William Bury website

[Sam Flynn]

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.

[Harry D]

Likelihood of Bury being the ripper.....south of 5 percent.

That seems ridiculously low, Herlock. Bury's the only named suspect we know guilty of committing a Ripper-esque murder who can be tied to the East End during the Autumn of Terror. There are good arguments for Ellen Bury's lack of overkill, and the only Ripper murder that happened after his death (McKenzie) is a much disputed one.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Len Murray –the last surviving Scottish lawyer who defended clients in capital murder cases- who says Michael has finally solved the case “not just beyond reasonable doubt but beyond all doubt”.

I hope I’ll never call on him to defend me. Overconfidence bordering on stupidity.

[Herlock Sholmes]

I really do think that this case is over, with only the loose ends of the Stride and McKenzie murders to be tied up. In support of my view I’d point out that last year, two distinguished lawyers in the U.K., men familiar with criminal evidence and criminal law, came forward to affirm that an identification has been made in this case, and that Bury can now be named as the Ripper. The signature evidence was one of the things cited. Any Ripperologist in 2019 can responsibly hold the view that this case is already solved.

Im sorry but you appear to be inhabiting a different world. This case is nowhere near solved. Bury is worth looking at of course but come on this is overconfidence taken to extremes. The two lawyers who made those comments have done themselves no favours I’m afraid. Likelihood of Bury being the ripper.....south of 5 percent. Still higher than most but that’s all. I’m afraid you’ve saddled your horse and are intent on riding it blinkered to the end.

[Herlock Sholmes]

. Yes—the Ellen Bury murder was a sexualized murder. Her genital mutilations are described in the two medical reports. When we then find her body in the position that we find it in, when she could have been placed into the trunk in any one of a number of different ways, it is obvious what Bury was doing. Any seasoned analyst would immediately recognize this as sexually degrading posing of the victim’s body. In addition, William Bury tilted Ellen Bury’s head to one side, as was done with a number of the Whitechapel victims. This confirms that William Bury was deliberately manipulating the appearance of Ellen Bury’s body, that is, that he was engaged in posing behavior.

You appear to be making the rather baffling suggestion that she was stuffed into a trunk in a sexually degrading pose? Being stuffed into a trunk is simply being stuffed into a trunk I’m afraid. Too much is being read into this and it smacks again of shoehorning.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Yes—the important point here, per Keppel et al., is that “this killer obviously left the victims where others would find them.” William Bury accomplished this in Dundee by telling the police the exact location of Ellen Bury’s body.

In a trunk isn’t ‘on display’ by any normal understanding of the phrase. By that definition any corpse would have to be considered ‘on display’ if it hadn’t been buried or destroyed in some other way.

Left in the street, skirts lifted, legs spread is a world of difference between stuffed into a trunk. This is simply shoehorning in my opinion.

[Herlock Sholmes]

A seasoned analyst like Keppel understands that a signature characteristic can be absent or it can be reduced or modified in its expression in connection with the specific circumstances of a murder, and we have a whoppingchange of circumstances at Princes Street, namely, the murder occurred at the subject’s residence, and the subject was known by name to be living there by others in the area. Since these circumstances could reasonably have compelled William Bury to significantly reduce his mutilations, thus affecting the presence or degree of overkill, a seasoned analyst would not attach importance to the lower level of violence to the victim’s body at Princes Street. By the way, overkill may well have been present at the Ellen Bury crime scene. Dr. Henry Littlejohn gave his professional assessment that Ellen Bury would not have survived her mutilations. So while there was no escalation in overkill, we could indeed have a yes to overkill itself being present here

Surely this is a problem in itself when trying to decide if any victim is part of a series? What we are saying, in effect is, that the signs are there to read....unless. Why then can’t we say that it’s possible for other murders to have occurred in the series but unknown external circumstances in the killers life meant that things changed dramatically leaving those murders seemingly unconnected?

[Single-O-Seven]

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/local/dundee/728125/beyond-doubt-was-jack-the-ripper-hanged-in-dundee/

[Wyatt Earp]

Herlock, your signature assessment of the Ellen Bury murder is not a sound one. I’ll go through things point-by-point with you.

“1) the injuries sustained by the victims displayed the signature characteristic of picquerism; maybe

Yes—the Ellen Bury murder is actually a classic case of picquerism. Read the Ellen Bury medical reports. If there were ever a trial of William Bury for the Jack the Ripper murders, I have no doubt that Robert Keppel would be willing to go before a jury and provide expert testimony that William Bury was a picquerist.

2) the killer displayed a level of overkill in each case that escalated over the series; no

A seasoned analyst like Keppel understands that a signature characteristic can be absent or it can be reduced or modified in its expression in connection with the specific circumstances of a murder, and we have a whopping change of circumstances at Princes Street, namely, the murder occurred at the subject’s residence, and the subject was known by name to be living there by others in the area. Since these circumstances could reasonably have compelled William Bury to significantly reduce his mutilations, thus affecting the presence or degree of overkill, a seasoned analyst would not attach importance to the lower level of violence to the victim’s body at Princes Street. By the way, overkill may well have been present at the Ellen Bury crime scene. Dr. Henry Littlejohn gave his professional assessment that Ellen Bury would not have survived her mutilations. So while there was no escalation in overkill, we could indeed have a yes to overkill itself being present here.

3) the victims were incapacitated immediately and killed quickly to enable the killer to live out his fantasies; maybe

Yes—Dr.Littlejohn testified that Ellen Bury was incapacitated with a blow to the head prior to being murdered.

4) the killer exhibited complete domination over each victim; maybe

Yes—Keppel et al. reference “use of a knife to penetrate the victims’ bodies and desecrate their sexual regions” in connection with this point. They also reference posing and other mutilation. All of these things occurred at Princes Street.

5) the victims’ bodies were left open and on display; no

Yes—the important point here, per Keppel et al., is that “this killer obviously left the victims where others would find them.” William Bury accomplished this in Dundee by telling the police the exact location of Ellen Bury’s body.

6) the victims in this series were displayed in unusual body positions, revealing signs of posing; no

Yes—the Ellen Bury murder was a sexualized murder. Her genital mutilations are described in the two medical reports. When we then find her body in the position that we find it in, when she could have been placed into the trunk in any one of a number of different ways, it is obvious what Bury was doing. Any seasoned analyst would immediately recognize this as sexually degrading posing of the victim’s body. In addition, William Bury tilted Ellen Bury’s head to one side, as was done with a number of the Whitechapel victims. This confirms that William Bury was deliberately manipulating the appearance of Ellen Bury’s body, that is, that he was engaged in posing behavior.

7) the victims were left in sexually degrading positions with their legs spread and genitalia exposed to illustrate their vulnerability after death and the killer’s dominance; no

Yes—see above, Ellen Bury’s body was placed in a sexually degrading position.

8) the killer mutilated his victims and showed increased postmortem mutilation from one victim to the next; no

As I noted in my comments on overkill, above, a seasoned analyst would take into account the specific circumstances of the murder and focus on the presence and not the degree of mutilations at Princes Street. So while there is a no to escalation, there is a yes with respect to the presence of mutilations.

9) the killer evolved to the removal of their organs and body parts, and removed some of them from the crime scenes; no

No—but as per the above, an experienced analyst would not attach importance to this.

10) the killer targeted specific areas of attack, stabbing and slashing the breasts, genitalia, abdomen, and sexual organs of the victims; no

Yes—when William Bury mutilated Ellen Bury’s body, he went for her abdomen, genitals and face, all areas that received attention in the Whitechapel murders.

11) the murders were planned and organized; and maybe

Maybe—you have it right here. We can’t be sure if the Ellen Bury murder was preplanned or not. Given that this was a very different murder, a domestic murder, that could have occurred suddenly and unexpectedly, perhaps in connection with an argument, or perhaps out of a threat by Ellen Bury to report William Bury to the police, I’m not inclined to think that we should attach much importance to the presence or not of preplanning.

What we have here, then, is a remarkably close match with a complex and extremely rare combination of signature characteristics. It seems quite possible that out of the entire pool of murders committed in Victorian Britain, the only murders that would match this specific combination of signature characteristics would be the unsolved murders of certain Whitechapel victims and the solved murder of Ellen Bury. From a purely statistical standpoint, it appears to be a virtual certainty that William Bury was either a copycat killer or Jack the Ripper—and as I’ve shown, Bury wasn’t a copycat. On the remote (very remote) possibility that the close signature combination match could have simply been a coincidence, I ran through a list of supporting pieces of circumstantial evidence at the end of “The Bury ID” that collectively allow us to reasonably exclude that explanation.

I really do think that this case is over, with only the loose ends of the Stride and McKenzie murders to be tied up. In support of my view I’d point out that last year, two distinguished lawyers in the U.K., men familiar with criminal evidence and criminal law, came forward to affirm that an identification has been made in this case, and that Bury can now be named as the Ripper. The signature evidence was one of the things cited. Any Ripperologist in 2019 can responsibly hold the view that this case is already solved.

[Single-O-Seven]

That’s an interesting ‘what if’, Abby.

And I think S-O-S makes a good argument.

I agree that Abby makes a great point, too. I certainly feel he would have been investigated further, which may have cracked things open much more. At the very least we would know a lot more about Bury. If he wasn't JTR there may have been better reasons to rule him out. It's a shame he wasn't looked into further while incarcerated and that the police inquiries are no longer available to us. I could also say it's a shame he wasn't made to sit and rot on a death row for a lot longer than a few months - maybe something more would have come out! Justice was swift in the Victorian Era.

[Harry D]

Hes got alot going for him. I cant help but think that if he had murdered Ellen in London he would have been arrested as also being the ripper.

That’s an interesting ‘what if’, Abby.

And I think S-O-S makes a good argument.

[Busy Beaver]

McKenzie's murderer was under no such constraint, he could have gone to town on the victim's body without revealing his name.

William Bury was 3 months dead by the time Alice Mckenzie was murdered.

[Abby Normal]

Hi Abby,

I do think in terms of gashing Ellen's abdomen, Bury couldn't help himself. While JTR undoubtedly killed his victims for the satisfaction he got from the postmortem mutilation, I think Bury killed Ellen because he was just an abusive prick who went too far. The mutilation was not his impulse in that case, but once she was dead he just couldn't help put the knife in her. He held back from going too far with it for reasons I stated before.

SOS

agree. I think it may have started as a drunken row. and or maybe she said something accusing him of being the ripper? (this might also fit with his odd saying he wasn't the ripper).

any way it dosnt looked like a planned murder to me.

[Single-O-Seven]

Hi Abby,

I do think in terms of gashing Ellen's abdomen, Bury couldn't help himself. While JTR undoubtedly killed his victims for the satisfaction he got from the postmortem mutilation, I think Bury killed Ellen because he was just an abusive prick who went too far. The mutilation was not his impulse in that case, but once she was dead he just couldn't help put the knife in her. He held back from going too far with it for reasons I stated before.

SOS

[Abby Normal]

and just another minor point-Bury seemed to be obsessed with not being blamed as the ripper. odd. why this preoccupation with it? Why even bring it up?add to this the possible writing on his door saying hes the ripper?

whats going on here?

i think these also point to possible guilt. and if he was the ripper-skipping town right after the murder of Kelly to avoid getting caught (getting too hot)-is a narrative that fits with above strange stuff.