William Bury: Jack the Ripper

[Dickere]

Ha! You're quite right Dickere!

I do indeed have a marked tendency to sit on a fence which I've yet to get off of!

Owing to the plethora of suspects and huge holes in the evidence, I tend to rule everyone in (apart from the really silly suspects).

I simultaneously like Bury for it, and quite fancy the torso-ripper theory, even though those two lines of thought are completely incompatible!!!

It's not a very discriminating approach, I'm afraid, but personally I favour it over counting suspects out for relatively flimsy reasons.

Naturally my five a side ripper team has an inordinately large number of players "on the bench"!!

Well you're allowed an inordinate number of subs these days, provided they're not sitting too close together. They need to be slashingly distanced.

[Ms Diddles]

Well you're allowed an inordinate number of subs these days, provided they're not sitting too close together. They need to be slashingly distanced.

Ha! The bench is buckling under the weight of them all though!

Tumblety has his big long legs folded up inches from his nose, whilst Bury's tiny wee Ronnie Corbett feet are still dangling in mid air though....!

[Herlock Sholmes]

And just to add to my post #104.

There are certain posters Wulf that almost go into hysterics when Druitt is discussed . Some even get annoyed when he’s even mentioned as a suspect. Bury has received no such reaction on here. In fact I believe that pretty much everyone has accepted that he’s a worthwhile suspect. There been a very balanced view taken of Bury IMO. No one has ignored anything intentionally or tried to brush anything under any carpet. All that’s been done is that the points against have been raised. The only complaint that I have personally (and I believe that most posters agree) is when it’s claimed that it’s obvious that Bury must have been the ripper and that we should accept that it’s case closed. Those of us who don’t accept that premise aren’t doing it because we don’t want the case solved it’s because we accept the doubts. And some of us (myself included) believe that the points against outweigh the points for. There’s nothing wrong with saying “I strongly feel that Bury was the ripper” but it’s not something that we can claim as a fact.

[Guest]

Good post Shlomes, but I maintain my long suspicion that most people who read about Bury realize he probably was Jack, but they want to keep the mystery alive. And I genuinely respect that, life should be full of mystery.
Then I see that posts about Stride not being a C5 and then I think probably not it's just people are thick lol

[Dickere]

And just to add to my post #104.

There are certain posters Wulf that almost go into hysterics when Druitt is discussed . Some even get annoyed when he’s even mentioned as a suspect. Bury has received no such reaction on here. In fact I believe that pretty much everyone has accepted that he’s a worthwhile suspect. There been a very balanced view taken of Bury IMO. No one has ignored anything intentionally or tried to brush anything under any carpet. All that’s been done is that the points against have been raised. The only complaint that I have personally (and I believe that most posters agree) is when it’s claimed that it’s obvious that Bury must have been the ripper and that we should accept that it’s case closed. Those of us who don’t accept that premise aren’t doing it because we don’t want the case solved it’s because we accept the doubts. And some of us (myself included) believe that the points against outweigh the points for. There’s nothing wrong with saying “I strongly feel that Bury was the ripper” but it’s not something that we can claim as a fact.

The difficulty with Bury is that the police did look closely at him yet did not pursue him as a subject. Unless we feel they were totally wrong, which suggests complete incompetence in a case as high profile as this, that is a major point that cannot be ignored.

[Guest]

Well that FBI profile of jtr mentioned that he was likely to have been overlooked by the investigation.

how many time was Sutcliffe over looked because police overwhelmed by suspects and government officials with silly request s, that was over a much longer time span. Never mind the fact they looking for a Jew like west Yorkshire police looking for a Geordie?

[Ms Diddles]

Good post Shlomes, but I maintain my long suspicion that most people who read about Bury realize he probably was Jack, but they want to keep the mystery alive. And I genuinely respect that, life should be full of mystery.
Then I see that posts about Stride not being a C5 and then I think probably not it's just people are thick lol

For me, I pull up well short of stating that Bury was "probably" JTR.

I consider it a possibility, nothing more.

I foster no desire to keep the mystery alive.

I'd love to see it solved, but agree with Herlock that the evidence would need to be incontrovertible.

I fear that the existence of such evidence may be highly improbable, but I insist on keeping some flicker of hope alive.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Good post Shlomes, but I maintain my long suspicion that most people who read about Bury realize he probably was Jack, but they want to keep the mystery alive. And I genuinely respect that, life should be full of mystery.
Then I see that posts about Stride not being a C5 and then I think probably not it's just people are thick lol

To be honest I often think the opposite happens, in that some really hate the idea of having to admit that the likeliest prospect is that we will never know who the ripper was. Some just hate the idea of saying “I don’t know” about any aspect of the case so that they’d rather come up with a theory and then defend it with their last breath. I just look at Bury and consider the points for and the points against and the latter significantly outweigh the former.

Im doubtful about Mackenzie as a rippe victim (although she might have been one) but her murder is far, far more similar to a ripper murder than that of Ellen Bury. Now Wulf thinks that those who don’t think that Bury was ‘obviously’ the ripper are somehow conveniently dismissing evidence so I have to then ask why dismiss - stranger, prostitute, killed in the street, throat cut, abdomen attacked, but 100% accept - wife, former prostitute, killed indoors, no throat cutting, strangled with rope, abdomen attacked, hidden in a box?

Its not rocket science really. As Miss D says he’s a ‘possible, nothing more.’ I’d say that we can add that he’s better than 99% of ripper suspects though.

[Guest]

Im doubtful about Mackenzie as a rippe victim (although she might have been one) but her murder is far, far more similar to a ripper murder than that of Ellen Bury.

I agree with many of your comments but not so much about this one, the mutilations on Ellen Bury were sexual in nature and some of them peculiarly similar to those on Eddowes, driven by the same perversions.
And without getting into the nitty gritty, very rare apparently according to Keppel and others who have spent time looking at these kind of cases.

I spoke with Keppel once and he seemed very interested but wanted £15K to do the work, but i was just a graduate at the time and couldn’t afford it.

[Herlock Sholmes]

I agree with many of your comments but not so much about this one, the mutilations on Ellen Bury were sexual in nature and some of them peculiarly similar to those on Eddowes, driven by the same perversions.
And without getting into the nitty gritty, very rare apparently according to Keppel and others who have spent time looking at these kind of cases.

I spoke with Keppel once and he seemed very interested but wanted £15K to do the work, but i was just a graduate at the time and couldn’t afford it.

If they were only similar to Eddowes then why not eliminate Chapman, Nichols etc? Yet if we look at consistent features then throat cutting is the very obvious one and entirely absent in Ellen Bury. The ripper’s victims may have been strangled but they definitely weren’t strangled with a rope. And of course none were concealed. These points tower over the others. I’d say, similarities/dissimilarity’s are 80/20 in favour of the latter imo.

[Guest]

Yet if we look at consistent features then throat cutting is the very obvious one and entirely absent in Ellen Bury.

And we go back to the argument of ritualistic aspects which drive the serial killer to kill, in this case the mutilations of the gentials.
and the method of murder where there is often seen signifcant variation amoung similar killers and varies depending on circumstances.
And they are distinct, or so the anaylists say.

Now i know Keppel is probably retired now, but sometimes I really am minded to put Burys case to an anaylist of his stature.
Instead of just me and others rambling on get some actual quantiative anyalisis of the probablity two such people being in the same locality.
I would bet my bottom dollar its damned unlikely.

But with work and everything i never do seem to have the time, I have some other rod in the fire now on Bury but you're right that is a good question and this could be the next one.

[John Wheat]

If they were only similar to Eddowes then why not eliminate Chapman, Nichols etc? Yet if we look at consistent features then throat cutting is the very obvious one and entirely absent in Ellen Bury. The ripper’s victims may have been strangled but they definitely weren’t strangled with a rope. And of course none were concealed. These points tower over the others. I’d say, similarities/dissimilarity’s are 80/20 in favour of the latter imo.

No the C5 were not strangled by rope but is it certain a ligature was not used to strangle any of the C5?

[Aethelwulf]

And we go back to the argument of ritualistic aspects which drive the serial killer to kill, in this case the mutilations of the gentials.
and the method of murder where there is often seen signifcant variation amoung similar killers and varies depending on circumstances.
And they are distinct, or so the anaylists say.

Now i know Keppel is probably retired now, but sometimes I really am minded to put Burys case to an anaylist of his stature.
Instead of just me and others rambling on get some actual quantiative anyalisis of the probablity two such people being in the same locality.
I would bet my bottom dollar its damned unlikely.

But with work and everything i never do seem to have the time, I have some other rod in the fire now on Bury but you're right that is a good question and this could be the next one.

Hey Wiggins, what's your take on the Farmer attack? I'd never really taken much notice of it before, but reading the press reports not only does the man sound a hell of a lot like some of the other ripper descriptions, it also sounds awfully like Bury. One witness even states as the man made off he struck him with a whip (for a horse?). The 22nd of Nov is also in that window to spook Bury into selling his horse and cart in early Dec. I know everything about the attack screams not ripper, but you know, he wasn't a machine, there could have been some blunder. The reference to her knowing him 12 months before and ill using her also sounds like Bury's treatment of Ellen.

[paul g]

If the police were not sent to Dundee and that had never happened how much further up the ladder of suspects would Bury be.
bury is often argued against due to the above and the way the murder and Injury’s were committed.
However there are similarities, not exact but similarities.
Take out no further action from Scotland Yard and as a suspect he becomes more interesting .

Did the London poliice ever issue a public statement regarding Bury and reasons for his elimination .

[Herlock Sholmes]

No the C5 were not strangled by rope but is it certain a ligature was not used to strangle any of the C5?

Fair point John. I assume that the suggestion would be that the throat cutting might obscure ligature marks?