William Bury website

[Sam Flynn]

Here is a description of the major wound to Ellen's abdomen, from the medical report prepared by Templeman and Stalker. I think most people would describe this as a "cut" and not a "stab."

I'm not denying that, and nor have I ever. She was cut, but she was also garotted and sustained stab wounds from a penknife.

"There was an incised wound in the centre of the abdomen, extending downwards from the umbilicus for four and a half inches. It penetrated the abdominal cavity, and through it protruded part of the omentum, and about a foot of intestine, part of which was dry and black from exposure to the air."

Indeed. One 4.5" cut penetrating the abdominal wall, and one longer cut which scored the skin of her belly as one might score a pork rind. None of this looks like the Ripper's work to me.

[Wyatt Earp]

Here is a description of the major wound to Ellen's abdomen, from the medical report prepared by Templeman and Stalker. I think most people would describe this as a "cut" and not a "stab."

"There was an incised wound in the centre of the abdomen, extending downwards from the umbilicus for four and a half inches. It penetrated the abdominal cavity, and through it protruded part of the omentum, and about a foot of intestine, part of which was dry and black from exposure to the air. This cut was ragged towards the lower part."

[Sam Flynn]

I suppose it depends if you consider Millwood and Tabram as victims, too. I tend to, though I know it's a contentious issue.

Indeed, but I don't count either as a Ripper victim. Even if I did, it seems that he moved firmly away from stabbing for the four or five consecutive murders he went on to commit between 31st Aug and 9th November 1888.

[Single-O-Seven]

There's another point of difference. Jack the Ripper wasn't really a stabber; he inflicted long, deep cuts on the throats and abdomens of his victims.

I suppose it depends if you consider Millwood and Tabram as victims, too. I tend to, though I know it's a contentious issue.

[Sam Flynn]

But Bury did strangle his wife and then stab her in the abdomen after death.

There's another point of difference. Jack the Ripper wasn't really a stabber; he inflicted long, deep cuts on the throats and abdomens of his victims.

[Herlock Sholmes]

. We can use such things to make any number of suspects fit, and we have to draw the line somewhere.

Exactly Gareth.

How can we say ‘well Bury ticks certain recognised boxes that would apply to the ripper but, when he doesn’t tick a box, we can chalk it down to circumstances then move on?’ There could be any number of unknown circumstances for a killer at any given time which could account for a difference which might lead us away from connecting a suspect to a series. If it’s unknown to us how do we decide?

[John Wheat]

But Bury did strangle his wife and then stab her in the abdomen after death.

[Sam Flynn]

String/rope, whatever. It wasn't a knife, that's for sure.

[John Wheat]

But Bury didn't use a piece of string Sam he used a piece of rope. And there is evidence to suggest Jack used a ligature in some of the Ripper murders.

[Sam Flynn]

It’s been explained to you that the M.O. of a serial killer can vary among crime scenes, and it’s been explained to you that a signature characteristic can be reduced in expression in connection with the specific circumstances of a murder. So you object to Bury by saying that his M.O. varied, and that one of his signature characteristics, mutilation, was reduced in expression?

We can use such things to make any number of suspects fit, and we have to draw the line somewhere. Jack the Ripper drew very firm, decisive lines across his victims' throats, and he didn't use a piece of string to do so.

[Wyatt Earp]

I did take a look. Easy to navigate site, not cluttered, plenty of white space which makes the content easy to access - a nice design. As for the content, still reading through but the initial pages I have read are well written, clear and interesting. I shall be visiting again.

Thank you, etenguy.

[Wyatt Earp]

As to the wounds, a 4.5" cut penetrating the abdominal wall below the umbilicus, coupled with a slightly longer superficial cut which didn't penetrate the abdomen, doesn't really compare with what the Ripper did to his victims. Victims which he dispatched with a swift and devastating cut to the throat - a technique honed over several murders by the time Ellen was killed; yet Ellen did not perish by this practised and efficient means, but was throttled with a rope.

It’s been explained to you that the M.O. of a serial killer can vary among crime scenes, and it’s been explained to you that a signature characteristic can be reduced in expression in connection with the specific circumstances of a murder. So you object to Bury by saying that his M.O. varied, and that one of his signature characteristics, mutilation, was reduced in expression?

[etenguy]

If you haven't been to the Bury website before, I hope you'll consider taking a look.

I did take a look. Easy to navigate site, not cluttered, plenty of white space which makes the content easy to access - a nice design. As for the content, still reading through but the initial pages I have read are well written, clear and interesting. I shall be visiting again.

[Wyatt Earp]

I don't see Ellen's murder as particularly ripperesque, TBH and, whilst Bury can be placed in the East End, he was based in Bromley-by-Bow, not Whitechapel/Spitalfields. Bromley adjoined Poplar, and the districts of Limehouse, Shadwell and Ratcliff (to name three) lay between Bury's stomping-ground and JTR's killing fields. There were plenty of unfortunates/prostitutes in those districts in their own right, and one would think that a killer of unfortunates would have claimed a fair few victims there, rather than venture further West to indulge his urges.

The anchor point for a serial killer’s campaign isn’t necessarily his residence, it could be his place of employment or some other location of consequence to him. There were a lot of pubs close to where Bury lived, but for some reason he was all the way over in Whitechapel getting drunk. He may well have had some specific connection to the Whitechapel area that we simply don’t know about. At Bury’s trial Marjory Smith testified that Ellen Bury told her that Bury had “pals.” We also know from James Martin’s testimony that Bury could be gone from home for days at a time. One obvious possibility, then, is that when Bury was away from home, he could have been staying at the residence of a friend somewhere in the Whitechapel area, and this friend’s residence could have become the anchor point for the murders. It’s also possible that Bury was simply one of those rare bird serial killers that chooses a hunting ground at a considerable distance from where he lives. In short, I don’t see a worthwhile objection to Bury here.

[Wyatt Earp]

Hi Wyatt,

I'm curious to hear more on the opinions of the two UK lawyers you cite. Can you possibly provide a link or other details? I'm largely confident the JTR murders are settled as well - but I fear most people don't want to hear that.

EDIT: Here's a link with some of the details I believe Wyatt was referring to:
https://www.holdthefrontpage.co.uk/2...ripper-theory/

and

https://www.thecourier.co.uk/fp/news...ged-in-dundee/

Thanks for posting these links, 07. I've only read the newspaper articles and don't have anything to add to this.