William Bury the Whitechapel Murderer ?

[Roy Corduroy]

Hi Sam, I see the word Stables twice on this 1873 map which is contained here on the site here. One on a passaseway connecting to the left of George Yard, and one that points to Whitechapel thoroughfare.

[Sam Flynn]

Beadle, on page 168, hints at a local connection, speaking of George Yard: "In 1888 it was also a stables. ... Bury stabled his pony in Spanby Road but George Yard itself was an ideal place to park a pony and cart whilst he was in Whitechapel and Spitalfields."

Pure conjecture, but it was near the epicenter.

Pure conjecture indeed, Roy. Some points to note:

1. "In 1888 [George Yard] was also a stables". Presumably, Beadle gets this idea from the fact that Louis Diemschutz stabled his pony in "George Yard"... but that was someplace known colloquially as "George Yard" (compare "Dutfield's Yard"), off Cable Street, and not George Yard of Tabram infamy. Problem is, Cable Street isn't particularly near the epicentre.

2. Beadle only supposes that Bury could have stabled his pony in George Yard. One might be forgiven from reading the literature that this was a definitely ascertained fact - I've certainly come across people who were under that impression - but it's nothing of the sort. Not that this matters much, once one realises that (a) George (Tabram) Yard was almost certainly mistaken for George (Diemschutz' pony) Yard; and (b) it's an open speculation on Beadle's part anyway.

3. "An ideal place to park when [Bury] was in Whitechapel and Spitalfields". Note the underlines. The only reference we have to Bury being "in" Whitechapel was when he was at a pub there - but Whitechapel extends some distance, and contained many pubs. It's quite conceivable - probable, even - that the pub in question was located at the eastern end of Whitechapel, not far from Bury's home in Bow, rather than "deep in Ripper Country", which is clearly the connection that Beadle would like us to make. Indeed, in the same block of text, Beadle states quite matter-of-factly that the Ripper's "intimate working knowledge of Whitechapel and Spitalfields... fits Bury to a tee". Well, it doesn't - at least inasmuch as we have no evidence whatsoever that Bury knew either district particularly well.

4. You'll note that, in (3) above, I've twice underlined the "and" between Whitechapel and Spitalfields, for good reason. We have only one example of Bury's "frequenting" a pub in Whitechapel - and that, as I've noted, could well have been only on the eastern fringe of that district - but there is not one example of Bury being in Spitalfields for any reason whatsoever. Beadle's conflation of the two districts, whilst apparently trifling given their close proximity, does run the risk of portraying Bury as having been more familiar with Spitalfields than might actually have been the case. The statement that George Yard was "an ideal place to park when [Bury] WAS in Whitechapel..." (where does that "was" come from?) is taking auto-suggestion to another level.

[Roy Corduroy]

Colin, you have a good point. Thank you for the map showing Bury's residence as outside the "zone."

Beadle, on page 168, hints at a local connection, speaking of George Yard: "In 1888 it was also a stables. ... Bury stabled his pony in Spanby Road but George Yard itself was an ideal place to park a pony and cart whilst he was in Whitechapel and Spitalfields."

Pure conjecture, but it was near the epicenter.

Roy

He seems to satisfy every requirement - proximity to the crimes, ...

While 'accessibility' should certainly be a "requirement"; 'proximity' should not!

... just a seemingly average local man ...

There can be no justification for the suggestion that William Bury was 'local'.

Casebook.org Forum 'Thread': "Informal Preview of Geo-Spatial Analysis Project"

Casebook.org Forum 'Thread': "Informal Presentation of Geo-Spatial Analysis Project"

I have yet to discuss the concept of 'Standard Deviation' and its practical applications, in my "Informal Presentation". But the data, which accompanies Figures 1-3, should serve to clarify the concept, specifically as it applies to the Autumn 1888 residence of William Bury.


Figure 1: Cumulative Probability Distribution (0.00% - 90.00%) (Circular) (Click to View in flickr)
Underlying Aerial Imagery: Copyright Google Earth, 2007
Overlying Plots, Labels and Color-Shadings: Copyright Colin C. Roberts, 2009

Red: 0.00% - 50.00% Stipulated 'Expectation' of Distribution Accumulation *
- 0.00 - 0.73 Standard Deviations
- Radius: 445.28 Yards
- Area: 0.20 Square-Miles
* Were these murders to have continued ad infinitum; the 'expectation' would be that 50.00% would have occurred within the specified circular area. This can be loosely interpreted, to mean that the 'probability' of the impending subsequent murder occurring within this circular area; would have been 50.00%.

Red/Orange: 0.00% - 60.00% Stipulated 'Expectation' of Distribution Accumulation *
- 0.00 - 0.92 Standard Deviations
- Radius: 563.42 Yards
- Area: 0.32 Square-Miles
* Were these murders to have continued ad infinitum; the 'expectation' would be that 60.00% would have occurred within the specified circular area. This can be loosely interpreted, to mean that the 'probability' of the impending subsequent murder occurring within this circular area; would have been 60.00%.

Red/Orange/Yellow: 0.00% - 70.00% Stipulated 'Expectation' of Distribution Accumulation *
- 0.00 - 1.16 Standard Deviations
- Radius: 708.33 Yards
- Area: 0.51 Square-Miles
* Were these murders to have continued ad infinitum; the 'expectation' would be that 70.00% would have occurred within the specified circular area. This can be loosely interpreted, to mean that the 'probability' of the impending subsequent murder occurring within this circular area; would have been 70.00%.

Red/Orange/Yellow/Green: 0.00% - 80.00% Stipulated 'Expectation' of Distribution Accumulation *
- 0.00 - 1.48 Standard Deviations
- Radius: 904.41 Yards
- Area: 0.83 Square-Miles
* Were these murders to have continued ad infinitum; the 'expectation' would be that 80.00% would have occurred within the specified circular area. This can be loosely interpreted, to mean that the 'probability' of the impending subsequent murder occurring within this circular area; would have been 80.00%.

Red/Orange/Yellow/Green/Aqua: 0.00% - 90.00% Stipulated 'Expectation' of Distribution Accumulation *
- 0.00 - 2.02 Standard Deviations
- Radius: 1,234.67 Yards
- Area: 1.55 Square-Miles
* Were these murders to have continued ad infinitum; the 'expectation' would be that 90.00% would have occurred within the specified circular area. This can be loosely interpreted, to mean that the 'probability' of the impending subsequent murder occurring within this circular area; would have been 90.00%.

Entire Image (Assumed Circle): 0.00% - 95.00% Stipulated 'Expectation' of Distribution Accumulation *
- 0.00 - 2.57 Standard Deviations
- Radius (Assumed Circle): 1,575.36 Yards
- Area (Assumed Circle): 2.52 Square-Miles
- Area (Square): 3.20 Square-Miles
* Were these murders to have continued ad infinitum; the 'expectation' would be that 95.00% would have occurred within the specified circular area. This can be loosely interpreted, to mean that the 'probability' of the impending subsequent murder occurring within this circular area; would have been 95.00%.

Note: William Bury's Autumn 1888 residence is 'Off the Chart'.

As mentioned in the "Informal Preview": I have used the Murder-Site 'Epicenter' and its corresponding 'Cumulative Probability Distribution', as the basis for a very simple 'centrographic' model, which I have constructed in order to provide an example of geographic profiles. The model differs significantly from those used by Kim Rossmo, David Canter, Ned Levine (CrimeStat), et al …, which establish rectangular 'search areas' that are then divided into tens of thousands of rectangular 'cells'; to each of which proprietary 'distance-decay' functions are then applied, in order to assess the respective likelihood that each of the 'cells' has played host to a perpetrator's base of operations. Whereas these complex models attempt to pinpoint the specific areas, in which a perpetrator is most likely to be found; the model that I have constructed simply estimates the size of the 'net' (circular or elliptical), that when cast upon the murder-site epicenter, will capture a perpetrator at various levels of probability (e.g. 50.00%, 60.00%, etc …).

The model is derived from the very simple premise that at some level of deviation from the murder-site epicenter, there exists a '50%-threshold' that determines an appropriate level of 'delay' in the cumulative distribution function associated with the murder-sites under consideration.

In other words: If we assume, generally speaking, that there is a 50% probability that a doctor will reside within the area, in which he makes house-calls; that there is a 50% probability that a door-to-door salesman will reside within the area, in which he operates; and that there is a 50% probability that a serial-murderer will reside within the area, in which he kills; then that probability will be progressively greater than 50% in the cases of larger areas, and regressively less than 50% in the cases of smaller areas. This would be due to the fact that traversal of an 'area of operations' becomes more difficult as the size of that area increases; thus increasing the necessity for any such 'operator' to work from within the area itself.

Using one 'standard deviation' as the '50%-threshold', there is a perceived 'probability' of 63.68% that the murderer would continue to operate within the specified limitation (i.e. within one standard deviation of the murder-site epicenter); and therefore a 31.84% perceived 'probability' that he would be found to be living within this specified limitation. Beyond one standard deviation; the latter 'probability' progressively increases beyond 50% of the former. Whereas below one standard deviation; the latter 'probability' regressively decreases below 50% of the former.

*** This will all be explained with much greater clarity, as my "Informal Presentation" progresses. ***


Figure 2: Cumulative 'Geo-Profile' Probability Distribution (0.00% - 90.00%) (Circular) (Click to View in flickr)
Underlying Aerial Imagery: Copyright Google Earth, 2007
Overlying Plots, Labels and Color-Shadings: Copyright Colin C. Roberts, 2009

Red: 0.00% - 50.00% Stipulated 'Expectation' of 'Geo-Profile' Distribution Accumulation *
- 0.00 - 1.67 Standard Deviations
- Radius: 1,023.39 Yards
- Area: 1.06 Square-Miles
* Were these murders to have continued ad infinitum; the 'expectation' would be that 84.42% would have occurred within the specified circular area. This can be loosely interpreted, to mean that the 'probability' of the impending subsequent murder occurring within this circular area; would have been 84.42%. So in accordance with the example 'geographic-profile' model: The probability that the perpetrator(s) operated from a residence or 'base' within the specified circular area; would have been 50.00%.

Red/Orange: 0.00% - 60.00% Stipulated 'Expectation' of 'Geo-Profile' Distribution Accumulation *
- 0.00 - 2.11 Standard Deviations
- Radius: 1,294.91 Yards
- Area: 1.70 Square-Miles
* Were these murders to have continued ad infinitum; the 'expectation' would be that 91.18% would have occurred within the specified circular area. This can be loosely interpreted, to mean that the 'probability' of the impending subsequent murder occurring within this circular area; would have been 91.18%. So in accordance with the example 'geographic-profile' model: The probability that the perpetrator(s) operated from a residence or 'base' within the specified circular area; would have been 60.00%.

Red/Orange/Yellow: 0.00% - 70.00% Stipulated 'Expectation' of 'Geo-Profile' Distribution Accumulation *
- 0.00 - 2.66 Standard Deviations
- Radius: 1,627.96 Yards
- Area: 2.69 Square-Miles
* Were these murders to have continued ad infinitum; the 'expectation' would be that 95.50% would have occurred within the specified circular area. This can be loosely interpreted, to mean that the 'probability' of the impending subsequent murder occurring within this circular area; would have been 95.50%. So in accordance with the example 'geographic-profile' model: The probability that the perpetrator(s) operated from a residence or 'base' within the specified circular area; would have been 70.00%.

Red/Orange/Yellow/Green: 0.00% - 80.00% Stipulated 'Expectation' of 'Geo-Profile' Distribution Accumulation *
- 0.00 - 3.39 Standard Deviations
- Radius: 2,078.61 Yards
- Area: 4.38 Square-Miles
* Were these murders to have continued ad infinitum; the 'expectation' would be that 98.06% would have occurred within the specified circular area. This can be loosely interpreted, to mean that the 'probability' of the impending subsequent murder occurring within this circular area; would have been 98.06%. So in accordance with the example 'geographic-profile' model: The probability that the perpetrator(s) operated from a residence or 'base' within the specified circular area; would have been 80.00%.

Red/Orange/Yellow/Green/Aqua: 0.00% - 90.00% Stipulated 'Expectation' of 'Geo-Profile' Distribution Accumulation *
- 0.00 - 4.63 Standard Deviations
- Radius: 2,837.67 Yards
- Area: 8.17 Square-Miles
* Were these murders to have continued ad infinitum; the 'expectation' would be that 99.44% would have occurred within the specified circular area. This can be loosely interpreted, to mean that the 'probability' of the impending subsequent murder occurring within this circular area; would have been 99.44%. So in accordance with the example 'geographic-profile' model: The probability that the perpetrator(s) operated from a residence or 'base' within the specified circular area; would have been 90.00%.

Entire Image (Assumed Circle): 0.00% - 95.00% Stipulated 'Expectation' of 'Geo-Profile' Distribution Accumulation *
- 0.00 - 5.91 Standard Deviations
- Radius (Assumed Circle): 3,620.67 Yards
- Area (Assumed Circle): 13.30 Square-Miles
- Area (Square): 16.93 Square-Miles
* Were these murders to have continued ad infinitum; the 'expectation' would be that 99.80% would have occurred within the specified circular area. This can be loosely interpreted, to mean that the 'probability' of the impending subsequent murder occurring within this circular area; would have been 99.80%. So in accordance with the example 'geographic-profile' model: The probability that the perpetrator(s) operated from a residence or 'base' within the specified circular area; would have been 95.00%.

Note: William Bury's Autumn 1888 residence is yet again; 'Off the Chart'.


Figure 3: Bury's Residence in the 'Context' of the Cumulative 'Geo-Profile' Probability Distribution (0.00% - 99.50%) (Circular) (Click to View in flickr)
Underlying Aerial Imagery: Copyright Google Earth, 2007
Overlying Plots, Labels and Color-Shadings: Copyright Colin C. Roberts, 2009

Red/Orange/Yellow/Green/Aqua: 0.00% - 90.00% Stipulated 'Expectation' of 'Geo-Profile' Distribution Accumulation *
- 0.00 - 4.63 Standard Deviations
- Radius: 2,837.67 Yards
- Area: 8.17 Square-Miles
* Were these murders to have continued ad infinitum; the 'expectation' would be that 99.44% would have occurred within the specified circular area. This can be loosely interpreted, to mean that the 'probability' of the impending subsequent murder occurring within this circular area; would have been 99.44%. So in accordance with the example 'geographic-profile' model: The probability that the perpetrator(s) operated from a residence or 'base' within the specified circular area; would have been 90.00%.

Red/Orange/Yellow/Green/Aqua/Blue: 0.00% - 99.50% Stipulated 'Expectation' of 'Geo-Profile' Distribution Accumulation *
- 0.00 - 10.97 Standard Deviations
- Radius: 6,721.69 Yards
- Area: 45.82 Square-Miles
* Were these murders to have continued ad infinitum; the 'expectation' would be that 99.99% would have occurred within the specified circular area. This can be loosely interpreted, to mean that the 'probability' of the impending subsequent murder occurring within this circular area; would have been 99.99%. So in accordance with the example 'geographic-profile' model: The probability that the perpetrator(s) operated from a residence or 'base' within the specified circular area; would have been 99.50%.

Entire Image (Assumed Circle): 0.00% - 99.75% Stipulated 'Expectation' of 'Geo-Profile' Distribution Accumulation *
- 0.00 - 12.88 Standard Deviations
- Radius (Assumed Circle): 7,891.97 Yards
- Area (Assumed Circle): 63.17 Square-Miles
- Area (Square): 80.43 Square-Miles
* Were these murders to have continued ad infinitum; the 'expectation' would be that 99.99% would have occurred within the specified circular area. This can be loosely interpreted, to mean that the 'probability' of the impending subsequent murder occurring within this circular area; would have been 99.99%. So in accordance with the example 'geographic-profile' model: The probability that the perpetrator(s) operated from a residence or 'base' within the specified circular area; would have been 99.75%.

Red Dot: Autumn 1888 Residence of William Bury

3 Spanby Road, Parish of Bromley St. Leonard, County of Middlesex*
Longitude: 0° 1' 19.85" West
Latitude: 51° 31' 18.09" North

* Most written accounts of Bury's tenure in London's 'East End' suggest that he resided in 'Bow'. These accounts are incorrect: All of Bury's known London residences, during the period in question, were in the Parish of Bromley St. Leonard, not the Parish of St. Mary Stratford Bow.

White Circle:
- 6.06 Standard Deviations
- Radius: 3,711.26 Yards
- Area: 13.97 Square-Miles
- 99.82% 'Expected' Distribution Accumulation *
- 95.38% 'Expected' 'Geo-Profile' Distribution Accumulation *

* Were these murders to have continued ad infinitum; the 'expectation' would be that 99.82% would have occurred within the specified circular area (i.e. the white circle). This can be loosely interpreted, to mean that the 'probability' of the impending subsequent murder occurring within this circular area; would have been 99.82%. So in accordance with the example 'geographic-profile' model: The probability that the perpetrator(s) operated from a residence or 'base' within the specified circular area; would have been 95.38%.

*** In other words: Were these murders to have continued ad infinitum; the 'expectation' would be that 99.82% would have occurred within an area that was, in its entirety, in closer proximity to the murder-site epicenter than was Bury's Autumn 1888 residence. This can be loosely interpreted, to mean that the 'probability' of the impending subsequent murder occurring within this area; would have been 99.82%. So in accordance with the example 'geographic-profile' model: The probability that the perpetrator(s) operated from a residence or 'base' that was in closer proximity to the murder-site epicenter than was Bury's Autumn 1888 residence; would have been 95.38%. ***

*** Put simply: This analysis would suggest a 99.82% probability that Bury's Autumn 1888 residence would have remained outside the 'killing field', even if the murders had continued indefinitely; and a 95.38% probability that the perpetrator(s) of these crimes operated from a residence or 'base' that was in closer proximity to the observed 'killing field' than was Bury's domicile, in Spanby Road.

Or, even more simply: Bury wasn't 'local'! ***

Point of reiteration (see data pertaining to 'White Circle'; Figure 3): Approximately fourteen square miles of London 'real estate' was in closer proximity to the murder-site epicenter than was Bury's Autumn 1888 residence. This would suggest that as many as one million persons lived in closer proximity to the observed 'killing field' than did William Bury, in the Autumn of 1888.

Compare the data pertaining to the 'white circle' in Figure 3, to that pertaining to an assumed (i.e. non-depicted) similar circle associated with the Chambers of Montague John Druitt:

9 Kings Bench Walk, The Temple, City of London
Longitude: 0° 6' 31.15" West
Latitude: 51° 30' 43.82" North

Assumed (i.e. non-depicted) Circle:
- 4.82 Standard Deviations (Bury: 6.06 Standard Deviations)
- Radius: 2,950.39 Yards (Bury: 3,711.26 Yards)
- Area: 8.83 Square-Miles (Bury: 13.97 Square-Miles)
- 99.52% 'Expected' Distribution Accumulation * (Bury: 99.82%)
- 90.96% 'Expected' 'Geo-Profile' Distribution Accumulation * (Bury: 95.38%)

* Were these murders to have continued ad infinitum; the 'expectation' would be that 99.52% (Bury: 99.82%) would have occurred within an area that was, in its entirety, in closer proximity to the murder-site epicenter than were Druitt's Chambers. This can be loosely interpreted, to mean that the 'probability' of the impending subsequent murder occurring within this area; would have been 99.52% (Bury: 99.82%). So in accordance with the example 'geographic-profile' model: The probability that the perpetrator(s) operated from a residence or 'base' that was in closer proximity to the murder-site epicenter than were Druitt's Chambers; would have been 90.96% (Bury: 95.38%).


Figure 4: Murder 'Locale' (Immediate Vicinity; General Vicinity; Broad Vicinity) (Click to View in flickr)
Underlying Aerial Imagery: Copyright Google Earth, 2007
Overlying Plots, Labels and Color-Shadings: Copyright Colin C. Roberts, 2009


Figure 5: Ancient Parochial Establishment of East London (Click to View in flickr)
Underlying Aerial Imagery: Copyright Google Earth, 2007
Overlying Plots, Labels and Color-Shadings: Copyright Colin C. Roberts, 2009

Part of an effort to define that, which was 'local' in the context of political geography:

- Yellow: The Parish of St. John at Hackney
- Orange: The Parish of St. Leonard Shoreditch
- Red: The Parish of St. Dunstan Stepney
- Green: The Parish of Bromley St. Leonard
- Purple: The City of London
- Gold: The Liberty of His/Her Majesty's Tower of London
- Blue: The Precinct of the Priory of St. Mary without Bishopsgate (St. Mary Spital)
- Green: The Precinct of the Priory of the Holy Trinity (Aldgate) (Middlesex portions)

The Ancient Parish of St. Dunstan Stepney (Red) was divided, between the years 1329 - 1867, into the following Civil Parishes:

- The Parish of St. Matthew Bethnal Green
- The Parish of Christ Church Spitalfields
- The Hamlet of Mile End New Town
- The Parish of St. Mary Whitechapel
- The Parish of St. John of Wapping
- The Parish of St. George in the East
- The Parish of St. Paul Shadwell
- The Hamlet of Mile End Old Town
- The Hamlet of Ratcliff
- The Parish of St. Anne Limehouse
- The Parish of St. Mary Stratford Bow
- The Parish of All Saints Poplar

The Precinct of the Priory of St. Mary without Bishopsgate (St. Mary Spital) (Blue) was originally part of the Parish of St. Botolph without Bishopsgate (excepting the northernmost 'tip', which was part of the Parish of St. Leonard Shoreditch). By the end of the seventeenth century, it had become The Liberty of Norton Folgate (north) and The Old Artillery Ground (south).

The green areas, which constituted the Middlesex portions of the Precinct of the Priory of the Holy Trinity (Aldgate), were originally part of the Parish of St. Botolph without Aldgate. The smaller area (north) eventually became the Parish of Holy Trinity (Minories), while the larger area (south) became The Precinct of St. Katharine (west), and once again the Parish of St. Botolph without Aldgate (east).


Figure 6: Bury's Residence in the 'Context' of the Murder 'Locale' and a Larger 'East End' (Click to View in flickr)
Underlying Aerial Imagery: Copyright Google Earth, 2007
Overlying Plots, Labels and Color-Shadings: Copyright Colin C. Roberts, 2009

Red Dot: Autumn 1888 Residence of William Bury

3 Spanby Road, Parish of Bromley St. Leonard, County of Middlesex
Longitude: 0° 1' 19.85" West
Latitude: 51° 31' 18.09" North

The terms 'East Ender' and 'local' should not be used interchangeably, in the context of the 'Whitechapel Murders'.

In the case of William Bury, for example; there is a resident of 1888's 'East End', who plainly and simply was not 'local'.

[Barnaby]

A distinction needs to be made between the likelihood that Bury was JTR (slim) and a rank-ordering of known suspects, where Bury would be high on the list.

[The Grave Maurice]

I have to agree with the Astute Stan. I don't pay much attention to the suspect theories because I remain convinced that JtR was an unknown and unknowable nobody. But, even so, Bury must definitely remain a "person of interest".

[sdreid]

Definitely a top candidate. I gave him a 3.

[Christine1932]

I gave him a 7, which frankly is as high as I'll ever vote for anyone on the evidence we're left with today. I think it's the undisputed murder and mutilation of his poor wife that swings it for me and lifts him above the other suspects.

And yes, as you say, no "royal conspiracy's" and so on, just a seemingly average local man who was actually a psychopath and did the killings for no better reason than to satisfy some sick drive.

Co-signing this post!

[Cubitt]

I voted 5. He is at least possible candidate - here we have a condemned murderer who killed his ex-prostitute wife. Not Royal doctor, Masonic conspiracy or pathetic schizophrenic.

I gave him a 7, which frankly is as high as I'll ever vote for anyone on the evidence we're left with today. I think it's the undisputed murder and mutilation of his poor wife that swings it for me and lifts him above the other suspects.

And yes, as you say, no "royal conspiracy's" and so on, just a seemingly average local man who was actually a psychopath and did the killings for no better reason than to satisfy some sick drive.

[Christine1932]

I voted 5. He is at least possible candidate - here we have a condemned murderer who killed his ex-prostitute wife. Not Royal doctor, Masonic conspiracy or pathetic schizophrenic.

[Cubitt]

I was unaware of him until I read his profile in the suspects category just now.

Of all the people put forward as the Ripper, he certainly sounds the most convincing candidate to me. He seems to satisfy every requirement - proximity to the crimes, a profession which gave him a basic understanding of anatomy, a convicted murderer who mutilated his victim in exactly the way Jack did, a pony and trap which could get him to and from the victims comparitively easily, quickly and unobserved, a drunk, a collection knives, etc etc.

And a thoroughly nasty piece of work.

[D.Meakin]

I think he is a superb candidate, his wife was not very clever but she was semi literate therefore it is possible that she did.
Which book did you order on bury? if it was the unmasked one by william beadle it is superb-300+ pages and i read it in two days

[Christine1932]

Bury actually makes better sense than many other - among Lewis Carroll, Queen Victoria, Pope and Prince Albertīs ghost he is at least possible - , but wasnīt his MO different than Jacks...? I donīt quite remember. How he killed his wife?

[halomanuk]

Aaah just seen this thread,i should have written 'officially recognised' prostitute,as it was never openly stated that she was - even though for a while she was.

She did TRY to keep the money yes but Bury marched her down to the bank to draw more and more out to fund his excess drinking so she didn't have a hope there.
The only proud possessions she did have was her little jewelry collection that she kept in a basket with her so that Bury couldn't get his hands on them - she used to polish them whenever she could,bless her.

[Mrsperfect]

Ellen was a prostitute

Unfortunately there are no known photos of him.

His wife wasn't a protitute no,but she did inherit Ģ300 from an aunt and she invested it in railway shares.

Sorry to correct you here but she was a prostitute. She inherited the money from her aunt after she became a prostitute. She met Bury in a brothel.

I think she was keeping the money for her old age. That's why she didn't want Bury to spend it.

Regards

Eileen