William Bury website

[Harry D]

and re the ripper related graffiti on his house-it does seem like could be neighborhood kids ragging on a nasty character whos from London

I thought there were coppers stationed at the house? Although I doubt they were there 24/7. There would've been a chance for some daring scallywag to write the graffiti. The whole 'Jack Ripper Is At The Back Of The Door' and the 'Jack Ripper Is In This Seller[sic]' does sound like the graffiti kids would write, rather than the real killer's confession.

[Al Bundy's Eyes]

Btw, someone really needs to edit Bury's entry on Murderpedia. It speaks about him attacking Ada Wilson and Annie Millwood as if they are known facts: https://murderpedia.org/male.B/b/bury-william-henry.htm

It also claims Bury pretended an intruder had killed Ellen, when in fact he said she accidentally killed herself.

Jumping Jehoshaphat! That's an absolutely shocking bio, I've rarely seen such a piss poor piece of "factual" work.

[Wyatt Earp]

while I think Bury is a very valid suspect for the ripper murders, Im with herlock and Harry on doubts how a body can be displayed in a sexually degraded position while stuffed in a trunk. perhaps its possible, but unless wyatt can specifically show how this is so and or quote experts who say this-id need more info to consider.

It seems that stuffing a body in a trunk is the first move to hide and get rid of a body-not display it IMHO.

Hi Abby, here are Keppel, Weis, Brown and Welch on the display issue in the Ripper murders: “…the victims were left in the open and on display in an effort to further degrade them and shock those who discovered the bodies. No efforts were made to hide or dispose of the victims. The first five victims were intentionally left in outdoor locations. In the Kelly case, he left her in her own room where she would be found by anyone searching for her. In fact, this killer obviously left the victims where others would find them.” According to this description, the Ellen Bury was a display murder, as William Bury did not transport or hide her body, and he ensured that her body would be quickly discovered by informing the Dundee police of its location. It’s not reasonable to argue that Bury made an effort to hide the body by putting it in the trunk, as he led the police directly to the trunk. From a display perspective, the Ellen Bury murder was actually very similar to the Mary Kelly murder. In the Mary Kelly murder, her body was in her bed, and in the Ellen Bury murder, her body was in a trunk close to her bed.

[Wyatt Earp]

and re the ripper related graffiti on his house-it does seem like could be neighborhood kids ragging on a nasty character whos from London, but I wouldn't dismiss it-the ripper was known to have probably written graffiti before, and with Burys apparent obsession with NOT being the ripper-it could be significant.

If he was the ripper, I could see the un ripper like way he got caught, along with the graffiti as a man unravelling psychologically.

The whole 'Jack Ripper Is At The Back Of The Door' and the 'Jack Ripper Is In This Seller[sic]' does sound like the graffiti kids would write, rather than the real killer's confession.

The handwriting evidence suggests that the two messages at the rear of the residence are specimens of disguised handwriting and that they were written by the same person. That points to William Bury being the author, as he was experienced at disguising his handwriting while Ellen Bury could apparently barely write.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Hi Abby, here are Keppel, Weis, Brown and Welch on the display issue in the Ripper murders: “…the victims were left in the open and on display in an effort to further degrade them and shock those who discovered the bodies. No efforts were made to hide or dispose of the victims. The first five victims were intentionally left in outdoor locations. In the Kelly case, he left her in her own room where she would be found by anyone searching for her. In fact, this killer obviously left the victims where others would find them.” According to this description, the Ellen Bury was a display murder, as William Bury did not transport or hide her body, and he ensured that her body would be quickly discovered by informing the Dundee police of its location. It’s not reasonable to argue that Bury made an effort to hide the body by putting it in the trunk, as he led the police directly to the trunk. From a display perspective, the Ellen Bury murder was actually very similar to the Mary Kelly murder. In the Mary Kelly murder, her body was in her bed, and in the Ellen Bury murder, her body was in a trunk close to her bed.

More comedy.

They said - in the open, on display.......not in a box!

You cannot display someone, as the ripper did with his victims by putting them in a box in a room in a house where no one else was expected to be. If he’d have left her there and simply escaped leaving her to be discovered then you might be able to suggest that he was doing it so that he could think of the horror at her discovery. But this isn’t what happened. He deliberately went to the police. If he’d intended this all along he wouldn't have bothered putting her in the trunk. He have killed her and trundled off to the station. So it was a case of either a) he hadn’t decided on his next move So he put her somewhere out of sight, or b) he intended to dispose of the body but then changed his mind and confessed. So it’s simply twisted logic you're using...again.

Ellen Bury Murder similar to Mary Kelly?

Active Street prostitute/woman at home.
Stranger killer/familial murder.
Horrendous mutilations/injuries not in the same league.
Parts strewn around the room/nothing.
Heart missing/nothing missing.
Kelly on her bed/Bury in a box.
Killer escapes/killer confesses.

Yes, they’re almost interchangeable

[Herlock Sholmes]

The handwriting evidence suggests that the two messages at the rear of the residence are specimens of disguised handwriting and that they were written by the same person. That points to William Bury being the author, as he was experienced at disguising his handwriting while Ellen Bury could apparently barely write.

Suggests...

It no more points to William or Ellen than it does to the postman or the butcher. If he put her in a box, suggesting that he was considering of disposing of her body, then he decides to confess why the hell would have bother writing the graffiti? Unsurprisingly it makes no sense.

[Michael W Richards]

The signature evidence shows that the same person murdered Martha Tabram, Mary Ann Nichols, Annie Chapman, Catherine Eddowes, Mary Jane Kelly and Ellen Bury. Since we know who murdered one of these women, we know who murdered all of them. As a reminder, signature evidence is admissible in court and has been used to help secure convictions of serial killers. It is not like graphological evidence, which cannot be trusted and has routinely been excluded from trials. Members of the community should keep these facts in mind and not dismiss signature evidence as unreliable "profiling."

First off I did visit the site and read the Stride murder synopsis. Using one of the witnesses that was not involved in the Inquest into Liz Strides death as something pivotal in this murder isn't, for me anyway, a viable premise. The fact that anyone said in print in a memo or for the press that they believed Schwartz is immaterial when juxtaposed with his obvious absence in the records. There is no physical evidence that Strides killer was interrupted, stopped from completing acts, showed hesitation, partial preparation or even touched Strides body after the single throat cut. And we have a contemporary medical authority on these cases, having personally inspected 4 of the five victims, that Stride was not killed by Annies killer, or in the same way.

Some M/O features, or signatures for the killer, without Tabram..(because I, like almost every contemporary investigator and almost every student of the cases since, do not see any evidence that would suggest marriage of Marthas killer with Polly, Annie, Kate or Marys killer(s)...and because Martha was almost certainly killed by one man with a pen knife and another with a dagger),... would be Middle aged women soliciting as targets, killer and prey do NOT know each other, double throat cuts to expedite blood letting and abdominal mutilations immediately thereafter.

If I were a "Buryist" Id focus on looking at crimes that are not focused on pm mutilating.

[Wyatt Earp]

Hi Michael, thanks for visiting the website. I have never claimed that the Stride murder could be linked to the Ripper’s signature (if you look at the main page of the Bury website, for example, you’ll see that I don’t list Stride as one of Bury’s victims). That said, I accept that there is a statistical argument to be made that the Stride and Eddowes murders were almost certainly committed by the same person (close proximity in space and time, cut throat, similar victim characteristics, etc., all the stuff we’ve heard before). Experienced guys like John Douglas accept this argument as well. For me, the challenge, then, was to try to develop a reasonable scenario in which Bury could have been the person who murdered Stride, given the obvious differences between the Stride and Eddowes crime scenes. Schwartz’s account was apparently taken seriously by Swanson, which was enough for me to want to explore it, and my post on the Stride murder was the result of that exploration. Can it be proven that Bury murdered Stride? Of course not. Do I think that he killed her? Yep.

I disagree with you about Tabram, as do Keppel, Weis, Brown and Welch in their article. Important signature elements are there, as I showed in Table 1 of “The Bury ID.”

Have a great weekend, everyone.

[c.d.]

And we have a contemporary medical authority on these cases, having personally inspected 4 of the five victims, that Stride was not killed by Annies killer, or in the same way.

Hello Michael,

How does a doctor become a "medical authority?"

c.d.

[Wyatt Earp]

while I think Bury is a very valid suspect for the ripper murders, Im with herlock and Harry on doubts how a body can be displayed in a sexually degraded position while stuffed in a trunk. perhaps its possible, but unless wyatt can specifically show how this is so and or quote experts who say this-id need more info to consider.

It seems that stuffing a body in a trunk is the first move to hide and get rid of a body-not display it IMHO.

To expand on my earlier response, Abby, I don’t see why you couldn’t have posing of a body inside a trunk if, as a perpetrator, you’re confident that the body would be quickly discovered there. It’s important for everyone here to understand that you can have a display murder with an indoor murder. In the case of the Mary Kelly murder, the body was behind a single partition (door). In the case of the Ellen Bury murder, the body was behind two partitions (door and lid of trunk). In both cases, however, the perpetrator could be certain that the body would be quickly discovered.

Let’s assume for a moment that at some point in the proceedings William Bury really did dally with the idea of transporting the body and that his placement of the body into the trunk was a first step in that direction (I don’t think that’s what occurred, as the posing of the body is obvious, and I don’t think he would have posed the body if he intended to transport it, but let’s set that aside). It wouldn’t change anything. While technically it would be a violation of Keppel et al.’s “no attempts were made to move the bodies,” elsewhere Keppel emphasizes that a signature characteristic can be modified, diluted or entirely absent at a given crime scene in connection with the specific circumstances of that murder. William and Ellen Bury were known by name to be living at their Princes Street address by others in the area. If William Bury had simply fled the scene, there would have been a manhunt for him as Ellen Bury’s murderer and perhaps also as the Whitechapel murderer. Under this set of circumstances, then, would anyone here be surprised if Jack the Ripper, in this instance, had decided to abandon body display and instead make an attempt to transport the body away from the scene? Certainly we would not be able to exclude him as being Jack the Ripper if he had taken this action, given the situation. William Bury did not transport the body, though, he made sure that it would be quickly discovered, and so we have no choice but to classify this as a “display” murder and a match on that signature point.

[Herlock Sholmes]

.

To expand on my earlier response, Abby, I don’t see why you couldn’t have posing of a body inside a trunk if, as a perpetrator, you’re confident that the body would be quickly discovered there. It’s important for everyone here to understand that you can have a display murder with an indoor murder. In the case of the Mary Kelly murder, the body was behind a single partition (door). In the case of the Ellen Bury murder, the body was behind two partitions (door and lid of trunk). In both cases, however, the perpetrator could be certain that the body would be quickly discovered.

But he wasn’t expecting or hoping that the body would have just been discovered by persons unknown because he went to the police and told them about it.

[Herlock Sholmes]

. elsewhere Keppel emphasizes that a signature characteristic can be modified, diluted or entirely absent at a given crime scene in connection with the specific circumstances of that murder.

So how can these be reliable signposts if external events, that investigators would in all likelihood have been completely unaware of, can alter them or cause them to occur or nor occur. Movable goalposts are useless.

[Abby Normal]

To expand on my earlier response, Abby, I don’t see why you couldn’t have posing of a body inside a trunk if, as a perpetrator, you’re confident that the body would be quickly discovered there. It’s important for everyone here to understand that you can have a display murder with an indoor murder. In the case of the Mary Kelly murder, the body was behind a single partition (door). In the case of the Ellen Bury murder, the body was behind two partitions (door and lid of trunk). In both cases, however, the perpetrator could be certain that the body would be quickly discovered.

Let’s assume for a moment that at some point in the proceedings William Bury really did dally with the idea of transporting the body and that his placement of the body into the trunk was a first step in that direction (I don’t think that’s what occurred, as the posing of the body is obvious, and I don’t think he would have posed the body if he intended to transport it, but let’s set that aside). It wouldn’t change anything. While technically it would be a violation of Keppel et al.’s “no attempts were made to move the bodies,” elsewhere Keppel emphasizes that a signature characteristic can be modified, diluted or entirely absent at a given crime scene in connection with the specific circumstances of that murder. William and Ellen Bury were known by name to be living at their Princes Street address by others in the area. If William Bury had simply fled the scene, there would have been a manhunt for him as Ellen Bury’s murderer and perhaps also as the Whitechapel murderer. Under this set of circumstances, then, would anyone here be surprised if Jack the Ripper, in this instance, had decided to abandon body display and instead make an attempt to transport the body away from the scene? Certainly we would not be able to exclude him as being Jack the Ripper if he had taken this action, given the situation. William Bury did not transport the body, though, he made sure that it would be quickly discovered, and so we have no choice but to classify this as a “display” murder and a match on that signature point.

hey wyatt
I see what your getting at kind of. This is how I see it.
Could a body stuffed in a trunk be indicative of a wish to degrade? yes absolutely.
If it was, could also be in a SEXUALLY degrading position? possibly-but without the perpetrator explicating saying it was the purpose, then it would be hard to come to that conclusion, unless she was placed in the box in obvious sexual position-ie sexual parts front and center, legs spread apart etc.
If this is the case could it be considered DISPLAYED in a SEXUALLY DEGRADING position. I suppose it could, especially if he knew it would be found soon and or he led someone to it, which seems to be the case.

Do we know the position of the body in the box-was there obvious sexual posing? whats the first thing one saw when they opened the box? do we know?

[c.d.]

I expect Bury would have been concerned about Stride identifying him either out of her unhappiness about the incident, or because the police might have pressured her to do so.

Identified him as what? The man who pushed her?

c.d.

[Wyatt Earp]

hey wyatt
I see what your getting at kind of. This is how I see it.
Could a body stuffed in a trunk be indicative of a wish to degrade? yes absolutely.
If it was, could also be in a SEXUALLY degrading position? possibly-but without the perpetrator explicating saying it was the purpose, then it would be hard to come to that conclusion, unless she was placed in the box in obvious sexual position-ie sexual parts front and center, legs spread apart etc.
If this is the case could it be considered DISPLAYED in a SEXUALLY DEGRADING position. I suppose it could, especially if he knew it would be found soon and or he led someone to it, which seems to be the case.

Do we know the position of the body in the box-was there obvious sexual posing? whats the first thing one saw when they opened the box? do we know?

Lt. Lamb only testified that the body, like Kelly’s, was naked except for a chemise, “The right leg was broken in two and doubled back under [the] lid of [the] box,” and “The] left leg [was] bent back so that the foot was over [the] right shoulder,” but that’s obviously a sexually degrading position.