jack was a "nobody", an odd, local loner with a lot of issues that nobody could (wanted to?) see. Buchan is the right age; he has an occupation with access to a selection of sharp knives; the fact that he chose to slash his own throat on both his birthday and Mary Kelly's burial day is certainly noteworthy.
His Poplar residence does pose a problem. I have long thought that Jack must have been a Whitechapel native - the "classic" serial killer who strikes just far away enough from home to keep from drawing attention to himself, but close enough to be on familiar turf. Why would Buchan travel so far? Did he have an excuse for going into Whitechapel every so often? Did he have a place to stay there? [Of course, it MAY be that a homeless (or far-from-home) Jack would wander the alleys, hide in doorways, wash in someone else's backyard, slip into a doss house or pub, sleep in the park (or under the arches), and still avoid detection. Jack always seemed to have to the luck running with him!] Travelling all those miles when the mania stikes just seems odd ...
Roger - have you made any progess with your research? Have you found any living relatives? I would be very interested in reading more!
Steve
|
Chris Scott
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Chris
Post Number: 1042
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 10, 2004 - 12:44 pm: |
|
Some time ago I did some research notes on Buchan - these may be of use
Edward Buchan 1859-1888
In 1871 the Buchan household is listed as living at 36 and 37 Robin Hood Lane, Poplar. The household consisted of:
Horace Buchan aged 48 born Foots Cray, Kent - Marine Store dealer
Maria Buchan aged 45 born Poplar
Children:
Maria aged 13
Edward aged 11
Charles aged 10
All children are listed as born in Poplar.
The above are all listed as living at No 37. At No 36 another son is listed alone as follows:
Horace Buchan aged 18 born Poplar - Shopman
In 1881 the household is listed as living at 36 and 37 Robinson (sic) Lane - this is almost certainly a transcription error for Robin Hood Lane.
Horace Buchan aged 59 born Foots Cray kent - Marine Store dealer
Maria Buchan aged 48 born Poplar
Children:
Maria aged 23
Edward aged 21
Charles aged 20
All children listed as born in Poplar and no occupation listed for any of them.
The other son, Horace, listed in 1871, had by the 1881 census married and his household details are as follows:
88 High Street, Poplar, London
Horace Buchan aged 28 born Poplar - Marine Store dealer
Phoebe Buchan aged 23 born Mile End
Childeen:
Maria aged 4
Honor aged 3
Louisa aged 1
Horace aged 5 months
All children listed as born in Poplar
Other:
Ellen McCarthy aged 14 born Poplar - General servant
By 1891 Horace senior had moved to different premises in the same road as follows:
42 Robin Hood Lane, Poplar
Horace Buchan aged 68 born Foots Cray, Kent
Maria Buchan aged 69 born Poplar
Children:
Maria aged 35 born Poplar
Horace Jnr. had moved back to Robin Hood Lane with his family as follows:
34 Robin Hood Lane, Poplar
Horace Buchan aged 38 born Poplar - Labourer
Phoebe Buchan aged 34 born Poplar
Children:
Maria aged 14
Honor aged 13
Louisa aged 11
Horace aged 10
Florence aged 7
John aged 6
Edward Buchan's death at the age of 29 was registered in Poplar in December, 1888 (Reference 1c 470)
|
Julia
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 10, 2004 - 1:32 pm: |
|
It seems strange to me that if Edward Buchan were the murderer, he would move from slashing others' throats to slashing his own.
Was there any investigation into his death? How sure are we that it was actually a suicide? Can one slash one's own throat??...seems a bit difficult to me.
Another question, how far is Poplar from Whitechapel? Could he have actually moved to Whitechapel in the interim between the 1881 census and the time of the murders, and become more familiar with the area?
Julia |
roger barber
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 18, 2004 - 8:05 am: |
|
Hi everyone. I'm sorry but I haven't been into the message board for some time and presumed that there were no follow ups.
As I explained before, I have been too busy to follow up threads of possible research.
One problem I have encountered is where was Buchan buried? I have searched in the obvious places like All Saint's Poplar and the main East London Cemetery for burials on sacred and unsacred ground because of his suicide, but without success.
The death certificate says the body would be subject of an inquest but it appears that the records for 1888 were destroyed during the war.
Can anyone help?
As far as the likelihood of someone walking 2 miles form their home to commit murder, this is surely quite feasible, especially at this time when people walked for quite long distances.
In a recent TV programme on Vincent van Gogh (another future suspect?!!) it says that he walked every day in 1873 from Brixton to Covent Garden and back to his place of work in 45 minutes.
The main factor in my opinion making Buchan a genuine possibility is the fact that psychologists have suggested that the reason for the mutilations of the bodies was to remove the womb - the concentration on which suggests that he could have had suicidal tendencies, certainly low self esteem and possible hatred of his mother.
Serial killer profiler, Robert Ressler has come up with a profile for the killer and Buchan meets most of the criteria i.e. single, 25-30, in a menial job, living at home with his parents.
As well as a shelf sorter in his father's shop, he also appears to have been a shoemaker, giving him access to the type of knives mentioned as possibly being used by the murderer.
As far as connections to Whitechapel are concerned, I beleive that his mother's brothers could have had a shop there, but again this needs following up.
One other strange point is that in one of the Maybrick accounts, I'm not sure which, the writer suggests that there was an "M" written on the wall behind Mary Kelly's body. They claimed that this could have been "M" for Maybrick, but what if it was "M" for Maria (his mother).
Keep up the conversations.
Roger Barber
|
Stan Russo
Sergeant
Username: Stan
Post Number: 46
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, May 22, 2004 - 7:13 am: |
|
Roger,
What if the "M" was for more worthless suspects? Or for MacNaghten's theory on Druitt is awful and riddled with errors so perhaps we sgould come up with something similar, but then take it seriously.
Under your theory, Buchan is a better suspect that Druitt because MacNaghten's theory is erroneous. By that logic we could also be looking for someone similar to Lewis Carroll because Wallace's theory is so far fetched and erroneous.
Anyone taking Buchan as a serious suspect should have the facts behind that suspect's proposal. Buchan was proposed due to biographical errors made on another suspect. There has to be more. That having been said, the possibility of course does exist, and until someone can ascertain the whereabouts of Buchan on the nights of the murders he must remain as a suspect, but please come up with a solid theory.
STAN RUSSO |
Steve Laughery
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 19, 2004 - 9:58 pm: |
|
Roger,
Thank you for coming back!
Buchan has as much/more going for him as a Ripper suspect as most/all others. I think it's a riveting story, and it should be looked into!
You're right, of course, in pointing out that people used to walk much further distances back then in their daily lives (going to work, visiting friends, shopping, etc.). Still, hiking a couple of miles at three or four o'clock in the morning after roaming the streets of London, hiding in alleys, and (I would guess) drinking/stalking all night long, slitting someone's throat and (often) mutilating her body and hiding some gory body part on yourself so that you can get home in time to start work at dad's shop ... well, I think you see where I'm going with this.
I really think Buchan is a viable suspect (definately worthy of serious research!), but I think we need to be aware of the problems involved in the distances between the "killing floors" and our suspect's residence. In Kelly's case, for example, we may be talking about a "wild eyed" (to say the least!) young man in bloody clothing, packing a knife and a woman's heart, jogging two miles along a public road in broad daylight.
Anyway, please keep up the great work! I am fascinated by your suspect!
Steve
|
Stan Russo
Sergeant
Username: Stan
Post Number: 47
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Monday, May 24, 2004 - 12:20 am: |
|
Steve,
I hope that you are also fascinated by Charles Cross, James Green and here's a new suspect for you, James Kent. He went to get a brandy after seeing the body of Annie Chapman.
Buchan is as likely as any of those suspects, because he lived in the area. His suicide does neatly solve why the murders stopped, but then someone suffering from such a psychological problem, enough for him to take his own life, would most likely have made a mistake that led to his being caught.
This is the main reason why I can not endorse the 'Jack' as mad lunatic theory. Of course the murderer was not right in the head. Any person who commits acts such as these is not thinking straight, but someone who commits murders on at least foru separate nights, probably five separate nights including Martha Tabram's murder is thinking straight enough to escape detection. The mere act of murder for nothing more than murder simply does not fit.
STAN |
Natalie Severn
Chief Inspector
Username: Severn
Post Number: 857
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Monday, May 24, 2004 - 4:48 am: |
|
Hi Stan,I have to say I dont agree here.The cool of the paranoid schizophrenic is well documented.There is much compelling evidence to show just how frequently such individuals have held,without complete mental collapse or even noticeable instability.positions of great power requiring great tenacity intelligence and endurance.Take Hitler as one famous example.
A crusading attitude coupled with a willingness to shed blood marks out such "leaders".The idea that such an individual would have been too unstable to carry out the four or five serial murders without being caught does not stand up.A callous disregard for human life coupled with great resolution and cold-bloodedness has been documented.
The difficulty for me has always been the taking of the organs because if he did do this to "relive a sexual fantasy connected to the murders" then it doesnt add up unless the disembowelling was to do with a literal interpretation of something from the bible---in other words unless the series corresponded with "voices" telling him to do such and his illness also manifested itself as a form of religious fanaticism.
Best Wishes Natalie |
Antonio Ruiz Vega
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Monday, May 24, 2004 - 7:00 am: |
|
Reading a recent book from Ian Gibson´s pen, "El erotómano" (Gibson is now a spanish citizen), the life of Sir Henry Spencer Ashbee, supposed author of the anonimous erotic book "My Secret Life", I think is a possible candidate for "ripper". Ashbee write a minucious diary, and there is a great lap about the summer and autumm of the year 1888. Ashbee was traveling in South America but at this days has return to London. An erotic obsessed, among his friends there was many sexual maniacs, like the amazing Frederick Hankey (living in Paris), collector of macabre items. Ashbee spent part of his youth working in the East End and had a house in Mile End Road. Her son, Charles, stay some months in the Toynbee Hall. In 1888 Ashbee was in a great trouble: both wife and son left him and the main amount of Ashbee´s fortune belongs to his wife, Elizabeth. In "My secret life" Ashbee tells many sexual encounters with "unfortunates" in the London backs. All the book exudes misoginy and there are some ambiguous confessions about his cruelty. (in the spanish traslation: Una o dos veces me he visto atemorizado cuando jugaba amorosamente. Más de una vez he perdido mi oportunidad a causa de miedos. He intimidado también a otros, aunque nada he contado de eso aquí. Creo que ya no soy tan cruel). Perhaps too old to "kill" in these years, her phisical resemblance is very likely James Maybrick (!).
|
Steve Laughery
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Monday, May 24, 2004 - 10:46 pm: |
|
Stan Russo,
I am surprised that my post inspired such a sarcastic response.
I stand by what I wrote: Buchan is every bit as viable a suspect as any other - including, I daresay, whoever your pet candidate may be - and I see nothing wrong with more research. I believe that is a big part of what this site is all about.
I'm sorry if that upsets you. To be honest, though, I don't understand why it does.
Steve |
Stan Russo
Sergeant
Username: Stan
Post Number: 48
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 25, 2004 - 11:08 pm: |
|
Steve,
It doesn't upset me. Sorry if you took it that way.
Just to me, Buchan is a suspect because MacNaghten does a lousy job of proving his case against Druitt, and MacNaghten was there around the time of the murders. To me, by that logic, any person around could be plugged in as a better suspect than a researcher's suspect who does not prove his case.
Buchan is a suspect because he committed suicide 10 days after the Miller's Court murder. Other than the fact that he was depressed, the probable reason Buchan committed suicide, that's all there really is to label Buchan as a suspect. So why is he any more viable than the three or four nobodys I mentioned in an earlier post?
Mr. Barber has had fourteen years to research Edward Buchan to add to his case. To my knowledge he has found no additional evidence or relative information, so why is Buchan more viable than Lewis Carroll or George Gissing?
My pet suspect, whom I call FIDO, come here FIDO, is not of concern here. I am more than happy to debate the merits of who I believe was 'Jack the Ripper'. Why does that have anything to do with the viability of Edward Buchan?
I hope you do the research on Buchan. I hope you find something better than depression and suicide. Until then my opinion, and it is just an opinion, is that Buchan is not a viable suspect.
STAN |
Thomas C. Wescott
Detective Sergeant
Username: Tom_wescott
Post Number: 59
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 26, 2004 - 12:05 am: |
|
Randy,
You write: "Here was a man who, on the day of Mary Kelly's funeral (which incidentally fell on his own birthday) decided to end his own life in a rather unusual and brutal manner, reminiscent of the Ripper crimes, as he cut his own throat severely -- To quote from a news article: "He had nearly severed his head from his body."
What you should say is that he killed himself on his birthday (which incidentally happened to be the day of Mary Kelly's funeral). That's all we're talking about here, a man who killed himself on the day of Mary's funeral. But doesn't it seem more likely that his birthday was the instigating factor, or something that occurred that day? I thought Roger's essay was excellent, and worthy, but in the end Buchan is a non-start for a suspect. People killed themselves all the time by slitting their throat. I concur with Stan that Buchan is not a viable suspect. But we still need more Roger Barber's out there with the eye and mind to look in forgotten corners.
Yours truly,
Tom Wescott |
Stan Russo
Sergeant
Username: Stan
Post Number: 49
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 26, 2004 - 4:30 am: |
|
Tom,
I couldn't agree more. Well I could but then they'd have to lock me away because I'd have more than 100% agreeability. And that's just not right.
STAN |
Dan Norder
Detective Sergeant
Username: Dannorder
Post Number: 117
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 26, 2004 - 5:07 am: |
|
I consider Buchan a viable suspect, under the theory that a weakly supported suspect is better than a random name with no support (like, say, Barnett) or someone with evidence that points away from him being the killer (too many to even get into).
As far as traits we might look for, known to have committed a violent act with a knife should be right up there. Potentially some form of mental disturbance (and I hedge bets on this one based upon the idea that some killers can hide their disturbed thought processes from others pretty well). At least being plausibly close to the crime scenes on the dates in question. Some people think being killed or locked up after the MJK killing is a good indicator (not that I put all that much weight on that one).
Buchan's got all that. It's not much, but we honestly don't have much of anything on anybody.
Dan Norder, editor, Ripper Notes
|
Michael Raney
Inspector
Username: Mikey559
Post Number: 390
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 26, 2004 - 5:26 pm: |
|
Everybody,
IMHO Buchan is not a viable suspect at this time. There is a lot more research that must be done before he can be included on the list. In my experience and in my personal belief, you cannot start at a suspect and work back towards the crime. You must work from the crime outward using each piece of evidence that we find be it forensic or circumstantial. Using this method of research, you must start with an unknown subject. Then you see what person or persons, the evidence points to. This does eliminate several subjects immediately off the list. This does not mean that they couldn't be Jack, just that without researching from the crime out they are not a suspect yet. Does this make sense to anyone but me? And please remember, this is my personal opinion and not a reflection on what anyone else may believe.
Mikey |
Thomas C. Wescott
Detective Sergeant
Username: Tom_wescott
Post Number: 61
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 26, 2004 - 7:29 pm: |
|
Dan,
What you'd be talking about then is naming everyone who committed suicide at some point not long after Nov. 1888. Or perhaps wife beaters/slayers (remember, a guy slit his wife's throat the same night of the double event, but his own murder gives him an alibi!). People didn't possess guns as they do now, thus knives were more frequently used as murder/suicide weapons. Is there a SINGLE piece of evidence against Buchan other than that he killed himself with a knife? If so, please let me know as it's been sometime since I read up on him.
Yours truly,
Tom Wescott |
Jason Scott Mullins
Inspector
Username: Crix0r
Post Number: 263
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 26, 2004 - 11:36 pm: |
|
"Does this make sense to anyone but me?"
Makes perfect sense to me Mikey :P
Rock on,
crix0r
"I was born alone, I shall die alone. Embrace the emptiness, it is your end."
|
Dan Norder
Detective Sergeant
Username: Dannorder
Post Number: 120
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, May 27, 2004 - 1:39 am: |
|
Mikey,
Yes, I agree that you want to look at the crimes and then go from there. Unfortunately I don't see how we have enough info there to narrow the list of suspects all that much. I know a lot of people try to, but I haven't seen anyone yet get very far without making some conclusions that could turn out to be completely wrong.
Tom,
That single piece of evidence (although it's really more like three: violent with knife, mental problem, lived in roughly same geographical area at the time) is more than we have on a lot of people who have been called suspects, many of whom have gotten their own books. I do think anyone known to have committed violence with knives should be on a long list of potential suspects (assuming there's nothing to knock them off the list). If that means a whole heck of a lot of people, I don't think we can avoid that.
Certainly there are a lot stronger suspects, don't get me wrong, but I can't see ruling him out just from lack of information.
Dan Norder, editor, Ripper Notes
|
Chris Scott
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Chris
Post Number: 1253
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, June 06, 2004 - 12:45 am: |
|
Hi all
Found the details below of a minor case that Buchan Snr. was involved with in 1874 and thought this might be of interest
Chris
Times (London)
6 October 1874
James Houghlahan was indicted for stealing a chain of the value of £1, the property of James Paton. Mr. W.J. Abram prosecuted; the prisoner was not defended. On the morning of the 26th of September, the prosecutor missed his chain, which was attached to a barge in the Bow Creek, and afterwards found it pawned at a marine store dealer's, named Buchan, in Robin Hood lane, for 2s. Buchan said that he bought the chain for old iron; but it was proved that even as old iron the chain was worth 10s. The jury found the prisoner Guilty, and censured the marine store dealer for having so carelessly bought the chain. Mr. Fletcher disallowed his expenses and sentenced the prisoner to be kept at hard labour for three months.
(Message edited by Chris on June 06, 2004) |
Roger Barber
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Monday, June 21, 2004 - 5:54 pm: |
|
Sorry I haven't responded to the comments made over the past month or so.
Having read the series of messages, I would just like to make a couple of comments.
Firstly, one of the newspaper reports says that he had been acting in a strange manner for some time. What does this mean? Maybe he was coming in at odd times or had bloodstained clothing.
Secondly, I still believe that the significant factor in considering him a suspect is the fact that he committed suicide on his birthday.
This is a strong psychological link to the murderer who appears to be aiming at removing the womb, showing low self-esteem and therefore a possible suicidal tendency and/or hatred of his mother.
Another possibility is that he used a handcart to hide his clothes after changing them. Marine Stores dealers used them to transport goods.
As far as te comment about my lack of research for 14 years, this is simply due to burden of work
The only areas I have tried to investigate are
1. Locating his grave.
2. Tracing living relatives.
Both of these have drawn a dead end.
|
Randy Scholl
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 13, 2004 - 6:32 am: |
|
Stan Russo:
>> Buchanis as likely as any of those suspects, because he lived in the area. Hissuicide does neatly solve why the murders stopped, but then someone sufferingfrom such a psychological problem, enough for him to take his own life, wouldmost likely have made a mistake that led to his being caught.
Thisis the main reason why I can not endorse the 'Jack' as mad lunatic theory.Of course the murderer was not right in the head. Any person who commitsacts such as these is not thinking straight, but someone who commits murderson at least foru separate nights, probably five separate nights includingMartha Tabram's murder is thinking straight enough to escape detection. The mere act of murder for nothing more than murder simply does not fit. <<
One small point here. People who commit suicide are often not "mad lunatics" either. Indeed, your argument above seems rather inconsistent. He was obviously "suffering from such a psychological problem" enough for him to brutally murder and mutilate 5 or 6 women. Would this be more or less extreme of the psychological problem required for him to kill himself? |
Randy Scholl
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Monday, July 12, 2004 - 8:31 am: |
|
I'm not what you'd call a Ripper fanatic by any means, (although I do find the subject to be very interesting and thought-provoking), so I haven't been checking out these boards on any kind of regular basis. And this particular thread had been pretty dead for a long time, so on those occasions when I do check out the boards, this particular thread hasn't been top on my list to check, simply because my expectations of finding new comments haven't been particularly high. But I must say, coming upon a lengthy discussion on it is a pleasant surprise.
Anyway, I'll comment on the one post addressed specifically to myself, and hopefully my commentary will be pertinent to other points which have been brought up by other people.
Thomas C. Wescott writes:
>>Randy, }
You write: "Here was a man who, on the day of Mary Kelly's funeral (which incidentally fell on his own birthday) decided to end his own life in a rather unusual and brutal manner, reminiscent of the Ripper crimes, as he cut his own throat severely -- To quote from a news article: "He had nearly severed his head from his body."
What you should say is that he killed himself on his birthday (which incidentally happened to be the day of Mary Kelly's funeral). <<
That's an excellent point of course. Obviously his own birthday would hold more import to him than any external-to-his-own-personal-life events.
>>That's all we're talking about here, a man who killed himself on the day of Mary's funeral. But doesn't it seem more likely that his birthday was the instigating factor, or something that occurred that day? <<
For that matter, it could just as easily be pointed out that even if Mary's funeral was a significant instigating factor, which is not at all unlikely given the massive press coverage of the Ripper crimes, that this would not necessarily be suggestive of him being the Ripper himself. After all, he was obviously mentally unstable enough to commit a very violent suicide, so there may be a possibility that he saw some metaphorical connection between this funeral and his own birthday. Indeed, he may have even been inspired by the Ripper murders to end his own life in a similar fashion.
>>I thought Roger's essay was excellent, and worthy, but in the end Buchan is a non-start for a suspect. People killed themselves all the time by slitting their throat. I concur with Stan that Buchan is not a viable suspect. <<
Well, I'd say he's as "viable" as any of the other thousands of residents of the general area around Whitechapel. Which is to say he could be a possible suspect if actual evidence linking him to the crimes should surface. In the meantime,} it does suggest an interesting scenario at any rate. Perhaps more suited for fiction rather than non-fiction, but at least it's not as hokey as the ever-popular Royal conspiracy or similar nonsense.
In short, while there may not be any supporting evidence for this possibility, at least there's nothing in it which inherently violates logic, and it would nicely tie up the loose end of why the killings suddenly stopped. |
Randy Scholl
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 13, 2004 - 6:09 am: |
|
Michael Raney
>>Everybody,
IMHO Buchan is not a viable suspect at this time. There is a lot more researchthat must be done before he can be included on the list. In my experienceand in my personal belief, you cannot start at a suspect and work back towards the crime. You must work from the crime outward using each piece of evidence that we find be it forensic or circumstantial. Using this method of research,you must start with an unknown subject. Then you see what person or persons,the evidence points to. <<
I'm not sure I can agree with this wholeheartedly. The big problem I see here is that most of the evidence doesn't really point to anyone in particular. Certainly some of the evidence may point to certain general characteristics of the killer, but all in all, much of that is even pretty speculative.
>>This does eliminate several subjects immediately off the list. <<
Right, but in order to do so, you have to have suspects first to eliminate. And as far as I can tell, it makes better sense to not disinclude anyone from the list until such time as the evidence itself eliminates them. As such, perhaps it's better to include someone like Buchan in the list, even if there is no evidence directly supporting him as a suspect. Because, while a too-broad list of suspects might make the task daunting, a too-narrow list is far more likely to miss the actual killer.
I might go even further here and state that if a truly concerted effort to discover the real Jack the Ripper were undertaken, and if such an undertaking had the resources available to do so, perhaps the wisest course of action would be to start with literally every known person in the area and methodically eliminate them one by one, based upon direct contradictions to known evidence. |
Randy Scholl
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 13, 2004 - 5:25 am: |
|
Well, my first attempt at response never got posted so I'll try this again.
Thomas C. Wescott writes:
>>Randy,
You write: "Here was a man who, on the day of Mary Kelly's funeral (which incidentally fell on his own birthday) decided to end his own life in a rather unusual and brutal manner, reminiscent of the Ripper crimes, as he cut his own throat severely -- To quote from a news article: "He had nearly severed his head from his body."
What you should say is that he killed himself on his birthday (which incidentally happened to be the day of MaryKelly's funeral). <<
Good point. Of course, you have to understand that I'm not specifically stating the above so much as a support for Buchan as a suspect, but rather as a starting point for extrapolating a cohesive psychological scenario from it. To be sure, it's all purely speculative, but it's an interesting line of speculation IMO.
>>That's all we're talking about here, a man who killed himself on the day of Mary's funeral. But doesn't it seem more likely that his birthday was the instigating factor, or something that occurred that day? <<
Absolutely. And furthermore, even if Mary's funeral did play some part as an instigating factor, (which is well within the realm of possibility -- no doubt the Ripper crimes had a profound psychological effect on most of the people who lived in that area, so it would hardly be unheard of if someone already mentally unstable might be inspired to his own acts of violence, even against himself as the case may be) -- this would in no way establish any kind of strong support for him being the Ripper himself.
But no matter. I'm really not attempting an argument in support of him as a candidate, per se. I'm only describing a scenario which I believe is plausible enough to warrant consideration. And as you'll note, my original post was more than anything a request for more information about him
>>I thought Roger's essay was excellent, and worthy, but in the end Buchan is a non-start for a suspect. <<
Good phrase there, "non-start." I.e., there's not enough evidence to plausibly advance him as a suspect. Personally, however, if this were 1888 I'd say that it would be enough to warrant interviewing his relatives etc. regarding his whereabouts on the nights of the murders. IOW, it would be a lead worth following up on. But as it's not 1888, and most of the avenues for following up on this lead are no longer available, such a lead remains a non-start. Pity really.
>> People killed themselves all the time by slitting their throat.I concur with Stan that Buchan is not a viable suspect. <<
Depending on what you mean by viable. So far, I can't say there's anything inherently implausible about him as a suspect; there's just nothing that supports it.
>> But we still needmore Roger Barber's out there with the eye and mind to look in forgottencorners. <<
Agreed. |
Jennifer D. Pegg
Chief Inspector
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 550
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, July 19, 2004 - 6:29 am: |
|
Just caught this thread.
It's really quite grim, but interesting.
I had never heard of him before.
after reading this, I think i will find it hard to forget.
Jennifer
"Think things, not words." - O.W. Holmes jr
|
Roger Barber
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 27, 2004 - 9:21 am: |
|
Hi everyone.
I have followed your arguments and you seem to miss the point I am making about the importance of killing himself on his birthday, which coupled with the Ripper's fascination with removing the womb makes a psychological connection that is missing with other suspects. When you then add that he had access to knives(he was also a shoemaker), was the right age, single, in a menial job, and lived 2 miles from Whitechapel, I believe thsi makes him a very viable candidate.
Another interesting point is that if the police considered that he could have been the Ripper, would they have been able to say so, especially if the family asked for it to be covered up?
As far as I can see, all the police on the case or connected with the case, when the opportunity arose to state who they thought JTR was, came up with different suspects -
Abberline said George Chapman, Anderson claimed that Kosminsky was the killer, McNaughton of course noted Kosminsky, Ostrog and Druitt as three possibilities.
So either the police had no idea at all or they were putting forward different names to hide the identity of the true killer.
If Buchan had been interviewed at some time during the series of killings or he had been drawn to their attention and then subsequently discarded, what would have been the reaction to his suicide and possibly other evidence, since destroyed, that he was the killer.
Would they have announced that he was the killer and that they had failed in apprehending him in time, or would they simply wind down the operation, as indeed they did. They were certanly under huge pressure and public opinion was very much against them.
In the absence of a photo of Buchan or a description, it is of course extremely difficult to get any further, especially as the Buchan family appear to have died out over the next couple of generations.
One final thought - did Edward Buchan look like the Duke of Clarence? If so, could the "Eddie" spotted in Whitechapel have been Buchan rather than the Queen's grandson?
As far as I can discover, the prince was a homosexual and was caught in a male brothel in the raid on Cleveland Street a year or two later.
The link with Druitt and James Stephen seem to go back to a homosexual group at Cambridge.
Certainly, Druitt is far more likely to kill himself after being sacked from his school for being gay.
All very intriguing!
|
Mercury Rising
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Sunday, October 30, 2005 - 2:44 pm: |
|
firstly i'd like to say, to everyone whom has posted on this board, that i have found it facinating to read.
i am very interested in psychological murders, they are the real life bogey men, aren't they? their minds are hurrendous, and yet some of us are intruiged, as am i.
the one thing i noticed from reading all of your posts, are how each idea of conclusion differs from the other, which is what has been this cases downfall from the moment it started.
to me, with the little knowledge that i have on the subject, believe that all of your posts are viable to extent. even if they aren't true, what does it hurt to have an opinion?
i do not believe that anyone can be told that their own idea of who the murderer was is untrue.
the only truth we can all be certain of is that sadly, we will never know.
if you are interested in my view on this...i have the feeling that if we knew the 'TRUTH', we would all be very, very surprised.
take care all. x |
Roger Barber
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Monday, November 28, 2005 - 7:02 pm: |
|
I still believe that the truth about the murderer will only be ascertained when the facts are examined rather than the myth that has been built up over 100 years. We need to understand why he did what he did. Only then can we discover hs true identity. |
Tim_308
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 07, 2005 - 3:01 pm: |
|
Roger Barber,
I don't understand how you can write your dissertation and quote 2 newspaper articles one after the other in which they have different names and ages for the person who committed suicide and not address this in your dissertation, it makes me wonder whether you are more interested in "having" a theory or analyzing facts. Why wasn't this addressed in your dissertation?
One report says Robert aged 40 and the next says Edward aged 29. |
|
Use of these
message boards implies agreement and consent to our Terms of Use.
The views expressed here in no way reflect the views of the owners and
operators of Casebook: Jack the Ripper.
Our old message board content (45,000+ messages) is no longer available online, but a complete archive
is available on the Casebook At Home Edition, for 19.99 (US) plus shipping.
The "At Home" Edition works just like the real web site, but with absolutely no advertisements.
You can browse it anywhere - in the car, on the plane, on your front porch - without ever needing to hook up to
an internet connection. Click here to buy the Casebook At Home Edition.
|
|
|
|
