Does anything rule Bury out?

[John Wheat]

I think the writings did predate his tenancy. He'd only lived there for two weeks...

To Errata

I can't find any source that claims the writings did predate his tenancy. You seem to be in a minority of one on this point. I can find sources which suggest the writings predate Ellen's murder and sources that suggest either Ellen or Bury wrote the messages. Euan MacPherson for instance suggests the chalk messages were written by Bury and I'm inclined to agree with him. I've said this before but nothing your saying rules Bury out. I suggest the differences in Ellen's murder and the C5 were down to Bury murdering his wife and not someone who couldn't easily be linked to him.

Cheers John

[Cogidubnus]

You seem to be in a minority of one on this point.

No...Two at least...I'd be prepared to at least entertain the concept...but even if the chalk messages post-dated Bury's tenancy, I'd be immensely surprised if he or his missus wrote them...this is a publicly accessible door...ANY local lout could've written them at ANY time...

[Errata]

To Errata

I can't find any source that claims the writings did predate his tenancy. You seem to be in a minority of one on this point. I can find sources which suggest the writings predate Ellen's murder and sources that suggest either Ellen or Bury wrote the messages. Euan MacPherson for instance suggests the chalk messages were written by Bury and I'm inclined to agree with him. I've said this before but nothing your saying rules Bury out. I suggest the differences in Ellen's murder and the C5 were down to Bury murdering his wife and not someone who couldn't easily be linked to him.

Cheers John

Well nobody knows when it was written. The person who wrote it didn't admit to it, and apparently not a ton of information was pursued at the time of the investigation. So all theories outside of aliens are on the table for how and when it got there. And anybody's opinion with a total lack of fact is equal to any other person's opinion. You seem like a records person. A historian. If it's written, then it is so. And that's fine. That's a good thing. MacPherson makes a case for Bury having written it. Not a good case, coming from someone who clearly does not understand how the mind works, but a case nonetheless. His idea is not a fact. It's an option.

I look at behavior. That has always been my thing. If people behave as though something terrible has happened, I assume something terrible has happened. Likewise if people behave like it's an ordinary thing, I have a hard time believing that something extraordinary is going on. If nobody knows how the long the graffiti has been up or who wrote it, it's because of one of two reasons. Either nobody saw it, or it had been around long enough to become unremarkable. Now it's certainly out of the way, but people had seen it, at least to not know how long it had been around precisely.

And it didn't freak people out. And that's either because even the most credulous gossip believed in all her heart that it was a lie, or because it was not the first Jack the Ripper graffiti to show up. And people love both a good monster and a good scare. If people believed it to be slightly credulous, they would have pointed and whispered as he walked down the street. Even if only a half dozen people ever saw it, because people gossip. He was not universally beloved. He hadn't been around long enough for that. Nor did the streets part to let the monster through, so to speak. So they act as though the graffiti did not alarm them overmuch until after the murder. I don't think it was the first Jack graffiti, and that's probably why they though they knew who did it. Probably some kid who had been caught writing a similar message previously.

And Bury wasn't crazy. Violent, stupid, thuggish, incredibly fatuous and vastly overestimating his ability to charm, but not crazy. Only a crazy person implicates themselves in serial murders, whether or not he did it. Now, I think he is dumb enough to write that as some sort of anti theft system, sort of the way more intelligent people put up "beware of dog" signs even if they don't have a dog. But people would have known that, and it still wouldn't implicate him as the Ripper. Now, I admit that I really like the idea of Ellen writing it because she was getting back at her husband, not because it was true but to hurt him. And it's possible that got her killed. But if that were the case, he would have told the police that she wrote it. He was sticking with that suicide story, and this is a guy who just doesn't know when shutting up will save his life.

And I can't rule anybody out. Or in. And suspects tend not to interest me. But the whole Bury story makes me laugh pretty hard. Not the murder part, but it is sort of a manual as to everything you absolutely should NOT do if you kill your wife. He couldn't have screwed up more if he tried. It's like "Mr. Bean Commits a Murder". Jack had already killed at least 3 women at this point, possible as many as 20 if you factor in the rate of change in design and extrapolate that there are missing bodies. But Jack had experience at this. He's not the Babe Ruth of murder, but he's a solid Milt Gaston. And sure, the Ripper was not incapable of screwing up or choking. But to screw up this badly? And not just once, but for the course of three months? There are precious few things that would cause an experienced killer to choke at an Abbott and Costello level.

[John Wheat]

No...Two at least...I'd be prepared to at least entertain the concept...but even if the chalk messages post-dated Bury's tenancy, I'd be immensely surprised if he or his missus wrote them...this is a publicly accessible door...ANY local lout could've written them at ANY time...

Hi Dave

You stated in an earlier thread...

"There's no evidence at all that either William or Ellen wrote either grafitto...as the door concerned was publicly accessible at the rear of the building, the odds are, that, as suggested by the local press, it was a comment, (either pre or post mortem) by the local youth who were simply linking with the London connection..."

This seems to suggest that you believe the messages were written by local children after the Bury's moved in. I wonder have you changed your views on this matter?

Cheers John

[John Wheat]

To Errata

I still think Bury wrote the graffiti and I still don't think anything rules Bury out.

Cheers John

[Scott Nelson]

There are precious few things that would cause an experienced killer to choke at an Abbott and Costello level.

What about a Toys for Tots level?

[Wyatt Earp]

People, some things to keep in mind:

1. There is evidence, beginning with the murderer's own statement, that this was an unexpected murder, such as one growing out of an argument. If that was the case, then Bury suddenly found himself in a jam he hadn't been anticipating. This needs to be taken into account.

2. Bury clearly had a strong situational incentive to tone down the mutilations. Sometimes you can't have a steak but have to settle for a hamburger. End of story.

3. There was a foot of intestine protruding from Ellen's belly, and based on Lt. Parr's trial testimony, Bury clearly feared a national manhunt for him as Jack the Ripper if he had fled the scene. Ultimately he tried bluffing his way out of the jam he was in. No great mystery there.

4. The man was trapped and it is not unreasonable to expect some mental deterioration and desperation in Bury as things drew to a close. End of story.

John Wheat is correct in his assessment, absolutely nothing has been posted in this thread that rules Bury out.

[Errata]

People, some things to keep in mind:

1. There is evidence, beginning with the murderer's own statement, that this was an unexpected murder, such as one growing out of an argument. If that was the case, then Bury suddenly found himself in a jam he hadn't been anticipating. This needs to be taken into account.

2. Bury clearly had a strong situational incentive to tone down the mutilations. Sometimes you can't have a steak but have to settle for a hamburger. End of story.

3. There was a foot of intestine protruding from Ellen's belly, and based on Lt. Parr's trial testimony, Bury clearly feared a national manhunt for him as Jack the Ripper if he had fled the scene. Ultimately he tried bluffing his way out of the jam he was in. No great mystery there.

4. The man was trapped and it is not unreasonable to expect some mental deterioration and desperation in Bury as things drew to a close. End of story.

John Wheat is correct in his assessment, absolutely nothing has been posted in this thread that rules Bury out.

1: As is the case with any guy who loses his temper and kills his wife. Anyone who commits a non premeditated and even some who commit premeditated murder find themselves unsure of what their next step should be. Nobody is arguing that Bury didn't utterly fail at getting away with a crime. And nobody is arguing that this was not stressful for him. So I take him being unprepared as read, as I would take it for any remotely similar crime. Bury utterly collapsed under the pressure. Which is not remarkable. I would predict that happening to him every time. The guy doesn't do well under pressure. The question is whether or not Jack the Ripper would crumble under that kind of pressure. Because the argument is that Bury was Jack. If it doesn't make sense that Jack would turn into an idiot after this murder, and Bury did exactly that, then Jack is likely not Bury.

2: That statement is completely true for everybody about most things. But not all people with all things. Anyone with obsessions and compulsions absolutely cannot make do with a hamburger without extreme distress. If you find someone who is OCD and tapping their pen in a very annoying fashion, and you grab that pen? They will get VERY upset. And if they can't get their hands on another pen, they will punch you in the face to get it back. Compulsions are not reasonable. The guy isn't punching you in the face because you took his pen, he is punching you in the face because something terrible will happen if he doesn't finish tapping that pen. It's self defense. All serial killers are obsessive and compulsive. It is not OCD, but there are many similar traits. The only time a serial killer will make do with less is if he is literally forced to. After that if he is able, he will find a new victim as quickly as possible. Just like OCD guy is going to move heaven and earth to get a new pen.

3:Well, first of all, I'm not sure he had to especially fear being caught as Jack the Ripper, since simply killing his wife would get him hanged. Kill one woman, kill seven, your fate is the same. I don't think he bluffed because he was afraid of being called Jack the Ripper, I think he bluffed because he didn't want to go to jail at all. A guy who kills one time does not need extra reasons to want to not get caught. Although any guy who cut up a woman was going to have some speculation whether or not he was the Ripper. He did what most guys who cut up their wives do. He lied. That doesn't make him Jack. That makes him normal.

4: No it's not unreasonable to expect some unreasonable behavior from a man who has murdered his wife and doesn't have the wit to know how to get out it. But that's true of any person who has been trapped since the dawn of man. That too is normal. On the other hand, people who have experienced several stressful events in a short time and have come through intact are mentally stronger and more quick thinking than those that haven't faced the same obstacles. Stressed people develop coping mechanisms. As far as I can tell, Bury had no coping mechanisms once he realized that the cops weren't just going to take his word for it. Had he been a smart man, he would have prepared for that eventuality, but he was not a smart man. Jack had coping mechanisms. I'm not saying he was healthy, after all one of his coping mechanisms was killing people. But he had seen death. He had been pursued, he had almost gotten caught a few times.

And what was so terrible about running? People didn't have the extensive records we do know. You move to Cheshire and change your name. Or if you want to guarantee you never run into someone you know, you go to America or Australia. It's not like his DNA was on file somewhere.

And nothing can exclude Bury it any scientific way. It's been 130 years, and we still don't have Jack's name. But we can rule him out if we think his behavior is absolutely inconsistent with what we know about Jack the Ripper, what we know about serial killers, and what we know about people. He didn't do dumb things because he was the Ripper. He did them because he was dumb, and he did not act like a man who had done it several times previous, and had been the subject of a nationwide manhunt. He acted the way you would expect some moron to act when he kills his wife. I mean, Jack might freak out if he killed his wife, but you would expect that he knows enough about suspicion to actually dump the corpse he conveniently boxed up.

I mean, I can't exclude my mom from being the Zodiac killer, but that doesn't mean I feel a need to toss her name in the ring.

[Wyatt Earp]

No offense, Errata, but the "I don't think the Ripper would have done this" and "I don't think the Ripper would have done that" type posts are a dime a dozen around here. You're not going to rule Bury out with stuff like that.

Some of the opposition to Bury appears to be founded on ignorance—ignorance about how serial killers actually behave, and ignorance about the facts and specific circumstances of the Ellen Bury murder.

Earlier in this thread you contended that the absence of a cut throat ruled Bury out, when in fact MO can change from crime scene to crime scene. You contended that the absence of a devastated abdomen ruled Bury out, when in fact signature behaviors can be curtailed in connection with the specific circumstances of a murder. You've posted some other jewels, too, such as William Bury was too stupid to have murdered Polly Nichols. I'm not sure what's going on with your posts in this thread, but you are certainly not ruling out William Bury.

[Cogidubnus]

Hi John

This seems to suggest that you believe the messages were written by local children after the Bury's moved in. I wonder have you changed your views on this matter?

Nice try John, but I haven't changed my views at all. I still believe it most likely the local kids, which was after all the view of the contemporary local press, (who would, one imagines, have had more incentive than most to sensationalise matters... but who didn't in at least this respect)...

However, I'm at least prepared to listen to Errata's belief that the same local kids could've written it earlier, perhaps as some sort of game of dares played at the rear of an unoccupied flat...JTR would've been a big name for kids to conjure with, probably for years after...and a natural outlet for their games as was, for example, WWll for my generation, (I seem even to vaguely recall some cheerful little souls playing a Boston Strangler game).

What I find most inconsistent, and therefore unlikely, though, is that either Bury wrote them, carefully leaving them intact, before toddled off down the cop shop to say he was scared of being labelled the ripper; or that his missus wrote them...the same missus incidentally who's being promoted as an illiterate...and that for similar reasons Bury, if aware of them, wouldn't have washed them off before toddling down said cop shop?

I reckon it most likely he regarded them as unimportant or simply overlooked them as the childish scribblings of the local youth...

All the best

Dave

[curious]

3. There was a foot of intestine protruding from Ellen's belly, and based on Lt. Parr's trial testimony, Bury clearly feared a national manhunt for him as Jack the Ripper if he had fled the scene.

3:Well, first of all, I'm not sure he had to especially fear being caught as Jack the Ripper, since simply killing his wife would get him hanged. Kill one woman, kill seven, your fate is the same. I don't think he bluffed because he was afraid of being called Jack the Ripper, I think he bluffed because he didn't want to go to jail at all. A guy who kills one time does not need extra reasons to want to not get caught. Although any guy who cut up a woman was going to have some speculation whether or not he was the Ripper. He did what most guys who cut up their wives do. He lied. That doesn't make him Jack. That makes him normal.

Jack had coping mechanisms.

Something has just occurred to me based on what Wyatt Earp has written. I believe some others on the board have expressed this before, so it's nothing new, except it just clicked with me.

Jack had coping mechanisms for when he was a nameless face in the crowd.

However, after the killing of Ellen, he would not be nameless, which is why he feared the manhunt.

Let's say that Bury was Jack, had killed all those women, then vanished -- faceless and unknown -- into the crowd that was London. He could go anywhere and not look over his shoulder because he was unknown.

HOWEVER, the killing of his wife changed that. Suddenly, it would be known who he was.

He feared a manhunt because he had, probably very anxiously, watched the increasing numbers of policemen moving into Whitechapel. Perhaps he was almost caught at one point and dealt with that terror. That would likely be why he insisted they move. The noose was tightening. He didn't know how long it would be before someone saw him and realized a witness description was of him.

His departure from London, taking Ellen with him, has always seemed particularly curious to me as it made no real sense. Why not just leave her? Why not kill her and then leave her body as a Ripper victim? Why not push her overboard the ferry?

I don't think he meant to kill her, even when the money was gone. He really had no one.

But suddenly, there she was dead.

He tried not to slice her as Jack did, but he was compelled -- his intelligence warring with his need. He was able to control himself somewhat.

Doesn't his fearing a national manhunt argue for him being Jack the Ripper?

If he were Jack the Ripper, he would have known it. He would have felt the tightening of the noose in London (even when he managed to escape). In London he had been anonymous, able to just slip back into his life.

HOWEVER, once his wife lay dead and he came to himself, he suddenly had no where to go. He could not know that people would be arguing the differences in this murder and the others. It would never have occurred to him that the authorities might decide she did not die by Jack's hand. Jack had no way of knowing Ellen would not he placed in his column.

Since he'd killed them all, what he saw was the difference of going from unknown and nameless to being identified. Something all of London wanted.

It was simple. To Bury, Jack the Ripper had killed again, now everyone would know his name . . .

----------
Interesting. Before today, I always thought that Bury brought up JtR because he always wanted to be more than he really was. Now, I'm not so sure. . . .

I'm not sure I've explained this well enough for you to get my point . . .

curious

[John Wheat]

To Curious

I think you are starting to think that maybe Bury thought he'd be arrested and tried as Jack the Ripper because he was Jack the Ripper. Or have I misunderstood your post?

Cheers John

[curious]

To Curious

I think you are starting to think that maybe Bury thought he'd be arrested and tried as Jack the Ripper because he was Jack the Ripper. Or have I misunderstood your post?

Cheers John

Hi, John,
He had lived in terror of having his identity discovered for months.

I think he thought it would be obvious to everyone.

[Wyatt Earp]

Something has just occurred to me based on what Wyatt Earp has written. I believe some others on the board have expressed this before, so it's nothing new, except it just clicked with me.

Jack had coping mechanisms for when he was a nameless face in the crowd.

However, after the killing of Ellen, he would not be nameless, which is why he feared the manhunt.

Let's say that Bury was Jack, had killed all those women, then vanished -- faceless and unknown -- into the crowd that was London. He could go anywhere and not look over his shoulder because he was unknown.

HOWEVER, the killing of his wife changed that. Suddenly, it would be known who he was.

He feared a manhunt because he had, probably very anxiously, watched the increasing numbers of policemen moving into Whitechapel. Perhaps he was almost caught at one point and dealt with that terror. That would likely be why he insisted they move. The noose was tightening. He didn't know how long it would be before someone saw him and realized a witness description was of him.

His departure from London, taking Ellen with him, has always seemed particularly curious to me as it made no real sense. Why not just leave her? Why not kill her and then leave her body as a Ripper victim? Why not push her overboard the ferry?

I don't think he meant to kill her, even when the money was gone. He really had no one.

But suddenly, there she was dead.

He tried not to slice her as Jack did, but he was compelled -- his intelligence warring with his need. He was able to control himself somewhat.

Doesn't his fearing a national manhunt argue for him being Jack the Ripper?

If he were Jack the Ripper, he would have known it. He would have felt the tightening of the noose in London (even when he managed to escape). In London he had been anonymous, able to just slip back into his life.

HOWEVER, once his wife lay dead and he came to himself, he suddenly had no where to go. He could not know that people would be arguing the differences in this murder and the others. It would never have occurred to him that the authorities might decide she did not die by Jack's hand. Jack had no way of knowing Ellen would not he placed in his column.

Since he'd killed them all, what he saw was the difference of going from unknown and nameless to being identified. Something all of London wanted.

It was simple. To Bury, Jack the Ripper had killed again, now everyone would know his name . . .

----------
Interesting. Before today, I always thought that Bury brought up JtR because he always wanted to be more than he really was. Now, I'm not so sure. . . .

I'm not sure I've explained this well enough for you to get my point . . .

curious

Curious, this is a great post. You've got some terrific stuff in here.

[Abby Normal]

Curious post has made me think and I have a question.

Why did bury if not the ripper leave London?