Jury ‘acquits’ wife killer as doubts cast on death in 19th century retrial

Notorious wife killer William Henry Bury has been “acquitted” of his crime in 1889 after new forensic evidence was presented to a modern-day jury.

Bury was hanged for strangling and mutilating his bride Ellen Elliot.

But the guilty verdict was “overturned” by jurors sitting at Dundee Sheriff Court – the same court room where he was originally tried.

The jury heard original evidence, plus testimony from two of the UK’S foremost present-day forensic pathologists in Dr John Clark and Professor Richard Shepherd, who had studied the original 19th century reports. The experts argued in favour of verdicts of murder and suicide respectively, though each agreed Ms Elliot’s death could not be explained with certainty.

That doubt in 1889 caused jurors to find him guilty, but to ask for leniency. The modern day jury instead found him not guilty by a majority of 13-2.

Dundee University forensic anthropologist Professor Dame Sue Black, who organised the retrial, said: “When 130 years ago the original jury found Bury guilty, they also asked the judge for mercy, which suggested that they had had doubt.

“Clearly our jury also had doubt. If you are going to condemn a man to death, then you need to have certainty and jurors then and now did not have that. As to the question of whether Bury really did kill his wife, the truth is that he probably did.”

The Crown alleged Bury strangled her with a piece of rope and disembowelled her before breaking her legs to cram her into a wooden trunk.

Dr Clark, an internationally respected expert who worked on the inquiry, said the ligature mark found around Ms Elliot’s neck ruled out traditional suspension hanging from a height. The wound, coupled with internal bruising to the neck, led him to believe Ms Elliot had been “killed by someone else”.

He said bruising elsewhere on her body, though not significant, indicated a struggle.

Prof Shepherd, who worked on the Bloody Sunday and Princess Diana inquiries, preferred a verdict of suicide.

He said the wound around Ms Elliot’s neck could have resulted from suicidal strangulation from a low object such as a doorknob. The professor also said her injuries suggested a lower level of force than might be expected from a drunk husband intent on murder. He accepted that suicide and then mutilation by another party, particularly a husband, on finding a body was “extremely rare”.

Young members of the Dundee and Aberdeen University mooting societies were given the opportunity to spend weeks working with two of Scotland’s leading lawyers Alex Prentice QC and Dorothy Bain QC as part of the retrial.