Does anything rule Bury out?

[John Wheat]

Rubbish...As the medical evidence makes clear, Ellen was killed using a ligature...there was no throatcutting...there were no deep abdominal excavations, nor any organ removals...such abdominal wounding as there was, appeared tentative...

Hi Dave

Are we totally sure that at least one of the C5 wasn't killed using a ligature? Perhaps a scarf. If Bury had gone to town on Ellen he would have been tried as Jack the Ripper. Also Bury seems to be deteriorating mentally at this time as evidenced by the **** and bull story he gave to the police.

Cheers John

[John Wheat]

Bury did 1/3 of a Jack the Ripper crime. What does that mean?

To Errata

In my opinion 1/3 of a Jack the Ripper crime means Bury was conscious of being tried as Jack. Hence the strangulation but no throat cutting. Bury couldn't resist making a cut to the abdomen but stopped short of extensive mutilation again because he knew he would be tried as Jack.

Cheers John

[Abby Normal]

Hi John



So were millions...London was a big place....Whitechapel on the other hand was very compact...got any proof Bury was specifically a nocturnal frequenter of Whitechapel at the time? No...I thought not...



Oh yes? So Ellen, like the others, was killed by manual strangulation, followed by throatcutting? And subsequently there were deep abdominal excavations including the removal of organs?

Rubbish...As the medical evidence makes clear, Ellen was killed using a ligature...there was no throatcutting...there were no deep abdominal excavations, nor any organ removals...such abdominal wounding as there was, appeared tentative...

Hi cog
No not rubbish. Sorry.
There is evidence that stride was killed using a ligature. Her scarf. And the doctor at the time said it. It was pulled tight and was said could have possibly used to strangle her.

Strangle with hands or with a ligature. Still strangling.

BTK mo was strangling, suffocating. Sometimes he used a ligature, sometimes a bag over the head, sometimes, his hands. Sometimes a combo. Sometimes he even shot them.

Serial killers change mo for a myriad of reasons. Period.


Bury targeted the neck to kill his wife, then slashed her stomach with a knife.
His wife was a prostitute.
He was known to be violent.
He is the only suspect to be a proven murder of women in a similar fashion as the ripper.
The c5 ended when he left.
He was a person of interest at the time.

He was known to use a horse and cart and if there is no proof that he was in whitechapel there is proof that he was minutes away in bow. Easy access either walking or riding.

You will have to better than that to rule out bury.

[Errata]

To Errata

In my opinion 1/3 of a Jack the Ripper crime means Bury was conscious of being tried as Jack. Hence the strangulation but no throat cutting. Bury couldn't resist making a cut to the abdomen but stopped short of extensive mutilation again because he knew he would be tried as Jack.

Cheers John

The irony of course is that the only reason Bury hanged was because he confessed (sort of). He didn't need to. They had lived in the country for about a month. No one really knew her, she wouldn't have had super close friends. All he had to do was wait until someone asked about her and then tell them she ran off with cattle farmer or something. This was a completely manageable situation even if he had gone full Ripper on his wife. Bury therefor, was a moron. I can't even guess how Bury's brand of idiocy would play out with Polly Nichols, but I don't see that particular brand of panic leading to a second victim.

[John Wheat]

To Errata

Bury still had a body to get rid of. He couldn't just leave her out in the street or indoors as in the case of Mary Jane Kelly. Also at this point Bury seems to be unraveling mentally.

Cheers John

[Errata]

To Errata

Bury still had a body to get rid of. He couldn't just leave her out in the street or indoors as in the case of Mary Jane Kelly. Also at this point Bury seems to be unraveling mentally.

Cheers John

He stuffed her in a trunk/box. He lived next to the ocean. There is a river, tons of loamy soil, and quite a bit of nothing where thing can be dumped or burned. Disposal was not a problem. He literally didn't even get that far.

And Bury may have been unraveling. But that is a predictable course. For example, an addict who is unraveling will go from being their best self back to being an addict, then back to being unable to cope even with drugs until executive function just throws up the white flag. The brain goes back to old crutches to stay upright until collapse is inevitable. People don't get new behaviors during this process until the mind has already collapsed. That's what a psychotic break or "nervous breakdown" is.

Bury unraveling leaves him completely unable to deal with what he did on any practical level. He confesses(ish). If he were the Ripper, that would mean that on his way up he had a nasty habit of getting mentally paralyzed and confessing. Unraveling is devolving. Going back to old behaviors that used to work. That's a bad trait for a Ripper. And devolving serial killers kill more. It's what's holding them together. They go into a frenzy. They kill more often, they are less careful, eventually they get caught or killed. And they may kill those closest to them, but they leave a wake of bodies behind before they do.

When anyone devolves they grab on to old self soothing behaviors. OCD, drug addiction, hallucinations, delusions, whatever makes them feel better. More in control. For serial killers, self soothing behavior is murdering people. It's why they kill. Devolving serial killers can get up to a body a day. It becomes a massacre, not a surgical strike.

[John Wheat]

To Errata

Wether Bury was the Ripper or not doesn't explain why he didn't throw Ellen in the River. If Bury was to do anything while unraveling I would expect him to drink more alcohol which he obviously did before murdering Ellen possibly affecting his ability to mutilate.

Cheers John

[Errata]

To Errata

Wether Bury was the Ripper or not doesn't explain why he didn't throw Ellen in the River. If Bury was to do anything while unraveling I would expect him to drink more alcohol which he obviously did before murdering Ellen possibly affecting his ability to mutilate.

Cheers John

It doesn't explain why he didn't dump the body, but why he didn't dump the body tells us whether or not he could be the Ripper. If he didn't dump the body because he was absolutely incapable of getting past the "Oh **** oh ****" part of the murder, that's not Jack. If he didn't dump the body because it literally never occurred to him, that's also not Jack. Jack didn't dump bodies, but he was criminally sophisticated enough to know that it was one option. In fact I'm hard pressed to think of a reason why he wouldn't dump the body that would prove he was Jack, but I'm not ruling out that a reason exists.

But I brought it up because having a body he needed to deal with (and he could have dumped her in the street if he really wanted to) does not mean he wasn't a moron, nor does it mean he couldn't do as much mutilating as he pleased. Nor does drunkenness explain that. We actually don't have a baseline for what level of sobriety is needed to cut up a human. Jack could have been pissed out of his mind for all we know. Though there was a story out of North Carolina a while back about some guy who used a fatal dose of meth and ripped out his wife's lungs and heart with his bare hands before he died. If a guy on meth can do it with his hands, I'm betting a drunk can do it with a knife.

No one saw Bury kill his wife. No one heard him. No one forced him. He had at least 72 hours to do whatever he wanted to do to that woman before he was in trouble. Assuming someone lived close enough enough to smell the corpse and cared enough to report it, that is. So the only constraints on what he did, was what he wanted to do. Apparently he didn't want to mutilate her any more than he did. He didn't want to cut her throat, he didn't want to disembowel her, evidently he didn't even want to get rid of her, and apparently he also didn't want to not get caught.

So we can say with reasonable certainty that Bury did exactly what he wanted to do, no more, no less. And we can also say with reasonable certainty that he was either incredibly self destructive or he was as dumb as a brick. So this isn't about what limited him. Nothing limited him. Nothing prevented him from pulling a full Ripper on this poor woman. Even if he was too drunk to finish in one go, she still would have been there when he woke up. And nothing forced him to do things he did not wish to do. Nothing forced him to cut up her abdomen. He didn't do it by accident. He didn't trip.

So if serial killing is a binary state, and there was nothing limiting or forcing him, then why 1/3 of a Ripper murder?

[John Wheat]

To Errata

There are no absolutes with serial killers. Why would Bury dump Ellen's body in the street? Wether he was or wasn't Jack he would be at risk of being arrested as Jack. I don't see how you can say Bury did exactly what he wanted to with Ellen's body. Also is stuffing a body into a trunk and then playing cards on said trunk the actions of a one time wife killer. None of what your saying rules Bury out.

Cheers John

[Errata]

To Errata

There are no absolutes with serial killers. Why would Bury dump Ellen's body in the street? Wether he was or wasn't Jack he would be at risk of being arrested as Jack. I don't see how you can say Bury did exactly what he wanted to with Ellen's body. Also is stuffing a body into a trunk and then playing cards on said trunk the actions of a one time wife killer. None of what your saying rules Bury out.

Cheers John

There are few absolutes with all serial killers.That's why serial killers as a group is covered by criminology, where you get odds but not guarantees. But every individual killer does have absolutes. It's psychology, where there are many rules. So while not all serial killers are motivated by sex, we know that a serial killer who is motivated by sex remains motivated by sex unless something drastic happens. Which is why we don't expect the Ripper to start dropping women off buildings. And if he did start doing that, that would tell us exactly what his fantasy is, what he is trying to do.

There is no reason Bury should dump his wife in the street. But he could have if he wanted to. Nothing was stopping him. And the threat of being arrested as Jack (whether he was or was not Jack) would have been pretty slim if he had just dumped the body somewhere. Any association with Jack the Ripper was completely within his control. Had he not cut up her abdomen, there would have been no link. Women died all the time. It didn't have to have any scent of a Ripper crime on it except that he chose it to be so.

He killed her in their home, he was with the body for a long time. He had a knife. I bet there was more than one knife. He had everything he needed to do to Ellen what was done to Chapman. Or Kelly. Or worse. It doesn't take like 10 hours to stuff a body in a trunk.

He didn't mutilate her more because he didn't want to. He wasn't interrupted, he wasn't forced to flee, no one burst in on him. He just didn't want to. Nor was someone holding a gun to his head forcing him to cut her abdomen. He chose to do that. Everything that happened to her was his choice. It was within his control. He could have done more to her corpse if he wanted to, he could have done less.

Now stuffing her in a trunk is not unusual. And playing cards on that trunk is not necessarily the behavior of a serial killer. It could be, it could equally not be. If he shut down in a major way, maybe playing cards was what was keeping him from running screaming from the room. People's reactions when something terrible happens are strange and varied. Not nearly the weirdest thing I've ever heard. Or he was simply waiting, and the contents of the box meant nothing to him. Maybe he was a serial killer, but not Jack. Maybe he had killed a couple of women in a temper before. Playing cards on the trunk is unfortunately not a very revealing behavior.

So:

-We have a single murder where the killer had all the time and opportunity in the world to whatever he wanted before he put her in that box.

-Serial killers operate either under fantasy or delusion or both. Ted Bundy, fantasy. Ed Gein, delusion. Dahmer, fantasy and then delusion.

-All serial killers are obsessive and compulsive (spree killers and mass murderers are not as a rule). They repeat behaviors and build until the reality matches the fantasy, and then they escalate. They cannot derive satisfaction from a murder if steps are skipped. They are compelled to do it again until it's right. They can choose not to start, they can stop to avoid detection, but they cannot stop mid ritual and walk away satisfied.

We know Jack was motivated by fantasy or delusion. It doesn't really matter which. We know that Jack targeted the throat and the abdomen almost equally. We know that he got an astonishing amount of work done in a very short time. We know he was criminally sophisticated enough to not get caught, and maybe never even seen. We know that he did not sacrifice a target in the interest of time. Eddowes was targeted in her throat, abdomen AND face, and he had far less time with her.

We think he gained an intense amount of satisfaction from what he did. We think he took organs as trophies. If Liz Stride was in fact a victim, we think he has a hair trigger because he could not bear the failure and went hunting for someone else immediately. We think he had enough control to space out his killing. Essentially we think he could control himself enough to not start, but not enough to not finish. We think at least the throat was symbolic, likely the abdomen as well. We think he escalated, and there is no evidence he devolved. But we also know that serial killers don't build up to a frenzy and then go back to square one.

So then we have Ellen Bury. No injuries to the throat, token injuries to the abdomen, stuffed in a box. W.H. Bury, apparently the murderer, sits on the body for awhile. He does not attempt to get rid of it. He does not attempt to flee. And in fact we have no idea what his long term plan was. But apparently the killing part was easy, the getting away with it part extremely difficult for him. So he turns himself in with a ludicrous confession because he doesn't was to be hanged as the Ripper. Which he would not have been had he not turned himself in, or even simply not mentioned the Ripper.

Being afraid of being labeled as the Ripper was valid. No one would want that, whether they were the Ripper or not. And yeah, hanging out with a corpse in a box is odd. And I have no idea why he cut her abdomen, though I expect it was a temper tantrum thing. And I could maybe get on board with the idea that Ellen Bury was a Ripper victim. But is there anything about Bury's behavior that could possibly remind you of Jack the Ripper?

[John Wheat]

So he turns himself in with a ludicrous confession because he doesn't was to be hanged as the Ripper. Which he would not have been had he not turned himself in, or even simply not mentioned the Ripper.

Being afraid of being labeled as the Ripper was valid. No one would want that, whether they were the Ripper or not. And yeah, hanging out with a corpse in a box is odd. And I have no idea why he cut her abdomen, though I expect it was a temper tantrum thing. And I could maybe get on board with the idea that Ellen Bury was a Ripper victim. But is there anything about Bury's behavior that could possibly remind you of Jack the Ripper?

To Errata

Why was Bury afraid of being labeled as the Ripper? Unless he was the Ripper this seems strange and what were those chalk messages about?
There are plenty of things about Bury's behavior that remind me of Jack the Ripper? Ellen being strangled. Why did Bury strangle Ellen? And why did Bury cut into Ellen's abdomen?

Cheers John

[Errata]

To Errata

Why was Bury afraid of being labeled as the Ripper? Unless he was the Ripper this seems strange and what were those chalk messages about?
There are plenty of things about Bury's behavior that remind me of Jack the Ripper? Ellen being strangled. Why did Bury strangle Ellen? And why did Bury cut into Ellen's abdomen?

Cheers John

It's not strange that he was afraid of being labeled the Ripper. It's strange that he was afraid of it and yet courted it at every turn by doing dumb things. Like saying that he was afraid of being called the Ripper to a cop.

The chalk messages were said to predate his tenancy. Something I assume came about because they asked the neighbors about it and the neighbors said it had been there a while. And evidently they had a particular author in mind, but they never caught up with him. If the writing predates him, it's not about him.

Ellen was strangled. It was and still is the second most popular way men kill their wives (the first is blunt force trauma). So that is not a clue. It might be a clue if Bury had no hands or something, but even then it wouldn't be a clue that she was killed by the Ripper. Getting strangled isn't remarkable.

Mutilating an abdomen is remarkable. Unfortunately it's not super remarkable. The Ripper was not the only serial killer who did it, and plenty of one offs do it, especially if their victim is someone they were close to. It does have the benefit of being potentially damning evidence if we had a different description of the wounds. Plural incisions running downwards is not the right wound pattern for Jack. First of all, at this point he had plenty of practice cutting people open, so you wouldn't expect him to fail. Secondly he worked midline from sternum to pubis. So the question becomes why would Jack the Ripper cut up the abdomen with no intention of exposing the viscera, and there's no good answer for that.

Also, those wounds were messy as hell. They found her flesh on the knife. I have spent a couple of days trying to figure out how on earth actual flesh sticks to the knife, and I think I've seen it once. And even then it was only when I had to cut a roast with a bread knife, and he wasn't using a serrated blade. No stab wound leaves flesh on a regular blade. And no normal cutting pattern of slices leaves flesh on a blade. Now I haven't seen any detailed description of her injuries, but the only way I can think of that happening... well it can happen two ways. The first is to rotate the knife in the wound like a corkscrew. But that looks like a hole in a person, and would probably be described as a stab. The other is to cut over the same area over and over. This can slice the flesh small enough to pulp it and leave it on the blade. That's nothing like what Jack did.

Cutting the same place over and over is a rage thing. It's like kicking over a chair when you are pissed. It doesn't accomplish anything but it let's you vent your anger.

Jack the Ripper had a skill set. A creepy one, but a skill set. He's not an expert, but better than the average bear. And he is an expert with a knife. And he has experience with the whole murdering people and getting away with it thing. And I'm looking at Ellen Bury's murder, and the only way I can see Jack doing that badly is if he had a sneezing fit or something. Or he was blindfolded and underwater. Never mind the hilarity of the whole "I'll turn myself in as 'not Jack the Ripper' and I'll be okay" It's not Jack's fantasy, so there was no reason to mutilate her at all. But even looking at the mutilation, it's not his work. And then he leaves the knife in his wife, and frankly Jack has more respect for his tools. This is a bumbling murder. This is all emotion, no analysis. And in fact it's so embarrassing on a professional level that I'm surprised Bury actually managed to kill his wife.

[John Wheat]

The chalk messages were said to predate his tenancy...
They found her flesh on the knife. I have spent a couple of days trying to figure out how on earth actual flesh sticks to the knife, and I think I've seen it once. And even then it was only when I had to cut a roast with a bread knife, and he wasn't using a serrated blade. No stab wound leaves flesh on a regular blade. And no normal cutting pattern of slices leaves flesh on a blade. Now I haven't seen any detailed description of her injuries, but the only way I can think of that happening... well it can happen two ways. The first is to rotate the knife in the wound like a corkscrew. But that looks like a hole in a person, and would probably be described as a stab. The other is to cut over the same area over and over. This can slice the flesh small enough to pulp it and leave it on the blade. That's nothing like what Jack did.

Jack the Ripper had a skill set. A creepy one, but a skill set. He's not an expert, but better than the average bear. And he is an expert with a knife. And he has experience with the whole murdering people and getting away with it thing. And I'm looking at Ellen Bury's murder, and the only way I can see Jack doing that badly is if he had a sneezing fit or something. Or he was blindfolded and underwater. Never mind the hilarity of the whole "I'll turn myself in as 'not Jack the Ripper' and I'll be okay" It's not Jack's fantasy, so there was no reason to mutilate her at all. But even looking at the mutilation, it's not his work. And then he leaves the knife in his wife, and frankly Jack has more respect for his tools. This is a bumbling murder. This is all emotion, no analysis. And in fact it's so embarrassing on a professional level that I'm surprised Bury actually managed to kill his wife.

To Errata

The chalk messages did not predate Bury's tenancy. No account of Bury that I've read has ever suggested this, what is your source? My money's on Bury himself having written the messages. If Bury did keep cutting the same part of the abdomen then this to me seems to be an attempt to prevent himself from making further mutilations as he was afraid of being arrested as Jack. The knife was not left in Ellen Bury. Instead it was found on a window sill. Again what is your source for this? Also you seem to have Jack pegged as some sort of criminal mastermind this is patently untrue.

Cheers John

[John Wheat]

The chalk messages were said to predate his tenancy...

No stab wound leaves flesh on a regular blade. And no normal cutting pattern of slices leaves flesh on a blade. Now I haven't seen any detailed description of her injuries, but the only way I can think of that happening... well it can happen two ways. The first is to rotate the knife in the wound like a corkscrew. But that looks like a hole in a person, and would probably be described as a stab. The other is to cut over the same area over and over. This can slice the flesh small enough to pulp it and leave it on the blade...

Jack the Ripper had a skill set. A creepy one, but a skill set. He's not an expert, but better than the average bear. And he is an expert with a knife. And he has experience with the whole murdering people and getting away with it thing...

To Errata

The chalk messages did not predate Bury's tenancy. No account of Bury that I've read has ever suggested this, what is your source? My money's on Bury himself having written the messages. If Bury did keep cutting the same part of the abdomen then this to me seems to be an attempt to prevent himself from making further mutilations as he was afraid of being arrested as Jack. The knife was not left in Ellen Bury. Instead it was found on a window sill. Again what is your source for this? Also you seem to have Jack pegged as some sort of criminal mastermind this is patently untrue.

Cheers John

[Errata]

To Errata

The chalk messages did not predate Bury's tenancy. No account of Bury that I've read has ever suggested this, what is your source? My money's on Bury himself having written the messages. If Bury did keep cutting the same part of the abdomen then this to me seems to be an attempt to prevent himself from making further mutilations as he was afraid of being arrested as Jack. The knife was not left in Ellen Bury. Instead it was found on a window sill. Again what is your source for this? Also you seem to have Jack pegged as some sort of criminal mastermind this is patently untrue.

Cheers John

I'm sorry, the knife was not left in her. That was from something else, and I conflated a bit. My mistake.

I think the writings did predate his tenancy. He'd only lived there for two weeks. Jack the Ripper graffiti appearing at the same time as a new tenant is alarming and frightening. Cops are called, people get scared, the graffiti gets scrubbed off, it's a whole thing. Jack the Ripper graffiti appearing when there is no tenant is annoying, but can be dealt with another time. The flat was below a shop. People who work in that shop would not at all be cool with a tenant who chalks about the Ripper. If they weren't freaking out, cops weren't called, scrubbing didn't happen, it meant that they didn't associate the writing with the tenant. The best reason they didn't given the short amount of time he lived there was that it showed up before he did.

It's a black hole clue. You can't see a black hole, but you can see what it does to the stuff around it. If stuff isn't being sucked towards something, there is no black hole.

When I say cutting the same area over and over, I'm not talking about sticking to a certain region. I'm talking about using a knife the way you use an eraser. That concentrated and quick strokes over a tiny area. Kind of like scrubbing.

And I don't know what you mean by cutting to prevent himself from making further mutilations based on fear. Unless you mean substituting behaviors, say, chewing gum instead of smoking. The problem with that is there is a very real OCD like component to any serial killer's ritual. It's why it's called a ritual. For compulsive people, substituting behaviors is the holy grail of therapy. It takes years of hard work. On the other hand, he certainly had the option to not start cutting her in the first place. Jack may be compulsive, but he didn't have alien hand syndrome. Think of it this way. You can choose to not jump in a river, but if you do jump in, you can't choose to stop swimming halfway across. If you do, it hurts. A lot.

I don't think Jack was a criminal mastermind. I think that maybe he thought he was, but he was a middling criminal with certain strong suits, certain weaknesses. He had a modicum of control, he could pay attention to his surroundings while committing these murders. He was skilled at escape. He was not bumbling. He did not panic in any meaningful way. And he did not have a habit of reporting his crimes to the cops.