Did the 5 canonical victims know each other?

[BillS]

One of the things that I always found attractive about Stephen Knight's Walter Sickert/William Gull/Netley theory was that the victims were not randomly chosen but were killed for a purpose. This explains why the murders started and, then ended. The latter ppoint is interesting since once they have started serial killers typically do not stop until they are caught.

I believe to suppport his theory he calims that the women all came from a very small area and drank in the same pub. Is this true? Is there any evidence that they did know each other, except for the fact that living in a small area they probably did have some social interactions?

Bill S

[perrymason]

Hi Bill,

Some did frequent some of the same places like The Britannia, but no link has ever been found to suggest that they specifically knew each other...and by extension, they might also know the man who killed them.

There is one case that intrigues me personally though, and its that Catherine Eddowes uses a version of Mary Kellys name and her address the night before she dies, on a pawn ticket for Johns boots...Jane Kelly of Dorset St. She also uses Mary Kelly of Fashion Street with Hutt in the Police Station Saturday night/Sunday morning.

With Mary being the next victim, and Kate effectively being identified as Mary Kelly, by herself,..... the night she is killed...it does make for interesting fodder.

Cheers.

[Elias]

I'd be more surprised if they didn't know each other to be honest. There was a much stronger community spirit in general in those days, and for these women, living in the same area, living out similar lives, it is highly likely they knew each other. But I think you could've picked out a group of 5 or so prostitutes from the east end at random at that time and found some link between them. I don't think it holds too much significance myself.

[Sam Flynn]

What militates against this premise is the fact that it sometimes took a comparatively long time to identify the victims. Even when an ID was obtained, the witnesses often knew the victim only by a nick-name or pseudonym, which in itself suggests a passing acquaintance, rather than a particularly close or long-standing friendship.

It may also be significant that not one "biographical witness" (if you get my drift) seems to have appeared in more than one case. Had the victims been friendly with one another, one might have expected at least one or two shared acquaintances to have come forward, if not to the inquest, then at least to the press. We see none of this - indeed, each victim (canonical or otherwise) seems to have had their own little cluster of friends.

[perrymason]

What militates against this premise is the fact that it sometimes took a comparatively long time to identify the victims. Even when an ID was obtained, the witnesses often knew the victim only by a nick-name or pseudonym, which in itself suggests a passing acquaintance, rather than a particularly close or long-standing friendship.

It may also be significant that not one "biographical witness" (if you get my drift) seems to have appeared in more than one case. Had the victims been friendly with one another, one might have expected at least one or two shared acquaintances to have come forward, if not to the inquest, then at least to the press. We see none of this - indeed, each victim (canonical or otherwise) seems to have had their own little cluster of friends.

Hi Sam,

Isnt there a connection that Pearly Poll has to more than one victim? Perhaps to Annie....I dont recall who.

Best regards.

[Sam Flynn]

Isnt there a connection that Pearly Poll has to more than one victim? Perhaps to Annie...Indeed, Mike, it was reported that Pearly knew Annie. They shared the same digs, however, which might explain their acquaintance - if indeed it were true, and not based on hearsay, confabulation or press ingenuity. If not, it's one thing to "know" someone casually and quite another to "know" them as a friend, which is one of the cornerstones of some of the more sensational Ripper theories.

[perrymason]

Indeed, Mike, it was reported that Pearly knew Annie. They shared the same digs, however, which might explain their acquaintance - if indeed it were true, and not based on hearsay, confabulation or press ingenuity. If not, it's one thing to "know" someone casually and quite another to "know" them as a friend, which is one of the cornerstones of some of the more sensational Ripper theories.

Fair points Sam. For me Kates alias choice twice in her last 24 hours, and the fact that the next attributed victim was of the same name and street as the name on Johns boots pawn ticket is a possible connection...as you say, perhaps not more than an aquaintance or a name she has heard, but it seems to me the last 2 women on the Rippers list were both calling themselves Mary Kelly the night they died.

Cheers Sam.

[Suzi]

Hi all-
It is odd that Kate gave her name as Mary Ann Kelly or whatever...strangely poignant given the circumstances I suppose.

I do think it unlikely that the 'Famous Five' hadn't rubbed up against eachother over time though...the proximity of the lodging and lurking and general walking about (for whatever reason) would suggest that they probably were, at the very least -at the same pub, mingling with the crowd and would have known eachother at least by sight......maybe from the odd fight!!!!!

There is a strange thing though that all the inquest statements never feature anything from a barmaid/pub owner etc etc (Hmmmmmmmmm)

Mind you there is always a tad of a worry re our Pearly.............

Good point about the 'militating' Sam........in some cases it took days didn't it, to work out who the cadaver was!

Hmmmmmmmmm despite the 'My sister kiss' dream by the daft "Liz Stride Sister" story

Suzi x

[Jane Coram]

Hi BillS,

There are a few tentative connections between lodging houses which might suggest they vaguely knew each other by sight at least, but I doubt anything more. Polly and Kate were literally in a handshake of one another in Flower and Dean Street, at the White House and Cooney's respectively at the same time and could well have passed each other on the street at some time or other.

And they probably all did drink at the same waterholes and could have known each other vaguely from there, but there were a hell of a lot of people crammed into the area at the time and those lodging houses had a vast intake of transitory residents who probably had little interest in other people's business.

True, there was a communal kitchen in the houses, and there are some suggestions from press reports that people that went back to the same lodging house on a regular basis did get to be known there, but it seemed that although people might be familiar with people from their own lodging houses, they tended to be a bit tribal and not mix with people from the others that much.

It's possible that Pearly did know Annie......but there isn't enough evidence to suggest a stronger connection than passing acquaintances for the most part.

There have been quite a few connections put forward in the past between them though which are complete red herrings, for instance that Annie lived opposite Miller's Court and that Liz lived in Dorset Street as well.

Gets quite hard to disentangle fact from fiction, but Sam's points are good ones.....you would have thought that if they were all intimate friends, that they would have had at least some friends in common and more importantly the police would have made the connection themselves.

Best guess, they probably nodded to each other in the street, maybe even exchanged the odd word, but a conspiracy of close friends? I really don't think so.

Hugs

Jane

xxxx

[perrymason]

Hi again all, Suz, Janie.....we dont see you here much Jane...sadly, but good post.

I think you made a really good point about Dorset St, by far the only location that 4..or is it all 5?, can be connected with, at some point in their respective lives.

Id agree with the idea that we are not likely looking at murders with one common thread let alone acquaintance, hence not likely related to their all knowing or not knowing this one "person".

footnote to Suz....Jane Kelly of # 6 Dorset on the pawn ticket for the boots, and Mary Kelly of Fashion St to Hutt.

Cheers.

[Suzi]

Cheers Michael-

That's what comes of going out to celebrate a birthday one day early!!! The Mary's get a tad muddled..just before they turn into alligators!!!:hiya:

Good points Janey...I imagine it was a passing 'ello c**k in the street too and maybe close friendships were few and far between,but that a lot of people just looked out for eachother,like Mary offering a floor/bed etc etc

Suz x

[Sam Flynn]

Hi Mike,I think you made a really good point about Dorset St, by far the only location that 4..or is it all 5?, can be connected with, at some point in their respective lives.The thing to remember is that Dorset Street housed a huge number of people at any one time - there are 895 definite "hits" in the 1881 census, for example. For simplicity's sake, let's take it to be 1,000 and make the generous assumption that an average person had 5 close friends in their immediate neighbourhood - that would give odds of 200:1 that person "A" was friendly with person "B", and the odds would get increasingly longer once one included friends "C", "D" and "E".

Even then, this only works if A, B, C, D and E all lived in the street at the same time, which we know wasn't the case. When it was, we had Annie Chapman living at the far Western end of Dorset Street and Kelly living at the far Eastern end, with several hundred people crammed into the dwellings in between. The greater the separation in terms of geography and time of residence, the longer the odds against victims being anything other than "nodding acquaintances" becomes.

The odds would shorten if there was some special factor that may have brought the victims together (in life) but, conspiracy theories apart, there was nothing to differentiate them from any number of the faceless, desperate poor that inhabited Dorset Street and many others in the vicinity.

[detective abberline]

Stephen Knight's theory was very attractive and ultimately flawed. The Masons/PAV/Gull conspiracy made for a very good fiction story but not the truth. It's quite possible - who will ever know - that the murder victims knew or even saw each other. In the end, it makes no difference. Jack didn't seek them out because they knew each other.

[jason_c]

There's no record of Kelly mentioning any of her friends had been murdered by the Ripper. Given our tendency to exaggerate, had a passing acquaintance been murdered the victm would soon have become Kelly's "murdered best friend". Its a good story to ellicit sympathy. The same goes for Eddowes.

[paul emmett]

In the end, it makes no difference. Jack didn't seek them out because they knew each other.

Because we can't be sure that their knowing each other didn't have something to do with the killings, I don't think we can conclude that it makes no difference if they knew each other or not. I feel, that is, that this IS a worthwhile thread. If one could prove that they did(or didn't), indeed, know each other, I think that would be heipful.

[Glenn Lauritz Andersson]

One of the things that I always found attractive about Stephen Knight's Walter Sickert/William Gull/Netley theory was that the victims were not randomly chosen but were killed for a purpose. This explains why the murders started and, then ended. The latter ppoint is interesting since once they have started serial killers typically do not stop until they are caught.

I believe to suppport his theory he calims that the women all came from a very small area and drank in the same pub. Is this true? Is there any evidence that they did know each other, except for the fact that living in a small area they probably did have some social interactions?

Bill S

No, there is not even a slightest indication of that they knew each other, nor if it would ever mean anything important.
Even if they DID know each other to some degree it wouldn't be that strange since some of them appear to have lived on Dorset Street at some point (although not necessarily at the same time) and since there was so many street prostitutes around in the area it wouldn't be particularly gobsmacking if they bumbed into one another on some occasion.

However, if that would be the case, it wouldn't in any way support the idea that they were chosen because of that link.
Most serial killer victims ARE chosen at random, and prostitutes are generally chosen because they are easy targets, vulnerable, lead irregular lives and really have no other choice than to force themselves into a risky situation.
So in all likelyhood - if there is a link between them it might be their living situation and their vulnerable position, possibly even their age.
The rest has to be considered a pure coincidence.

Nor do any of the later alleged victims ever appeard to have mentioned knowing the previous victims (nothing at all is said about this in witness statements from their friends, spouses or relatives.

As for Stephen Knight and the Royal Conspiracy: let's get this straight once and for all - it is a load of bollocks from beginning to end. And that includes the ridiculous idea that they were chosen because they knew each other.

All the best

[truebluedub]

Evans and Rumblelow did find an article which suggested that Annie Chapman was friends with Mary Kelly (190) in the People of the 11 November, of course this was a newspaper story.
Kind Regards
Chris Lowe

[paul emmett]

I'm concerned about what I see as a problematic backlash against authors like Knight who are "out of favor." I don't think there's a coach, and I'm as sure as I can be that Gull had nothing to do with it, but just because we see their theories as failed, doesn't mean every topic they brought up should be anathema. Just because "Juwes" isn't a Masonic term, and the intestines weren't over their left shoulders, doesn't, for example, mean that the victims didn't know each other, or even that this possibility might not have something to do with the killings.

[BillS]

I am with Paul Emmett on this one. I don't subscribe to all of Knight's theories but I do find the idea that the victims weren't chosen at random interesting and a possible way of explaining why the murders stoped suddenly.



Bill S

[Sam Flynn]

One final point, and I suppose I might be in the worng part of the forum for this commentIt's very easy to start a new thread, Bill - and suggest you do, erasing the off-topic bits from your previous post if possible. The "Juwes" will not be blamed for the victims knowing one another ;)

...thanks, Bill. Top man :)

[BillyE]

I think it likely the victims knew each other, at least in passing. They all lived within a few hundred feet of each other, I believe two of them slept in the same doss house, and all frequented the same pubs, mostly The Britannia, and The Ten Bells, so they must have at least run into each other. Also, prostitutes would stick together to protect each other against police, clients, pimps, other threats, even if they were in competition with each other for clients or turf. None of this means they definately knew each other, or knew their killer, but the possibility does add to the flavor of the case.

[Sam Flynn]

Hi Bill Also, prostitutes would stick together to protect each other.At least three, if not four, of the "canonical" victims were fortysomething women who prostituted themselves when they were short of money. Whilst that may have been a regular occurrence, that does not mean that they were full-time hookers by any stretch of the imagination, and their behaviour might not have been as chummy or organised as we might think.

As to their living within a few hundred feet of one another - they may have done so, but not at the same time. Added to which we must consider their respective tenures in the area:

Polly Nichols only seems to have drifted into Spitalfields in the Summer of 1888, spending most of her life previously in Lambeth and Walworth. Chapman spent her better years in the West of London and outside, arriving in Spitalfields in the early-1880s, hawked various odds and ends to scrape a living, or lived off the charity of various "boyfriends". Stride was based mainly in Poplar or St George's in the East. Kelly was heaven-knows-where, but if we are to believe her own account, she was mostly outside the East End of London until a few years before her death, and for at least half that time, she seems to have been based in St George's East or Stepney, rather than Spitalfields itself.

So, nodding acquaintances - maybe, but even then one has one's doubts. Taking the above circumstances into account, the notion of their being "friends" in any meaningful sense is difficult to believe.

[perrymason]

Good points Sam, but just for the "halibut"....Carrie Maxwell said she and Mary were friendly, but had only spoken twice in approx 4 months. So do some "hi... how ya doin's" count? Some of them lived simultaneously on Dorset at one time, correct? So if a strange woman from down the road and across the street, who has nothing to do with street whores or their hours, says she knew Mary Kelly to say hello, who's to say that anyone of the C5 might not have had similar encounters with other C5's at times.I dont mean to suggest it has any relationship to why they were the alleged five victims of Jack the Ripper....just that it might be a link with some if they werent Jacks victim.

Two women of the Canon died calling themselves Mary Kelly...in a row. Ok...5 weeks apart, but thats still consecutive in Jack-speak. If both were Ripper victims, maybe a link with the women,...if only one was Jack, there still might be a connection between the women, and if neither was killed by Jack, youd almost have to conclude that the naming issue is relevant, and the first woman knew of the second at least.

Best regards Sam.

[Sam Flynn]

Good points Sam, but just for the "halibut"....Carrie Maxwell said she and Mary were friendly, but had only spoken twice in approx 4 months. So do some "hi... how ya doin's" count? It does, but only in terms of "nodding acquaintance", Mike. That's a million miles away from being "as thick as thieves" (or blackmailers). And - note - Maxwell lived only some 20 feet from Miller's Court, much closer to Mary Kelly than Annie Chapman at 'tother end of Dorset Street, and infinitely closer than Nichols or Stride. Even so, within the parameters you describe, Maxwell had only ever spoken to Kelly for a total of - what? - 5 to 20 minutes out of 173,000 (being the number of minutes over a span of four months).

[perrymason]

It does, but only in terms of "nodding acquaintance", Mike. That's a million miles away from being "as thick as thieves" (or blackmailers). And - note - Maxwell lived only some 20 feet from Miller's Court, much closer to Mary Kelly than Annie Chapman at 'tother end of Dorset Street, and infinitely closer than Nichols or Stride. Even so, within the parameters you describe, Maxwell had only ever spoken to Kelly for a total of - what? - 5 to 20 minutes out of 173,000 (being the number of minutes over a span of four months).


Thats reasonable my friend, but as I said, just to walk the lane a bit further,.. the women we discuss all were out at the same times of night, perhaps working the same streets. Or pubbing at the same watering holes some nights. I think youre correct about Carrie....and its my feeling she is not someone we should assume "knew" Mary Kelly...but know, and know of...its the Eddowes-Kelly Mary Kelly alias that to me is very suggestive that Kate at the least, knew of Mary Jane Kelly just off Dorset St. Kate was Jane Kelly of Dorset to the pawnbroker, and Mary Kelly of Fashion St to Hutt.

The odds on that as a pure coincidence might be as long as the ones suggesting they met somewhere sometime on the streets. But she did use two versions of a name within her last 24 hours that belonged to the next victim in the Ripper series.....long shot or not.

My posit is that if there is some kind of link there between these two,, and the belief is that their killers were the same fellow, it might stand to reason that this fellow might also have tenuous links with the others too. Again...not suggesting a catalyst is in that link, just that the night socializers might be a somewhat smaller group than simply everyone on Dorset. Lots of Lodgers, but thats not always the all-nighters, Some had jobs, families.

I would think the C5 night crowd if out frequently might share an occassional "evening" with another C5'er. Or "any luck?"...whatever.

I realize the question is asked as it relates to a possible Ripper link, but Im not suggesting that the link need be defined by the Ripper killer.

But with Jack, for example....what if Jack was out to kill Mary Kelly Sept 30th, and heard a woman calling herself that was being released from jail at 1am. Implying access to some inner information stream I suppose. Kills Kate, finds out on what, Tuesday? when Kelly.....theres that name again, might she be known in some circles as Kate Kelly? As Barnett was assumed Marys husband .....comes in to ID her because that press tattoo detail reminded him she was still missing.

Cheesed off...he makes it his business to find out where this woman calls home, and decides to not chance a meeting but to force one...make sure he gets the right Mary Kelly this time.Which raises an interesting question....if Maria Harvey had been asleep in that room and the killer not knowing does her in, would yet another Mary or Jane Kelly have died once the killer found out, or would he have made another attempt on the Millers Court one...assuming of course at a new address..cant imagine Mary staying there after something like that happened.

That also works with a man who knows of Mary....who isnt Jack for one or both of the killings.

All the best Sam.

[Jane Coram]

Hi,

I think if I were seriously looking for a connection between the 5 canonical victims, I would tend to look at a common denominator and not that the women themselves. (Not that I am. Lol)

For instance, even if the victims did not know one another, was there someone else in the vicinity that might have known all five?

If I wanted to go in that direction, I would possibly look at someone running a business in the area, which might have been frequented by all five at some point. You have a few likely suspects:

Lodging House Keepers or Deputies - not so likely as it seems that the victims all stayed at different doss houses.

Someone working at the Whitechapel Infirmary. Oh no, been there and done that........with quite disastrous results. :oops:

Pub landlords?

Someone at the Casual Ward?

Well, you could have a field day.

I might think about looking at John McCarthy a bit closer. I mean, he was very well known in the area as a slum landlord.....proven connection with one of the victims. I have often wondered how many of the victims went into his shop to buy a bit of fast food in the wee small hours.

Just a bit of fun.......but they did all have (possibly:diablotin: ) one thing in common. Jack!

Hugs

Jane

xxxxx

[Suzi]

Hi Janey et al-
Yep I agree...Mc Carthy is certainly a pivot in this whole dabacle I reckon though can't quite put my finger on where or why...but the Dorset St hub does ring rather odd bells from time to time.

As to Pub Landlords....I wonder to this day why The Ringers (both) weren't interviewed...well I assume they were- but nothing inquest related at all....and that's before we get to The Bluecoat Boy and the Horn of Plenty and Gawd knows how many unnamed pubs!

Too right they knew eachother by sight I say

Suz xx

[Glenn Lauritz Andersson]

I am with Paul Emmett on this one. I don't subscribe to all of Knight's theories but I do find the idea that the victims weren't chosen at random interesting and a possible way of explaining why the murders stoped suddenly.



Bill S

That's absolute nonsens.

All the best

[paul emmett]

So in all likelyhood - if there is a link between them it might be their living situation and their vulnerable position, possibly even their age.
The rest has to be considered a pure coincidence.

Hello, Bill. Welcome to the boards.

Hello, Glenn. "Nonsense" is, as we find out repeatedly here, such a subjective term. For example, I "question" the above quote, espescially it's abrupt shift from "in all likelyhood" to "has to be." There could have been any number of links between the victims: the way their hair hung, or didn't; the way they smiled, or didn't; the way they carried themselves, or didn't; or any other of an endless string of possibilities. It has to be that we aren't ready to say what got to Jack and what didn't.

[BillS]

Glenn,

Thank you for your closely argued and erudite comment - you appear to be a sad loss to the Diplomatic Corps. Is this standard treatment of new members of the forum?

I am not sure what part of my comment is nonsens (sic). There could be a variety of reasons why the victims were not chosen at random; reasons that need have nothing to do with Stephen Knoght's theory. For example, the several prostitutes killed over a few weeks in Ipswich about 18 months ago were not - I believe - randomly chosen. I believe the killer had used all their services before and did not kill those whose services he had not. Whilst this may not be helpful in identifying JtR today, it does not mean that it is irrelevant or nonsense.

Also, if having killed his particular victims he might stop and, for example, move on to pastures new and outside London.

I had hoped that I had found a place where civil discussions on this subject could take place. I am beginning to think I was wrong.

In disappointment rather thananger,
Bill S

[Simon Wood]

Hi Bill,

It's a fair point. The C5 may well have known each other, Apart from Kelly they were of similar ages and backgrounds. Maybe they ran a mutual support group. Who knows?

But one thing does militate against them knowing/having an interest in each other/being a discrete group of women in whom the "Ripper" was interested, and it is most apparent between Nichols and Chapman. The circumstances of their being on the streets on the nights of their murders were identical. No money for lodging, keep the bed, I'll soon be back with the money.

I have no evidence to support my supposition, but would suggest that if the women were connected in some way Chapman, having learned via the newspapers of the circumstances which drove Polly Nichols to her death, would have taken care not to to allow exactly the same fate to befall her.

To dismiss the possibly of the C5 knowing each other as nonsense is nonsense in itself, but proving otherwise, though probably impossible to do, is worthy of discussion.

Keep it up.

Regards,

Simon

[Fisherman]

Just out of curiosity, Bill; what´s your take on the double event? If you endorse a view (do you?)of all the canonical five having a common background leading up to their final lethal involvment in it all, I think that the combination of Stride and Eddowes is the hardest part to explain, given that Eddowes had just been let out of custody when the Ripper caught up with her. Any thoughts on it?

Welcome to the boards, by the way; although there is the occasional whiff of gunsmoke out here, I think and hope that you will find that there are good friends and much learning to be found Casebookwise!

The best!
Fisherman

[Fisherman]

Simon writes:

"I have no evidence to support my supposition, but would suggest that if the women were connected in some way Chapman, having learned via the newspapers of the circumstances which drove Polly Nichols to her death, would have taken care not to to allow exactly the same fate to befall her."

Fair enough point, Simon. But the combination of drink and need for money may provide a good answer to Chapman not picking up on the warning. And we can safely assume that every unfortunate of the whole of Spitalfields was aware of the risks involved in streetwalking after the night of "the double event", but that did not keep them off the streets.

The best, Simon!
Fisherman

[Simon Wood]

Hi Fisherman,

Whilst I do not disagree with you that the fog of drink may well have dulled Chapman's alertness to the situation, it's worth pointing out that, after the so-called double-event, there were no street murders. Jolly Jack went awfully quiet after announcing himself in such grandiose fashion.

All we are left with is Millers Court. And if that was a "Ripper" murder I'll eat my hat.

Regards,

Simon

[Sam Flynn]

Hi Mike,Thats reasonable my friend, but as I said, just to walk the lane a bit further,.. the women we discuss all were out at the same times of night, perhaps working the same streets.As I was at pains to point out earlier, we're talking about fortysomething casual prostitutes in the main. (And by "casual", I don't mean "idle", but "occasional".) We're not talking about Sheznay and DeLinda waving their beads at passers-by every other night of the week, sharing a joint under a lamp when trade was slow.
Or pubbing at the same watering holes some nights.Drifting in and out at different times of the night - or day - for a tot of rum, before heading back to a doss-house kitchen for a warm, perhaps.

The "traditional" impression is of blowsy tarts drinking the evening away from 7 till chucking-out-time, with the odd knees-up or knee-trembler thrown in for good measure. We see Nancy and chums doing this in Oliver!, just as we see the "Cinematical Five" doing so in movies of the Ripper story. Whilst I have little doubt that this sort of thing did go on at times, I doubt that it was as regular, or as organised, as the "Hollywood" stereotype would have us believe.

Interestingly, one thing they never do in those films - presumably to economise on extras - is to show the multiple hundreds of people who lived in short, narrow thoroughfares like Dorset Street. The upshot of this is that the "pub at the corner" becomes a feasible "hub of the community", as perhaps we want it to have been.

Whilst I don't deny that the pub played an important social (even anti-social) role, they were comparatively small in size. The truth of the matter is that the Ten Bells, Blue Coat Boy and Britannia added together couldn't have accommodated even a tiny fraction of the population of Dorset Street at any one time. That the sort of interactions seen in soaps like Eastenders or Coronation Street went on under such circumstances ("Evenin' Mary"... "Ello, Chick".... "Polly been in yet?") is hard to credit.

Reflect on Prater, for example. "Gawd, Milly... gissa tot o' rum"... "That'll be fourpence, Liz"... "Put it on the slate, dear - I got some work comin' in today. (Gulp!). Seez ya later!". A slight exaggeration, perhaps - but I wouldn't mind betting it was nearer the truth.

[richardnunweek]

Hi All.
I must reflect on how many of us actually believe that the Millers court murder, was the end of the series?
Taking fact/ common sense, it would imply that the 'Ripper Murders' ceased after that event.
If one suggested that Mjk was targeted as the very last victim, the only question to answer is 'why'?
And what a Question...
Regards Richard.

[Sam Flynn]

If one suggested that Mjk was targeted as the very last victim, the only question to answer is 'why'? And what a Question......and what a (totally separate) discussion thread that would be, Richard!

In the context of this thread, of course, one would have to add "N" number of other victims outside the usual 5 and make them part of the same circle of friends. Given that it's hard enough to do so for a mere handful of women, it would be a bugger's muddle to make the others fit as well.

[Simon Wood]

Hi Sam,

Who are the '"N" number of other victims outside the usual 5' whom we might have to add to the "same circle of friends"? Are you thinking of Smith, Tabram, McKenzie and Mylett etc?

Regards,

Simon

[Glenn Lauritz Andersson]

Glenn,

Thank you for your closely argued and erudite comment - you appear to be a sad loss to the Diplomatic Corps. Is this standard treatment of new members of the forum?

I am not sure what part of my comment is nonsens (sic). There could be a variety of reasons why the victims were not chosen at random; reasons that need have nothing to do with Stephen Knoght's theory. For example, the several prostitutes killed over a few weeks in Ipswich about 18 months ago were not - I believe - randomly chosen. I believe the killer had used all their services before and did not kill those whose services he had not. Whilst this may not be helpful in identifying JtR today, it does not mean that it is irrelevant or nonsense.

Also, if having killed his particular victims he might stop and, for example, move on to pastures new and outside London.

I had hoped that I had found a place where civil discussions on this subject could take place. I am beginning to think I was wrong.

In disappointment rather thananger,
Bill S

Bill,

I have never been much of a fan of dimplomacy, so I am afraid I have to disappoint you on that one.

In most serial killer cases the victims are randomly chosen.
As I tried to explain in my last post, only in Whitechapel the number of prostitutes was estimated to over 1200, and on such a small area it would be rather strange if some of those women wouldn't have bumped into one another. Again, I fail to see how that would tell us anything about the killer.
Also, based on witness testimonies from the victims' friends and associates there are no mention anywhere of them knowing each other on a close personal basis.

You also totally misinterpret what I referred to as 'nonsense'.
Actually, I am myself of the opinion that the killer might have used the services of the victims previous as a client and this is indeed common in similar cases, but that is not what we are discussing here - the point made by a couple of posters was whether the victims knew EACH OTHER (not if they knew the killer or not) and for that reason was chosen as victims. A conclusion for which there is no valid support whatsoever.

As for Stephen Knight, there is nothing in his book that as any actual basic in fact. It is all either total fabrication or deliberate manipulation of the few fatcs that do exist. Knight's theory about the victims being killed is based on the idea that they all got together to blackmail the government, which of course is ridiculous.
Fact is, we don't know WHY - or even WHEN - the Ripper 'stopped' (based on which victim you consider to be his last one - something that certainly isn't carved in stone). There could be a number of reasons, inlcuding that he became ill, died or was thrown in jail for other offenses (which isn't unheard of in serial killer cases). Or esle he decided to stop for other personal reasons. To try to link that to the importance of one or several certain victims is fairy-tale stuff and shouldn't be taken seriously, and I will continue to ridicule that thought any chance I get.

All the best

[Simon Wood]

Hi All,

Regarding who knew whom, it's interesting that the police did not previously know any of the victims. It always took a third party to identify them. The only possible exception was Kelly.

Inspector Beck inquest testimony—

"He had not been aware that the deceased was known to the police."

Perhaps Inspector Beck should have got out more.

Regards,

Simon

[Sam Flynn]

Hi Simon,Who are the '"N" number of other victims outside the usual 5' whom we might have to add to the "same circle of friends"? Are you thinking of Smith, Tabram, McKenzie and Mylett etc?I'm not particularly fussy, and I don't want to get me canonicals in a twist here :) My only observation is that, in order to posit that these women were close friends, one might have to account for more than the "usual suspects" (or should that be "usual victims"?). Knight focused on the C5, and made them friends because it fitted his conspiracy/blackmail thesis. I find it hard to justify that even these five would have been anything other than nodding acquaintances, if that - never mind any other possible victims that one might wish to include in the list.

[Glenn Lauritz Andersson]

Well, Simon, we must remember that street prostitutes often used false names (just take Eddowes' usage of a false name at the police station) in order to make themsleves harder to identify.
I have come across several examples of how such women managed to fool the police for years until the autorities finally realized that files about several women actually concerned one and the same person. In those days female prisoners weren't photographed and their personal details were rather difficult to check, specially if they had no firm address or residence.
Not only the names were often faked, but also other factual details as date of birth etc.

All the best

[Glenn Lauritz Andersson]

All we are left with is Millers Court. And if that was a "Ripper" murder I'll eat my hat.I am definitely with Simon on that one (although probably for different reasons), but hey - I don't want to open a can of worms here.

[Simon Wood]

Hi Glenn,

Cans of worms are fine with me.

But before Sam berates me for being off-thread—

London's Finest [City & Met] prided themselves on knowing most things that went on in and around the streets of London. Now, they may have looked upon "X" and known her as Doris or Daisy, Gertrude or Sybil [or all of those names], but they would have recognized her. Surely to God one cop or another had "moved them on" or "cautioned them" at some time or another. We know, for instance, that Stride had been up before the Beak on a few occasions.

But as far as the cops were concerned C1 to C4 appear to have existed in a vacuum.

Regards,

Simon

[Glenn Lauritz Andersson]

London's Finest [City & Met] prided themselves on knowing most things that went on in and around the streets of London. Now, they may have looked upon "X" and known her as Doris or Daisy, Gertrude or Sybil [or all of those names], but they would have recognized her. Surely to God one cop or another had "moved them on" or "cautioned them" at some time or another.
No, Simon.
Believe me, I am talking from experience here, studying hundreds of cases involving street prostitutes.
Regardless of any bragging of the police, they would not likely had known or recognized any of them (the fact that Eddowes managed to make them accept a false name when she registred herself is a sad proof of that) - there were simply too many of them and because of a possible poor communication between different police districts in that respect.

Believe me, fooling the police by using a number of aliases was customary and daily procedure for them. And again, in UK in those days temporary prisoners were most likely not photographed.
I have hundreds of examples involving Danish prostitutes where the women easily fooled the police IN SPITE of that they actually were photographed (Denmark was unique in that respect) - and they still managed to get away with it!

I can assure you, the Met and the City police didn't have a clue and they would have been in good company with police forces in other countries during the same period.

Al the best

[Sam Flynn]

Hi SimonLondon's Finest [City & Met] prided themselves on knowing most things that went on in and around the streets of London. Now, they may have looked upon "X" and known her as Doris or Daisy, Gertrude or Sybil [or all of those names], but they would have recognized her. This may resonate with my earlier observation that many of the "C5" had only been on "H" Division territory for comparatively short periods of time - the oldest among them seemingly only indulging in occasional prostitution.

[Simon Wood]

Hi Glenn and Sam,

Fair enough. If you say it's so, then who am I to argue? You'll get no more argument from me.

Now, Glenn, about that can of worms . . .

Regards,

Simon

[perrymason]

Hello all,

As to them having some possible connection via pubs or with alcohol in general, I think it would have to imply that victims were perhaps selected at a watering hole, but not killed that same night. If the C5 were all Jacks doing of course. Cause Liz was sober.

Interesting Simon mentioned Polly and Annie circumstances the night they were killed. Really the only 2 of the 5 in similar straights, and not terribly different in age or appearance. Liz earned money for her bed, but chose not to pay it.....Kate may well have had a bed waiting for her where Kelly is at....she had no way of knowing if he did well or poorly at the market that afternoon....and Mary didnt need to pay for her bed that night.

On a possible landlord connection, maybe McCarthy owned other buildings one or more of the victims lived in. He did own several at some point.

But I think their boozing may be the possible link, and it need not be a bartender or owner...just another boozer who seems to have extra coins to buy them drinks sometimes. Maybe a person who had influence or power in the slums, a "gang" type. Maybe like a Blotchy Face character.

Thats why when he meets them out at night during a street whore murder spree, they dont run. Catches Polly off guard by coming up behind her,....tells Annie he fancies a moment alone with her....playfully grabs at Liz, but it turns sour and he kills her in anger......knows Kate well enough to have her place her hand on his chest....like..."oh darling, you scared me stepping from the shadows like that"....and escorts the last victim home after getting her sloshed.

But their not all the same guy though, are they? Likely Different men by the witness descriptions. But there is maybe an answer. Maybe a Gang leader leads others...others who the women might know work for Mr X, and might accompany if asked to go see him. Maybe Kate sought one of the "others" out.

Ideas "just for the jolly".

Cheers

[Sam Flynn]

As to them having some possible connection via pubs or with alcohol in general, I think it would have to imply that victims were perhaps selected at a watering hole, but not killed that same night. It doesn't imply that, Mike - not by a long stretch. Besides, that topic has everything to do with Jack's alleged "selection" procedure, and nothing to do with the question of whether the victims knew one another.

Focus, please :)

[perrymason]

It doesn't imply that, Mike - not by a long stretch. Besides, that topic has everything to do with Jack's alleged "selection" procedure, and nothing to do with the question of whether the victims knew one another.

Focus, please :)

I am focussed Sam, just semi literate....I meant to say that if there was a connection that existed between the women and "someone", that links them all, a mutually known individual.....that has origins from a pub, (like someone who could know all 5 from some location or have seen them at different locations), it would appear by Liz's sobriety and her inclusion in the Canon, that he did not neccesarily act only after they had been seen drinking.

Like he didnt just see them drinking and decide to act.

Regards Sam.

[John Casey]

I cant in all honesty say that I think the c5 knew each other, except maybe as a face in the street or across a crowded pub. After all wasn't one of them supposed to be interviewed in a dosshouse or at least overheard in a dosshouse getting in a right old state because another girl had been killed? If my (admittedly rather addled) memory serves me right, she's meant to have said "another one's been taken" or...something along those lines. Not "Oh my gawd, poor ol' Polly's copped for the ripper!".....of course, as I say my memory aint what it used to be, but I'm sure somebody will recognise what the hell I'm on about!! lol!

[CraigInTwinCities]

I think there's a chance a couple of them may have known each other in a passing way, but that's probably the extent of it.

I give little credence to the theory that they were picked off as part of a conspiracy where they were blackmailing the Queen.

But even Whitechapel was heavily populated all by itself, not to mention London in total, so odds are they didn't.

The more important question: what does it matter, one way or the other?

[perrymason]

I suppose I should restructure what I was intending to say earlier....regarding Kates choice of aliases in her last 24 hours. I think it was more than an odd coincidence restrospectively....I believe it indicates that she knew of Mary Jane Kelly off Dorset.

She pawns John's boots as Jane Kelly of 6 Dorset St, and she identifies herself as "nobody"...then later, Mary Kelly of Fashion St to Hutt, the nightdesk man at Bishopsgate. In approx 24 hours. The fact that she used "Jane" and "Dorset" in her alias choice to me is just too coincidental. Two women die calling themselves the same name... in a row. And then it ends...abruptly. Odd. Since she has been hanging out with a Mr Kelly herself, "Kate" Kelly would have been as good an alias as "Mary", and have made more sense. The "Jane", and the "Mary" and Dorset Street are what makes it interesting.

There are provable connections, like Pearly and Annie apparently, but I think this is a case where there is some evidence to suggest that perhaps a C5 knew another C5.

We know she is not identified right away....and since we have her on record as being released from Jail as Mary Kelly...would anyone else outside Hutt know that and believe the woman to be a Mary Kelly for a brief time?

Best regards all.

[Christine]

Concerning the use of "Mary," "Jane," and "Dorset" by Eddowes:

Anytime you look at a complicated situation involving lots of people, lots of time, lots of places, you're going to get some weird coincidences. If you pick out the single weirdest coincidence, then you can easily convince yourself that there's something there when there's not. And keep in mind that "Marie Jeanette" may not have actually been named Kelly at all.

It actually kind of reminds me of the way that modern porn actresses and exotic dancers all have names like "Traci" and "Raven" when forty years ago they were all "Bunny" and "Candy."

I not saying that there might not be something to it--it just might not be that useful after all.

[perrymason]

Concerning the use of "Mary," "Jane," and "Dorset" by Eddowes:

Anytime you look at a complicated situation involving lots of people, lots of time, lots of places, you're going to get some weird coincidences. If you pick out the single weirdest coincidence, then you can easily convince yourself that there's something there when there's not. And keep in mind that "Marie Jeanette" may not have actually been named Kelly at all.

It actually kind of reminds me of the way that modern porn actresses and exotic dancers all have names like "Traci" and "Raven" when forty years ago they were all "Bunny" and "Candy."

I not saying that there might not be something to it--it just might not be that useful after all.

You never know Christine...might be as you suggest, but the "Jane" is what twigged me really. I understand that to many of Mary's acquaintances, she was known as Mary Jane...not Mary Kelly. Bowyer is one example of that.

The incorporation of all three names and the correct street, although incorrect number and not in Millers Court, is what leads me to believe they had at least, common friends. Kate knew of her. I dont think a close friend would use a name and address so close to being correct..for fear Mary might be arrested later for something Kate did or said...its the close but no cigar... that makes me think she didnt concern herself if she was perhaps giving a name and street that might cause trouble for a real Mary Jane Kelly off Dorset.

But when she steps out of Bishopsgate, and turns left, does she take the "Kelly" alias with her?...or leave it with Hutt, and return to being Catherine "Kate" Conway Kelly Eddowes?

Does she refer to herself as Mary Kelly to the man she touches when Lawende, Levy and Harris stroll past?

Cheers Chris.

[Jon Guy]

Hello

I appreciate the thread is titled " the 5 Canonical ", but I`ll ignore this annoying and misleading term for the sake of this post.

I noticed the following, which seems to point at the fact that Martha Tabram may well have known Annie Chapman :

One final note of interest concerns 'Pearly Poll." The September 20th edition of the Echo published the following on the Whitechapel Murders:

Inspector Reid, Detective Sergeant Enright, Sergeant Goadby and other officers then worked on a slight clue given them by 'Pearly Poll.' It was not thought much of at the time; but what was gleaned from her and other statements given by Elizabeth Allen and Eliza Cooper of 35 Dorset Street, Spitalfields, certain of the authorities have had cause to suspect a man actually living not far from Buck's Row. At present, however, there is only suspicion against him.

Eliza Cooper been the last person to assault Annie before Jack got his mit`s on her.

[detective abberline]

Hi all.

It's perfectly possible that all the victims knew each other. In the relatively small area of East London they roamed and the doss houses and pubs they frequented, they may well have met each other. However, that is a big "might'. There is no written or oral evidence that they ever knew each other. Stephen Knight started this idea and there has been no evidence in the past 30 years to truthfully back up his ideas.

Cheers

[j.r-ahde]

Hello DA!

There has been talks about Catherine living sometime in a shed near Mary Kelly.

But if I remember correctly, that wasn't very reliable piece of information.

The most possible option is, that they knew, which one was which and that's it!

All the best
Jukka

[mikey559]

At one time I thought that living in such close proximity to each other, having the same drinking habits and being in the same profession, surely they must have known each other. Then over the years, I found out that there were 76,000 people living in the Whitechapel district in 1888. There were 1,200 known prostitutes in Whitechapel in that same year. As many as 300 people might pass through the doors of a single lodging house in one day. When you look at these figures, it becomes easy to see how they might have seen each other before and may even have lived in neighboring rooming houses, it doesn't mean they knew each other.

I don't know what I think anymore. Every day we learn more and more about the residents of Whitechapel and every day we find different reasons to change our minds about what we thought we knew.

Mikey

[mikey559]

I suppose I should restructure what I was intending to say earlier....regarding Kates choice of aliases in her last 24 hours. I think it was more than an odd coincidence restrospectively....I believe it indicates that she knew of Mary Jane Kelly off Dorset.



In the east end at that time, if you wanted an alias, you used Kelly. It was very, very common. If it were in any way unique, we would be able to find out more about the victim we all know as Mary Kelly. I don't think that Kates use of Kelly in any way points to her having known Mary Kelly, it shows she knew it was too common to lead back to her.

Just my humble opinion,

Mikey

[Glenn Lauritz Andersson]

I suppose I should restructure what I was intending to say earlier....regarding Kates choice of aliases in her last 24 hours. I think it was more than an odd coincidence restrospectively....I believe it indicates that she knew of Mary Jane Kelly off Dorset.

...

There are provable connections, like Pearly and Annie apparently, but I think this is a case where there is some evidence to suggest that perhaps a C5 knew another C5.
I am sorry Michael, but I am with Mikey on this one.
To use common names like Mary and Kelly appears to have not been very unusual at all, and I don't see anything else than coincidences here.
As far as I know, there are no 'evidence that suggests that a C5 knew another C5'. Such evidence would consist of statements from - for example - Barnett stating that Mary knew Eddowes or from John kelly stating that Eddowes knew Annie Chapman. We don't have any such indications and no mention of it, nor are such implications mentioned in the police files. I don't hesitate to say that it is all conjuncture and supposition.

Again, it wouldn't be an impossible thought that some of them bumped into one another at some point at a pub or on the street, but I fail to see how this would have any impact on the motive of killer. So for me it's not an important issue. The victims were most likely chosen because they were avaliable and vulnerable at that time of night and on those particular nights the killer stalked the streets. He most likely had some kind of preferences but besides that I don't see anything else than randomly chosen women.

All the best

[perrymason]

Hi Glenn, Mikey,

I am aware how prevalent the surname Kelly was...we can see it in just these 5 murder cases repeatedly.

What makes this choice of alias exceptional I believe is that Kate uesd it twice in 24 hours, the 2 aliases were variations of Mary Jane Kellys full given name,. and in one case using a Dorset St location, and the #6. It seems to me that she may have plucked it out of thin air once...but why twice...consecutively. And why would she need an alias for the pawn boots at all?

Jane Kelly of 6 Dorset, and Mary Kelly of Fashion St.

If one were to imagine this might indicate knowledge of Mary by Kate, one might also imagine that the number 6 was not entirely a random selection,..and that Fashion St might be used if someone knew Mary once had fashionable clothing, and the subject thought of her in that manner. From someone who is wearing all they own when going out, someone who had some fine dresses at one time might come to mind as "Fashionable".

Im saying to casually pluck imaginary names from thin air, it is very odd that she chose to do so twice in her last 24 hours, and the names she chose have so much in common with the next Canonical victims.

So many odd things are discarded as coincidental in these cases that one might think suggestive evidence of something odd isnt worth exploring. I would disagree with that.

In the same way that a section of a Left Kidney with Brights Disease sent as a "hoax" just happened to match Kates missing part.

My best regards Glenn, Mikey.

[John Casey]

If memory serves me correctly wasn't Kate seeing (on and off at least) some fellow called Kelly? From that point of view it wouldn't, on the face of it, seem that surprising if she happened to give that as a surname. As for calling herself Mary...well..it was a common enough name, but I agree, a bit of a coincidence all things considered. However I do tend to veer towards it being a coincidence.

[perrymason]

If memory serves me correctly wasn't Kate seeing (on and off at least) some fellow called Kelly? From that point of view it wouldn't, on the face of it, seem that surprising if she happened to give that as a surname. As for calling herself Mary...well..it was a common enough name, but I agree, a bit of a coincidence all things considered. However I do tend to veer towards it being a coincidence.


Hi John,

Catherine and John Kelly are not off and on really, they had been "together", or teamed, for some time at that point. I agree that her taking the surname Kelly isnt that odd based on their time together, but I would contest the idea that her using that and the given names of Mary and Jane, and a Dorset St address are as easily dismissed. Particularly when the next victim, is Mary Jane Kelly of 26 Millers Court off Dorset St.

Kate didnt need an alias to pawn the boots. She may have preferred to use one at the Police Station. Whatever her reasons for choosing those names, random or using variations of someone she knew of, it does appear on paper that the 4th and 5th Canonical were using the same name when they died. We dont know if Kate continued on to Mitre calling herself that, but we do know what she told Hutt.

A very odd coincidence, if just that.

[Sam Flynn]

Hi Mike,Particularly when the next victim, is Mary Jane KellyIt's worth remembering that Kate gave an alias of "Mary Ann Kelly", which suggests that it was either a totally made up name (apart from her common-law surname), or that Kate had a different Mary Kelly in mind. Either way, this "Mary Ann" is unlikely to have been "our" Mary, given that a number of people knew her only as "Mary Jane", and that she was wont to call herself "Marie Jeannette" - as opposed to "Marianne".

[perrymason]

Hi Mike,It's worth remembering that Kate gave an alias of "Mary Ann Kelly", which suggests that it was either a totally made up name (apart from her common-law surname), or that Kate had a different Mary Kelly in mind. Either way, this "Mary Ann" is unlikely to have been "our" Mary, given that a number of people knew her only as "Mary Jane", and that she was wont to call herself "Marie Jeannette" - as opposed to "Marianne".

Hi Sam,

On that last point Im quite sure that was a carryover from her fortnight abroad in Paris as what,...a courtesan? But you neglected to mention she was Jane Kelly of 6 Dorset St on the Pawnticket, dated a little more than 24 hours earlier. Its not an isolated instance with Hutt. Kate used the surname twice, and Jane Kelly was the first iteration, Mary Kelly was the second. She is murdered just after calling herself Mary Kelly.

Contextually, it becomes either one of those ironic and odd co-incidences of life, or an indication that she may have known of a Mary or Jane Kelly that lived off Dorset. Since that Mary Kelly does do the same "work" as Kate, it means that they would have been on occassion, working at night simultaeneously. They may have had mutual friends too.

Its no smoking gun Sam, but before its dimissed as coincidence, the probability of perhaps Kate knowing Mary even casually based on this should be assessed first. Since they share the same neck of the woods, the same occupation at night, and the same surname on occasions, its worth wondering about. It might be even odds in terms of coincidence, her choosing those names in particular, or her having heard of or met Mary Kelly off Dorset St at some point.

Best regards Gareth, as always.

[Glenn Lauritz Andersson]

But again, Michael - and please forgive me for raising this question, because at this point I am very frustrated - even if they dId know each other: what on earth would it show?
What is the significance of it?
Am I really expected to believe that this have any validity for why they were killed or why they were chosen as victims?
Because for that reason, it wouldn't be enough for them knowing each other but also for the killer - in turn - to know them all!

So can anyone please tell me why this is a valid concpet at all, and why I am wasting my time with this?
Can't you see that this is irrelevant, Michael, and - quite frankly - a ridiculous idea?

All the best

[Sam Flynn]

It might be even odds in terms of coincidenceThere were approximately 1.7 million women named "Mary" living in England at the time - it was far and away the most popular name in the country. The next most popular was "Ann/Anne", with just over a million, closely followed by "Elizabeth". Trailing behind, but still reasonably common, was "Catherine/Katherine/Kate", with around 300,000. Bearing that in mind, I'd settle for "coincidence" anytime, Mike.

[Supe]

Glenn,

So can anyone please tell me why this is a valid concpet at all, and why I am wasting my time with this?

You don't really want me to answer that, do you?:lol: But, you are perfectly right, it makes no difference.

Michael,

I would suggest that you are once again applying 21st C "feelings" to 19th C social problems. In the period anyone could pretty much take any name they wished--and they often did. Moreover, those who had lived a life like Kate had learned from an early age to use an alias with any authority figures. This was true of pawn brokers as well. Not only were the odds not an favor of most items ever being redeemed (unless the musical chairs scam of redeeming an item to repawn elsewhere was being played) but in many instances items being pawned were stolen--they used a phoney name as a matter of course.

Add to the mix that the Irish diaspora from the famine meant that Britain and North America were awash in Irish surnames (Kelly being among the most popular), throw in Sam's datum about the unbiquity of Mary as a Christian name and finally consider she'd lived for ages with a man named Kelly. That Mary Kelly was her alias of choice is no surprise. Indeed, the "Mary Jane Kelly" of Miller's Court might have chosen that name herself for much the same reason

And, to iteratde Glenn's notion--what in heck difference does it make unless you want to take a stroll in the fever swamps of conspiracy?

Don..

[Simon Wood]

Hi Don,

What's so wrong about a "stroll in the fever swamps of conspiracy"? [Good phrase, by the way].

Everything else has failed miserably.

Regards,

Simon

[John Casey]

Just another thought to throw in the pot as it were. I wonder if Mary Kelly was to victorian streetwalkers what Joe Bloggs or John Doe would be to us? Just a usefull name to use when all else fails?

As for whether it's worth chasing this line of enquiry, well....depends....interesting rather than usefull perhaps, but nobody HAS to post on any of these boards :beerchug: all the best to you's

[Glenn Lauritz Andersson]

Just another thought to throw in the pot as it were. I wonder if Mary Kelly was to victorian streetwalkers what Joe Bloggs or John Doe would be to us? Just a usefull name to use when all else fails?

Quite possible, John.

In any case, Don has a point - it is certainly worth contemplating that Mary Kelly may indeed have chosen her own name.
Since we can't be sure of her personal history, and all attempts to trace her genealogically have been fruitless, we may have to accept the fact that 'Mary Jane Kelly' may have been an alias she took according to those traditions and not her real name.

All the best

[j.r-ahde]

Hello Glenn!

I personally find it, in fact, probable, that "Mary Jane Kelly" was just a pseudonyme!

Since, like you said, none of us trying to find her real backround, hasn't succeeded without the eternal "yes, but..."!

All the best
Jukka

[perrymason]

It sure stirs up friction round here when someone suggests looking at things that are quite obviously very odd coincidences or something more.

As to the number of Marys, Anns and Janes during that period, Im sure thats relevant Sam, but relevance and inquiry satisfactorily addressed are not the same thing.

Im not talking about any Mary, Ann, Jane or Kelly, Im talking about the last two alledged Jack the Ripper victims, a much smaller crowd than the entire East End's occupants. Broad statistics dont answer this question.

Glenn, Don.....If there was a knowledge of one C5 by another, then perhaps within the remaining C5, there are other such acquaintences with other C5 victims. If there were such links discovered, the enduring notion of a mad serial killer randomly selecting victims as the opportunities arose might be tested. If any links existed between any Ripper victim and another, its of paramount importance to the overall investigation.

And since it appears to me that the last victim, the second Mary Kelly killed in a row, was killed by someone other than "Mystery Jack", looking at the concept of known acquaintences might open a dialogue that more accurately reflects what we are likely looking at with these crimes, more than a Canon of 5 has done anyway.

Sense cannot be made of one killer for the Canonical 5. They are as different as they are alike. Not the victims...rather what happened, and where. But if a killer was killing specific people, not just killing to satisfy some undiscovered urges I see speculated about freely here, then the context changes, and then single throat cuts by an "abdominal mutilator" might actually make some sense.

For the sake of honest open discussion, I really dont think harping on me to tow a Canon 5 line is productive for anyone. Its solved zero questions to-date.....maybe its time to cut the Canon cord, and look at some of these...many....coincidental issues over these cases for what they say without a Canon spin on them,.. or some intellectual snobbery frankly.

I really enjoy discussing the cases with you, but I dont feel I need to justify exploring a question that is on the surface, a very odd coincidental feature of Kates and Marys given relationship, as alledged Canon 4 and 5.

C'mon....5 women who all do the same work, who had all lived in Spitalfield at one point, some shared street addresses, and they all loved to drink. Yes...there are enough clients, and enough pubs, and enough whores to say they need'nt have met...but why take that approach when there are odd coincidences that might suggest differently.

For example, what about possible cultural associations?

My best regards all.

[Sasha]

It sure stirs up friction round here when someone suggests looking at things that are quite obviously very odd coincidences or something more.

As to the number of Marys, Anns and Janes during that period, Im sure thats relevant Sam, but relevance and inquiry satisfactorily addressed are not the same thing.

Im not talking about any Mary, Ann, Jane or Kelly, Im talking about the last two alledged Jack the Ripper victims, a much smaller crowd than the entire East End's occupants. Broad statistics dont answer this question.

Glenn, Don.....If there was a knowledge of one C5 by another, then perhaps within the remaining C5, there are other such acquaintences with other C5 victims. If there were such links discovered, the enduring notion of a mad serial killer randomly selecting victims as the opportunities arose might be tested. If any links existed between any Ripper victim and another, its of paramount importance to the overall investigation.

And since it appears to me that the last victim, the second Mary Kelly killed in a row, was killed by someone other than "Mystery Jack", looking at the concept of known acquaintences might open a dialogue that more accurately reflects what we are likely looking at with these crimes, more than a Canon of 5 has done anyway.

Sense cannot be made of one killer for the Canonical 5. They are as different as they are alike. Not the victims...rather what happened, and where. But if a killer was killing specific people, not just killing to satisfy some undiscovered urges I see speculated about freely here, then the context changes, and then single throat cuts by an "abdominal mutilator" might actually make some sense.

For the sake of honest open discussion, I really dont think harping on me to tow a Canon 5 line is productive for anyone. Its solved zero questions to-date.....maybe its time to cut the Canon cord, and look at some of these...many....coincidental issues over these cases for what they say without a Canon spin on them,.. or some intellectual snobbery frankly.

I really enjoy discussing the cases with you, but I dont feel I need to justify exploring a question that is on the surface, a very odd coincidental feature of Kates and Marys given relationship, as alledged Canon 4 and 5.

C'mon....5 women who all do the same work, who had all lived in Spitalfield at one point, some shared street addresses, and they all loved to drink. Yes...there are enough clients, and enough pubs, and enough whores to say they need'nt have met...but why take that approach when there are odd coincidences that might suggest differently.

For example, what about possible cultural associations?

My best regards all.

I agree, Michael. All the victims resided within a couple of hundred yards of each other in the Thrawl, Flower and Dean, Dorset, and Church Street doss houses off Commercial Street. Based on the following addresses, you could assume that Polly Nichols, Liz Stride and Cathy Eddowes were familiar with each other. Similarly, it seems Annie Chapman and Mary Kelly would have crossed paths.

• Polly Nichols used to reside at 18 Thrawl Street; just before her death she was evicted and moved into the White House at 56 Flower and Dean Street, a doss house that slept both men and women.

• Annie Chapman's primary residence was Crossingham's Common Lodging House at 35 Dorset Street.

• Elizabeth Stride occasionally lived in a common lodging house at No. 32 Flower and Dean Street, and reportedly was there the night of her murder.

• Catherine Eddowes usually stayed in Cooney's Lodging House at No. 55 Flower and Dean Street, and had slept there two nights before her murder.

• Kelly lived and died in McCarthy's Rents at 13 Miller's Court, off Dorset Street (it was actually the back room of 26 Dorset Street, situated across the road from Crossingham's Common Lodging House). She had previously resided in George Street, between “Flowery Dean” and Thrall Street. Kelly was seen picking up a man on Commercial Street between Thrall and Flower and Dean Streets the night of her murder.

These residences were suspiciously close to each other, covering less than 1.5% of the total hunting area.

Two blocks north of Flower and Dean Street was the Ten Bells Pub (now known as the Jack the Ripper Public House) on Church Street and Commercial Street, across from Spitalfields Market; all the Ripper victims were known to have drank here. Another commonality - as Michael points out.

Maybe there were plenty of clients to share among all these women but you would assume that could be competition among them for the "better" clients.

As to "cultural" associations, I'm not sure what Michael means by this exactly. What crossed my mind however was the possibility of a doctor working in the area "pro bono". The women would have most certainly had STDs and/or backyard abortions that may have meant they knew each other? Maybe Jack was a backyard abortionist and one of his clients was threatening to report him to the police but he didn't know which so he killed them all? Just spiff-balling here! Be gentle - I'm a newbie!

[Glenn Lauritz Andersson]

Glenn, Don.....If there was a knowledge of one C5 by another, then perhaps within the remaining C5, there are other such acquaintences with other C5 victims. If there were such links discovered, the enduring notion of a mad serial killer randomly selecting victims as the opportunities arose might be tested. If any links existed between any Ripper victim and another, its of paramount importance to the overall investigation.

And since it appears to me that the last victim, the second Mary Kelly killed in a row, was killed by someone other than "Mystery Jack", looking at the concept of known acquaintences might open a dialogue that more accurately reflects what we are likely looking at with these crimes, more than a Canon of 5 has done anyway.

Sense cannot be made of one killer for the Canonical 5. They are as different as they are alike. Not the victims...rather what happened, and where. But if a killer was killing specific people, not just killing to satisfy some undiscovered urges I see speculated about freely here, then the context changes, and then single throat cuts by an "abdominal mutilator" might actually make some sense.

For the sake of honest open discussion, I really dont think harping on me to tow a Canon 5 line is productive for anyone. Its solved zero questions to-date.....maybe its time to cut the Canon cord, and look at some of these...many....coincidental issues over these cases for what they say without a Canon spin on them,.. or some intellectual snobbery frankly.

I really enjoy discussing the cases with you, but I dont feel I need to justify exploring a question that is on the surface, a very odd coincidental feature of Kates and Marys given relationship, as alledged Canon 4 and 5.

C'mon....5 women who all do the same work, who had all lived in Spitalfield at one point, some shared street addresses, and they all loved to drink. Yes...there are enough clients, and enough pubs, and enough whores to say they need'nt have met...but why take that approach when there are odd coincidences that might suggest differently.
Michael,

There are no 'coincidences' here - what you describe are attributes that would fit hundreds of women only in Whitechapel alone.
The killer most likely chose his victims of preferences based on their vulnerability (due to their 'occupation') and their presence in the area at that time of night, not on anything else. That is the ONLY link.

The name 'Mary Kelly' can hardly be of any substantial importance - Eddowes called herself Mary ANN Kelly, and both it should be noted that Eddowes male companion John Kelly HAD KELLY AS SURNAME!
To even try to establish a link to Mary JANE Kelly is totally fruitless.

Again - the idea that the victims would know each other - and idea for which which I'd say there is little support - is totally irrelevant because if it would mean anything for why they would be singled out as victims, you would also need to establish a link that proves that the killer knew them all as well on a personal basis.

So - as I have said millinions of times - if they knew each other: SO WHAT?

I am not debunking this silly notion because it consists of 'conicidences' because there are no 'odd coincidences' here at all. I am debunking it because it is irrelevant.

Nor do this has anything to do with the Canonical Five.
You know very well that I am not a Canonical Five supporter so I fail to see what that has got to do with the issue at all. I believe Nichols, Chapman and Eddowes were killed by the same man - the other murders might have had other motives and murderers, but I certainly don't believe the victims would have needed to know each other in order to reach such a conclusion.

All the best

[CraigInTwinCities]

Hi Mike,It's worth remembering that Kate gave an alias of "Mary Ann Kelly", which suggests that it was either a totally made up name (apart from her common-law surname), or that Kate had a different Mary Kelly in mind. Either way, this "Mary Ann" is unlikely to have been "our" Mary, given that a number of people knew her only as "Mary Jane", and that she was wont to call herself "Marie Jeannette" - as opposed to "Marianne".

Careful, Sam! :) In actuality, the only person who ever claimed MJK preferred "Marie Jeanette" was Joseph Barnett; none of her other acquaintences used that name in any of the documented stuff we have on her. So we only have Barnett's word on whether she preferred Marie Jeannette to Mary Jane, which isn't enough as no one else testified at the inquest nor was interviewed by the newspapers as using the "Marie Jeannette" variant.

And don't put much stock into "Marie Jeanette" being on her headstone; after all, it was Barnett who influenced that, if anything.

[Sam Flynn]

Careful, Sam! :) In actuality, the only person who ever claimed MJK preferred "Marie Jeanette" was Joseph Barnett; none of her other acquaintences used that name in any of the documented stuff we have on her. Agreed - which is why I mentioned "Mary Jane" first, as many people seemed to know her by that name.

[Chris Scott]

The map below shows just how small an area was encompassed by the five addresses of the C5
However, I have to agree that even it could be proved that 2 or more of the victims knew each other, I am not sure what this would add
Chris

[Sam Flynn]

Hi Sasha,All the victims resided within a couple of hundred yards of each other in the Thrawl, Flower and Dean, Dorset, and Church Street doss houses off Commercial Street.Based on the 1881 Census over 1,800 people lived in those four streets alone. If we look at some of the adjoining streets in the vicinty, we can add another 1,730 residents from Crispin Street, Fashion Street, White's Row, Brushfield Street, Bell Lane and Paternoster Row.

In that small area, clustered around Christ Church, there was a total of over 3,500 residents - and that doesn't include those who lived in adjoining Courts, listed separately from the streets in which they were found. For example - New Court, off Fashion Street, was home to 97 people in 1881; Miller's Court had 30 residents.

Taking all this together, and without going into too much minute detail, I shouldn't be surprised if rather more than 5,000 people were crammed into an area within a radius of 40 yards of the Britannia. The figures associated with East End poverty are mind-blowing, perhaps, but it's as well to bear them in mind.
all the Ripper victims were known to have drank here. Another commonality - as Michael points out.Whilst it may be possible that the victims used the Ten Bells on occasion - which we really don't know for sure, by the way - that doesn't necessarily mean that they were "regulars", still less that they knew one another.

As I've pointed out, many of these women had only taken up residence in Spitalfields/Whitechapel relatively recently - mere months in some cases - having spent most of their lives elsewhere. Such conditions don't seem particularly conducive to one's forging friendships with the feckless nomads down the street, still less with those two blocks removed from one's lodgings.

[anna]

Hi everyone,
statistics,statistics,statistics.......
By the way, didn't Kate's sister live at No6 Fashion Street....
she's just swopping things around....typical Kate!....what a gal!!!
If all else fails....confuse the hell out of them.

So...nobody has thought of St Boltophs yet? Seems a good as place as any for their paths to have crossed. Even the casual prostitutes amongst them would know that clients knew this was the place to pick them up without much effort on either side....even over a few months,that's enough night time hours for the chance that they had all loitered and chatted together at some time....

[mikey559]

Did Henry VIII marry his wives based on their names? Or was it just coincidence? I think it's a very important discussion to have. I mean, did they all know each other? They definitely moved in the same circles. At least five of them did. Only one was a Princess in her own right, and yet, she shared the same name as 2 of Henry's other wives. Maybe only folks in the UK will know all the names of his wives. They were:

Catherine of Aragon
Anne Boelyn
Jane Seymour
Anne of Cleves
Kathryn Howard
Katherine Parr

3 names, 6 queens.

Okay, this post has ne relevance to JTR, however we are talking about coincidence or knowledge of someones name so I thought it appropriate.

Notice how the names of the canonical victims are similar to Henry's wives AND his daughters. I wonder if this is a coincidence or if there's something here showing how the murders can all be related to a king from 350 years prior.

Mikey :rolleyes2:

[Sasha]

Michael,

There are no 'coincidences' here - what you describe are attributes that would fit hundreds of women only in Whitechapel alone.
The killer most likely chose his victims of preferences based on their vulnerability (due to their 'occupation') and their presence in the area at that time of night, not on anything else. That is the ONLY link.

The name 'Mary Kelly' can hardly be of any substantial importance - Eddowes called herself Mary ANN Kelly, and both it should be noted that Eddowes male companion John Kelly HAD KELLY AS SURNAME!
To even try to establish a link to Mary JANE Kelly is totally fruitless.

Again - the idea that the victims would know each other - and idea for which which I'd say there is little support - is totally irrelevant because if it would mean anything for why they would be singled out as victims, you would also need to establish a link that proves that the killer knew them all as well on a personal basis.

So - as I have said millinions of times - if they knew each other: SO WHAT?

I am not debunking this silly notion because it consists of 'conicidences' because there are no 'odd coincidences' here at all. I am debunking it because it is irrelevant.

Nor do this has anything to do with the Canonical Five.
You know very well that I am not a Canonical Five supporter so I fail to see what that has got to do with the issue at all. I believe Nichols, Chapman and Eddowes were killed by the same man - the other murders might have had other motives and murderers, but I certainly don't believe the victims would have needed to know each other in order to reach such a conclusion.

All the best

Glenn, I get where you're coming from. For me, it is more pertinent if the victims knew (or thought they knew) the killer rather than each other but it is interesting to speculate. Four of the victims were in their forties - which is, and forgive the judgement here, pretty old to be on the game. It is also easier to profile Jack for these - if you believe he was in his twenties for example and had a problem with his mother. Also if they were on the game in the same area for all their lives, they were more likely to know each other - at least on sight. This would be less true of MJK who was much younger and - from my understanding - relatively new to the area. Again this is all very interesting but more important for me is their relationship to the killer than to each other. I think the latter case leads to conspiracy theories - which is fraught with danger but I am still very interested in entertaining such theories if they help shine a light on what might have happened.

Sasha

[Chris Scott]

With regard to Eddowes and the use of the name Kelly, this from an article I am currently transcribing may be of interest

Chris


The Scotsman
1 October 1888

Regarding the identification of Eddowes's body:
Up to a late hour in the evening the woman had not been identified, although several people had gone to the Bishopsgate Street Police Station and had seen the clothing. Two women who inspected this, and also saw the corpse, were certain that it was the body of a woman named Jane Kelly, but subsequently, on inquiries being made, it was found that this individual was still alive. A man who saw the body said he was sure it was that of a woman known as "Whoshe the Jewess," but the inquiries in this case care not yet completed.

[Monty]

Chris,

This also appears in the Irish Times report of 1st Oct 88.

Part of which reads...

.....The public were not admitted to the square until late in the afternoon, after an official plan of the square had been made for production at the inquest. Up to a late hour in the evening the woman had not been identified, although several people have been to the Bishopsgate street police station and have seen the clothing. Two women who inspected this and also saw the corpse were certain that it was the body of a woman named Jane Kelly, but subsequently on inquiries being made, it was found that this individual was alive. A man who saw the body said he was sure it was that of a woman known as "Phoebe the Jewess," but the inquiries in this case are not yet complete.

Here is the link....

http://www.casebook.org/press_reports/irish_times/18881001.html

Monty
:)

[Chris Scott]

Monty
many thanks for that
and "Phoebe" makes a lot more sense than "Whoshe"!

[detective abberline]

Hi. I'm glad to see some sanity has finally returned to this thread. Having read through the 1st 4 to 6 pages I wasn't too sure. Listen, they lived in a very tightly packed urban sprawl. They may indeed have come across each other. They weren't murdered because they knew each other. They weren't murdered because they knew a deep dark secret that could bring down the English monarchy(curse you Stephen Knight). They were very susceptible women unfortunately on the streets when Jack was prowling.

[Sam Flynn]

Hi everyone,
statistics,statistics,statistics..........facts, facts, facts, Anna :)

It's difficult enough to quantify so many aspects of this case, but where we have data at our disposal we should not ignore them.

[Mitch Rowe]

With regard to Eddowes and the use of the name Kelly, this from an article I am currently transcribing may be of interest

Chris


The Scotsman
1 October 1888

Regarding the identification of Eddowes's body:
Up to a late hour in the evening the woman had not been identified, although several people had gone to the Bishopsgate Street Police Station and had seen the clothing. Two women who inspected this, and also saw the corpse, were certain that it was the body of a woman named Jane Kelly, but subsequently, on inquiries being made, it was found that this individual was still alive. A man who saw the body said he was sure it was that of a woman known as "Whoshe the Jewess," but the inquiries in this case care not yet completed.

I wonder if Barnett had read any articles to MJK concerning Eddowes as Mary Kelly or Jane Kelly! If so I bet MJK really had the creeps!

[Monty]

Mitch,

If he was able to get a copy of the Scotsman or Irish times then yeah. And given Kellys alledged Irish background...

Seeing as the two papers report an almost identical story I feel that it was a piece from a News Agencey as opposed to an individual reporter. Therefore it is highly possible that this report appeared in more than just the Irish Times and The Scotsman.

This thread, are we talking friends, acquaintances or simple recognition?

No evidence for the first, but its not impossible. However Im sure someone would have noted two mutual friends (as most friendships work) being murdered.

The same stands for the second.

As for the third, again no evidence however logic dictates that it is highly possible their paths crossed from time to time.

Monty
:)

[anna]

Hi Sam,
I know,cheeky Anna:shakehead: when there's so many scholars on the boards,and I go making the thread "girlie" with sentimental nonsense,
about a fire engine impersonator!!!:1wink:
Seriously,I appreciate how important the facts are,and are what I'm ultimately here for,:2thumbsup: but sometimes the characters of the women get lost amongst all the hoo-ha of the events.
I wish we knew more about Annie and Polly as people,and not just big infirm ladies who got drunk and had no money,plus the facts and figures of their lives...no little touches..like Kate was fun,Liz liked her drama and Mary was feisty..or is that just me being sentimental again?:yes:

Anyway, nice to hear from you!:pleased:

[Sam Flynn]

Hi Anna,sometimes the characters of the women get lost amongst all the hoo-ha of the events.Mustn't lose sight of that, and I agree that our field of interest would be somewhat diminished without whatever insights we might gain into the lives of the characters involved.

[anna]

Thanks Sam, top man as usual.:2thumbsup:

[perrymason]

Interesting that Kate may have used an alias that belonged to someone else she may have known in the form of "Jane" Kelly. She was "Jane" according to the Pawn Ticket dated Friday night, perhaps the ladies met her after that. Who knows who the actual "Jane" Kelly was the article says was still alive. And she was Mary Kelly Saturday night,.... but surely unlikely she would have known a "Mary" Kelly as well.:rolleyes2:

If a link could be proven that all 5 women knew of each other, then it is certainly possible the killer would also be known by all of them too. And perhaps by others who knew the victims. Their individual links are as relevant as only that....they could possibly help define a social circle that a killer resides within. And perhaps motives for some of the murders.

Does anyone know if any gang type characters brought street whores clients for kickbacks, for example? Do we know that one of Marys ex's didnt "date" other C5 victims for example? Do we know that all the Canonicals had nothing worth killing them for? Not even information? Did they all know a single clergyman, or an anarchist Socialist,..did they all know some of the same street beat cops? We know gangs shook down whores and clients, ...had they been shaken down by the same men, or did they all know some of the same local bad guys?

Remember, Emma was definately attacked by a gang, but who knows if one of them or more werent this "Jack" fellow?

Ill drop it. But anytime Im told that unsolved murder case investigations based on a serial madmans spree wouldnt be signifigantly altered if a link of all 5 Canonical victims was established, I have to disagree.

Best regards.

[mikey559]

All I'm asking for is a factual link between any 2 of the 5 canonical victims. Not a coincidence. I have had different "beliefs" all my life regarding these crimes. Those beliefs have been challenged and as my knowledge grows and as my training has increased over the years, I have changed my "beliefs". While working on other crimes, I have found links to other victims that shed an entirely different light on the crime. I have long hoped that something similar would happen with this case. If all 5 were actually killed by the same killer and we could link any of the victims toegether by something more than their murder, we might actually move closer to a real solution to this case.

I don't think it will happen. I don't think we can even find out anymore if they knew each other. As it stands today we can not even factually say that they were killed by the same hand. We can guess, assume, think, whatever, we still can't prove anything.

Mikey

[Robert]

Hi Mikey

Of course the odds are always against anything unambiguously helpful appearing in this case.:lol: But then, all it would require would be a Press report to surface - say, Mary Jane Kelly of Millers Court, Dorset Street and Annie Sivvey of wherever, accused of rolling a sailor. Case dismissed. Sailor leaves court vowing vengeance.

[Sam Flynn]

Hi Mike,had they been shaken down by the same men, or did they all know some of the same local bad guys?Again, we aren't talking about "classical" prostitutes - at least two, if not more, of the C5 seem to have been occasional streetwalkers at best/worst, and until very recently Polly Nichols had been living in the West of London and holding down a decent job, however briefly - she, like some of the others, was only a comparatively recent "immigrant" to the Spitalfields area. Given that most of them were superannuated anyway, it is unlikely that any of the C5 - Kelly, perhaps, excepted - would have been in thrall to any local pimps; and given the likely casual nature of their prostitution, it is unlikely that they'd have been roughed up by the same man (apart from "you-know-who", of course).

The notion of them mixing in the same social circles is also somewhat questionable - the East End may have been a great leveller, but people were still individuals, and would have tended to clump together according to age, background and personality. Would a 25-year-old Kelly have hung around with the same sort of people as forty-somethings like Nichols or Stride? Would chirpy, perky Catherine Eddowes have bothered with the likes of the sickly Annie Chapman and her Walter Mitty "pensioner" friend? It's possible, but not compellingly so to my way of thinking.

[Septic Blue]

... Emma was definately attacked by a gang, ...

Can you imagine the tall tales that 'Mary Ann Kelly' of '6 Fashion Street' would have communicated, had she survived her attack ???

Invariably; she would have been somewhere on the beaten path, so that the reason for her whereabouts would not have been called into question.

Also invariably; she would have been innocently minding her own business, while most certainly not engaged in any illicit or immoral activities.

Finally, and again invariably; she would have been randomly set upon by whatever number of complete strangers she thought would make the whole thing believable.

... we aren't talking about "classical" prostitutes - at least two, if not more, of the C5 seem to have been occasional streetwalkers at best/worst, ...

I think we would gain a much better understanding of these women (Coles, Kelly and Mylett being the possible exceptions), if we stopped referring to them as "prostitutes", "working girls", "sex workers", etc ... and started referring to them as precisely what they were: Vagrants !!!

If you were to walk along 'The Evil Quarter-Mile' today, you would be accosted by any number of toothless hags in their forties-or-fifties; each using the same approach: "Oi guv; 'ave ya gawt 20p on ya ???"

Of course, each of them would be seeking substantially more than 20p, while hoping beyond hope that you might be nice enough to give them a couple of quid.

Were you to do just that, and then suggest that ten quid might be forthcoming if they provided 'a favour, or two'; negotiations would likely ensue.

These are the sort of women, with whom we are dealing in our study of Jack the Ripper: Vagrants !!! Women, in whom extortionist gangs would have had no interest whatsoever !!! They probably held out their hands as beggars, before offering there bodies as prostitutes, in nearly every solicitous encounter they ever made.

I'm sure that many vagrants occasionally resort to thievery. But, I would think that those that do would still be seen as mere "vagrants"; as opposed to "thieves" or "reallocation workers".


Colin 2235

[Glenn Lauritz Andersson]

Hi Colin,

I definitely agree with you about referring to the women as vagrants, because that is what most of them were (Eddowes - judging from the large number of possessions and clothes she kept on herself - I would almost consider somewhat of a Victorian "baglady"). Excellently put. In fact, that is how such women actually was referred to and labelled as in Scandinavian police files.
No doubt the prostitution thing was just of secondary nature and something they shared with hundreds of women from the poorer classes. And as we know, some of them DID have other jobs when available.

As for the "gang" problem (as in the case of Smith), I think we shouldn't be mislead by the Stephen Knight-inspired idea of extortion gangs, because as you imply, there would be little money to get from any of those women.
However, that doesn't rule out a group of men assaulting women for other purposes. Since the vital wound on Smith was a result of a weapon thrusted into her vagina, this indicates an attack of perhaps sadistic, sexual nature.
If Smith told the truth about the gang part of her story, then it is obvious that the group of men attacked her and sexually assaulted her, not to rob her of any earnings. And that wouldn't really be that strange - such group assaults happens even today. No doubt there are several things in her story that don't add up, but the gang story could well be true. But it hardly was an extortion gang, as the alleged (or even fictional) Nichols gang was supposed to be.

All the best

[Sam Flynn]

I definitely agree with you about referring to the women as vagrants, because that is what most of them were (Eddowes - judging from the large number of possessions and clothes she kept on herself - I would almost consider somewhat of a Victorian "baglady"). Excellently put.Indeed - good observation Colin, and I like the "baglady" analogy too, Glenn. If nothing else, thinking of most of the C5 as "vagrants" is more useful than the more emotive, and IMO inaccurate, use of the terms "prostitute" (with all its stereotypical, Hollywoodized connotations) and - saints preserve us! - "whore".

[Glenn Lauritz Andersson]

Indeed, Sam. Indeed.

"...and - saints preserve us! - "whore"."

A Martin Fido quote, I believe... :happy:

All the best

[perrymason]

Hello folks,

I mentioned cultural associations before, and what I was hinting at asking was... were there Irish threads running through some of the canonicals lives?

I would imagine on Bloody Sunday, the representation would be in groups..... in the form of National Socialsts...The Immigrant Polish Jews, the Russians, the Fenians, Dockers....if you can envision different flags and groups with that 10,000......maybe some of our Canonicals met at events, or marches. Like the gangs in Scorcese's Gangs of New York, albeit early 19th century.... hanging out with their Nationalist/Separationist friends, or glomming onto a group as friends of someone who is involved, or knows the others.

I think the Fenians have been shown to be the most active and potentially dangerous organization at that particular time in the East End, and almost certainly some investigators had multiple mandates that Fall involving their whereabouts and activities. Abberlines Posse comes to mind...Godley, Pearce, Reid, and others... did many interviews, and it was Abberline and Reid who sifted the ashes again Saturday morning.

Could the women have been linked in that way? Marys a no-brainer, sure she might know some Fenians, as with Joe,... but do we have some Irish die hards or sympathizers in the others?

If you will allow me this speculation.....I think you might agree there is some synchronicity with anarchists in this series. And with the work history of some senior Investigators. Our local rising star whose career was built on high profile Fenian arrests while stationed in Whitechapel.

Best regards

[Sam Flynn]

Hi Mike,Abberlines Posse comes to mind...Godley, Pearce, Reid, and others... Abberline's "Hollywood" Posse, you mean, Mike? Let's be under no illusions, especially with regard to Godley - who wasn't Watson to Abberline's Holmes, but a jobbing bobby, more likely to collar some stroppy drunk in the street than to be working full-time on smashing an international anarchist conspiracy.
I think you might agree there is some synchronicity with anarchists in this series.Only inasmuch as there was a synchronicity between the Suffragettes, the foundation of the Boy Scouts movement by Baden Powell and the "discovery" of Piltdown Man.And with the work history of some senior Investigators. There weren't that many senior investigators to go around, and each would have had a range of responsibilities - not all of which need necessarily have been cohesive or based on any particular specialism.

Abberline, for instance, wasn't what we might term a "Homicide" detective, neither could he have been described as one of the "Anti-terrorist Squad". Out of 28 cases at the Old Bailey between 1871 and 1888, Abberline was involved in investigating the following crimes:

Theft (11)
Fraud (7)
Forgery (6)
Arson (1)
Treason (1)
Wounding (1)
Murder (1)

...the latter, solitary, murder case happening in 1885, as was the single instance of treason (pro-Irish dynamitards). He may have been involved in other investigations that didn't make it through to the Criminal Court - but the strong impression given by this sample from the Old Bailey is that Abberline was mainly engaged in good, honest, everyday police work. The same was true of Edmund Reid.

[Septic Blue]

... maybe some of our Canonicals met at events, or marches.

2240
Social Activists ???

Because of their alcoholism and destitution, most of these vagrant women couldn't foresee anything beyond their next drink, meal or doss. Social activism would not have crossed their minds.

And either way; I don't think many of the activists (excepting those who were truly benevolent) would have welcomed them !!!

Blue-Collar society in Victorian London was not homogeneous, by any stretch of the imagination.


Colin 2241

[Supe]

Michael,

Could the women have been linked in that way?

What evidence is there that any of the Canonic 5 victims were in the least bit political? From what we know there is nothing to even suggest they had any political concerns. For most, life was a daily grind of earning a few pence whatever way they could and hoping their desire for gin could be muted until they had a night's lodging in hand and some sustenance in their stomachs. Their perseverence, at least, demands our respect (Polly and Annie were stil trudging the streets late at nightt hoping for one more score that would mean shelter)) and understanding that would strongly suggest they were not the sort to be members of a Marxist study group, a Fenian cell or a music hall performer fan club.

For that matter, what political organization besides a Keystone Kops Konspiracy would want these sad souls associated with it? I really think you are looking for things that aren't there. And all the conditional clauses you can conjure up won't make it any different. Since you obviously have great passion for the Ripper mystery you might want to turn that ardor to more productive areas of speculation and investigation.

Don.

[Supe]

Colin,

We seem to have had much the same ideas at the same time. They say great minds think alike, but that wouldn't apply to us. :laugh4:

Don.

[Flagg]

It's a possibility. Those in that line of work tend to look after each other. I'm sure there was competition for business between them. Even if they didn't know each other personally, they knew who their competition was.

[Sam Flynn]

Hi Flagg,It's a possibility. Those in that line of work tend to look after each other.They weren't in any line of work, for the most part. They would darn clothing, sweep floors, peel vegetables, do laundry, wash dishes, make matchboxes, run errands, hawk cheap nick-nacks, fruit or flowers - whatever came their way. Many of them had small allowances from their partners (past or present), received donations from charities or claimed relief from the "parish" or the church. We know that some of them sponged money from their families periodically.

When all these avenues failed, they might resort to begging from strangers for the price of a single bed. If they had no luck there, they might accost a man for the price of a double bed that they could share. Once in a while they might find a man as desperate for nookie as they were for money, in which case a "knee-trembler" down some dark alley might ensue.

These women were not, by any means, "professional" hookers in the conventional sense, and it's worth remembering Colin/Glenn's "vagrant/bag-lady" analogies in this regard - because that's what most of the Ripper's victims were.

[perrymason]

Hello all,

Interesting comments. On the vagrant issue, with the Canonicals, I would disagree....only 3 of the Canon were homeless by virtue of their circumstances at the time of their death....Mary Kelly was not a vagrant, and Liz Stride chose not to use the money she made cleaning her last afternoon for a bed.

The women sold themselves to live, to sleep, eat and drink,.... just like modern day street prostitutes sell themselves for booze, food, drugs, or perhaps a place to sleep. And many have boyfriends, who bring people the whores would never have met otherwise, into their social circle.

When I mentioned cultural associations, I wasnt referring to The Lions Club, or the local Chamber of Commerce, ...perhaps more like an Irish women hanging out with Irish friends when out and about in pubs. For safety in numbers, and for a local network that might help out, if in this case, an Irish woman was beaten by a client for example.

And I think there are examples of individuals in the East End at the time that may have known all 5 Canonicals, ....in the form of Social Workers like Barnardo.

Them being known by each other, or them all being known by some individuals, is what Im after here. Charington....he forced the closure of some 200 brothels (as per his biographer), over the course of a few years, and his picture was alledgedly in most brothels as a reminder that he, not so much the police,... was a danger to their operations.

Its the Six Degrees of Separation notion Im suggesting. Kate has a boyfriend John, who knows of a guy, or knows men that know Joe Barnett or Joe Fleming, and they know a woman quite well named Mary Jane Kelly living just off Dorset. John mentions the woman to Kate at some point.
And that results in Kate knowing of Mary Kelly.

Best regards.

[Sam Flynn]

perhaps more like an Irish women hanging out with Irish friends when out and about in pubs. For safety in numbers...
Safety in numbers? Glad you mentioned that, Mike...

2251

The red dots are a rough approximation (based on 1881/91 censuses) of the residents in one small part of (East) Dorset Street, and the blue dots represent about 50 people crammed into Ringer's. Based on this crude visual representation, I can't see that there was much likelihood that the victims were "pub-chums".

Just a reminder that Kelly was the only one known to have been living in that part of Dorset Street - Chapman lived down the far (West) end of the street, whereas Eddowes and the others lived mostly elsewhere.And I think there are examples of individuals in the East End at the time that may have known all 5 Canonicals, ....in the form of Social Workers like Barnardo....in amongst the hundreds of thousands of other residents of the East End?

We must bear in mind the demographics - we're talking about one of the most densely populated slums in British history, not a quaint English hamlet with a couple of cosy pubs facing the village green.Its the Six Degrees of Separation notion Im suggesting. Kate has a boyfriend John, who knows of a guy, or knows men that know Joe Barnett or Joe Fleming......who belonged to another age-group to Kate entirely. It's not just demographics, but the generation gap we have to bear in mind.

[Septic Blue]

On the vagrant issue, with the Canonicals, I would disagree...
You may disagree as much as you like, Michael; but your position is bound to be quite tenuous !!!

...only 3 of the Canon were homeless by virtue of their circumstances at the time of their death....Mary Kelly was not a vagrant, and Liz Stride chose not to use the money she made cleaning her last afternoon for a bed.
"... Mary Kelly was not a vagrant, …"

I think we would gain a much better understanding of these women (Coles, Kelly and Mylett being the possible exceptions), if we stopped referring to them as "prostitutes", "working girls", "sex workers", etc ... and started referring to them as precisely what they were: Vagrants !!!
"… (Coles, Kelly and Mylett being the possible exceptions), …"

Coles, Kelly and Mylett all had the benefit of relative youthfulness. Coles was quite clearly very attractive; and Kelly had a hovel, which she was able to call her own. These three were likely to have been professional street-prostitutes: i.e., resigned to the notion that prostitution was their calling in life; and inclined to reap all of its potential rewards (the obstacle of alcoholism, notwithstanding).

"... only 3 of the Canon were homeless by virtue of their circumstances at the time of their death … and Liz Stride chose not to use the money she made cleaning her last afternoon for a bed."

- A strand of hair can be split into halves

- The halves can then be split into halves; thus rendering quarters

- The quarters can then be split into halves; thus rendering eighths

- The eighths can then be split into halves; thus rendering sixteenths

- The sixteenths can then be split …

This of course, can continue ad infinitum !!!

The women sold themselves to live, to sleep, eat and drink,.... just like modern day street prostitutes sell themselves for booze, food, drugs, or perhaps a place to sleep. And many have boyfriends, who bring people the whores would never have met otherwise, into their social circle.
"... just like modern day street prostitutes …"

A comparison of 1888 with the "modern day" has absolutely no relevance to this issue: None whatsoever !!!

The issue concerns two distinctly different breeds (vagrant dolly-mops and professional street-prostitutes), within the same species: They both lived then, as they both live today !!!

If you were to walk along 'The Evil Quarter-Mile' today, you would be accosted by any number of toothless hags in their forties-or-fifties; each using the same approach: "Oi guv; 'ave ya gawt 20p on ya ???"

Of course, each of them would be seeking substantially more than 20p, while hoping beyond hope that you might be nice enough to give them a couple of quid.

Were you to do just that, and then suggest that ten quid might be forthcoming if they provided 'a favour, or two'; negotiations would likely ensue.
You would also be accosted by any number of more attractive women (but invariably brandishing the look of addiction: dark circles under the eyes; against the backdrop of an extremely pale face) in their late teens, twenties or thirties; each using the same approach: "Marijuana; hashish ???"

Never mind the introduction !!! These women are professional street-prostitutes; and their aim is to turn as many tricks as time (or their impending need for a fix) will permit.

With regard to occupation and social standing: The latter set of women (like Coles, Kelly and Mylett before them) are above all else, prostitutes !!!

But, with regard to occupation and social standing: The former set of women (like Smith, Tabram, Nichols, Chapman, Stride, Eddowes and McKenzie before them) are above all else, vagrants !!!

I will stake my reputation on the claim that Smith, Tabram, Nichols, Chapman, Stride, Eddowes and McKenzie probably held out their hands as beggars before offering their bodies as prostitutes, in nearly every solicitous approach that any one of them ever made.

Let's be realistic: This particular set of vagrant women had much better panhandling prospects, than prostitution prospects. While prostitution may have been potentially more lucrative; the opportunities were probably relatively scarce.

These vagrant women; whose vulnerability provided our man with such easily accessible prey, may have occasionally:

- Swept floors, washed windows and folded laundry: But above all else, they were not charwomen

- Invested in 'stock'; and gone to 'market': But above all else, they were not hawkers

- Sold their bodies at the height of desperation; or in the event of a very lucrative opportunity: But above all else, they were not prostitutes

Above all else, they were vagrants !!!


Colin 2253

[perrymason]

Hi Colin,

My apologies missing your exclusion of Kelly, and I cant argue with your logic. Although I do stand by my assumption on the night of her death, Liz Stride was a vagrant by choice...she had earned her bed that afternoon, and didnt choose to pay for it. Implying she may have had other plans.

What Im trying to get at is that people of all walks of life in a big city have tenuous links with almost everyone immediately around them. These women got to know bartenders, maybe some regular drinkers....likely had repeat business, had their own social circles outside the prostitution racket....like Maria and Mary hanging out that Thursday afternoon. They had boyfriends...who knew other blokes in the area, maybe introduced a few local pals to the ladies,..that kind of association.

It doesnt take to many degrees of separation to surmise that there may have been tangential links to each other through those kinds of relationships. Maybe in some cases, more than tangential. Dont we already know of a case where a witness in one potential Ripper case actually lived with a Ripper victim? Poll and Annie was it?

Best regards Colin.

[Flagg]

Hi Flagg,They weren't in any line of work, for the most part. They would darn clothing, sweep floors, peel vegetables, do laundry, wash dishes, make matchboxes, run errands, hawk cheap nick-nacks, fruit or flowers - whatever came their way. Many of them had small allowances from their partners (past or present), received donations from charities or claimed relief from the "parish" or the church. We know that some of them sponged money from their families periodically.

When all these avenues failed, they might resort to begging from strangers for the price of a single bed. If they had no luck there, they might accost a man for the price of a double bed that they could share. Once in a while they might find a man as desperate for nookie as they were for money, in which case a "knee-trembler" down some dark alley might ensue.

These women were not, by any means, "professional" hookers in the conventional sense, and it's worth remembering Colin/Glenn's "vagrant/bag-lady" analogies in this regard - because that's what most of the Ripper's victims were.

Sam, I'm quite familiar with this case and others. I used "line of work." out of respect.

[Septic Blue]

It doesnt take to many degrees of separation to surmise that there may have been tangential links to each other through those kinds of relationships. Maybe in some cases, more than tangential.

I agree wholeheartedly, Michael: Please carry on !!! But do so in light of the qualifier, which you just used: "may have been".

My reason for coming into this discussion was simply to make the point that we are dealing with two distinctly different breeds: vagrant dolly-mops and professional street-prostitutes. In making that point, I would contend that the former figures much more prominently into the equation than does the latter. In fact, those players that might have fit the description 'professional' (Coles, Kelly, Mylett), were themselves on the verge of vagrancy.

Contrary to common perception; most of the women in question were vagrants entangled in prostitution, rather than prostitutes entangled in vagrancy. I would hope that a distinct difference is readily apparent.

I coach my son's football team (that's the only "football": the one, in which a round white ball is moved with the foot), and am thus committed to two training sessions and one match, each week. Were I to die suddenly, just prior to the beginning of a match, I would hope that my obituary would not lend itself to the impression that I was above all else, a football coach.

People should be seen in light of what they are, above all else; not in light of that which provides a convenient (or perhaps sensational) explanation of events leading to their death. Regardless of what these women were doing at the times of their deaths, they were above all else, vagrants !!!

I believe that this is an especially important component of our field of study, as I am of the impression that while professional street-prostitutes of all shapes, sizes and economic standings were to be found throughout the metropolis; alcoholic, vagrant and completely vulnerable dolly-mops were to be found most readily in the Civil Parish of Christ Church Spitalfields.


Colin 2267

[perrymason]

Hi Colin,

Your analysis seems sound, and I think it points out that there were a plethora of women who lived in the streets who resorted to prostitution, and far fewer who chose to prostitute themselves as an occupation. This either explains his victim choices as just picking from the ripest tree...so to speak...or, that from within that population segment...he chose 3, or 5, or more, specific women.

I have heard of this "Football", thats the name you Brits and Europeans use for "Soccer" isnt it?...:wink2:

Sounds like your a great Dad.

Cheers Colin.

[Ms. Fade]

Apologies if I am repeating points that others have already made!

'Mary' and 'Jane' were both very common first names in the 19th century, and 'Kelly' is still a very common surname, so, although it is interesting to speculate that the canonical victims knew each other, it is possible that it is little more than a coincidence. Street prostitutes used (and still use) pseudonyms - if a streetwalker had been arrested and charged with soliciting on a previous occasion, she would often use a pseudonym if she was arrested again to disguise the fact that she already had a record, because revealing that could lead to a stiffer punishment the second/third/fourth time around.

The poster who commented about the large numbers of people resident in such a small area of the East End is quite right. I'm a historian, and I have recently been doing some research into my own family history - some of my ancestors were living in the East End of London in the 1880s, and when I examined the census returns, it soon became obvious that the property my ancestors lived in was also home to many other families. I suspect that if the canonical victims did know each other, it was in passing, in the same way that you might often see someone at the train station, or in the pub, but not know them to speak to or be friendly with.

An interesting discussion!

Ms.F

[ianincleveland]

interesting thread.Last night i was at my girlfriends local pub,a village about 7 miles from here.Now theres a few people i know in there to chat to who i know by name,others i on nodding terms with and some i dont know or remember at all.Now this place has a population of around 1200.I might know 20 of them very well,be on speaking/nodding terms with a further 100 and am clueless about the rest.Its possible any of the victims were on nodding/speaking terms,like Eddowes and Kelly with Eddowes using Kellys name.but i dont think they were best of friends else after Chapmans death the other 3 would be beating a path to the nearest police station suggesting they could be in danger.

this is the main reason i always rejected the blackmail theory of Knight. After Chapman had died theyd have been going to the police showing a connection.

so yes a couple may have been on nodding terms but i feel very little else

[Sam Flynn]

Its possible any of the victims were on nodding/speaking terms,like Eddowes and Kelly with Eddowes using Kellys name.Strictly speaking, she didn't, Ian - both "Mary Ann Kelly of 6 Fashion Street" and "Jane Kelly of 6 Dorset Street" aren't too far off superficially, but they are incorrect on a number of counts.

The East End had a superabundance of Irish immigrants, with many Kellys amongst them. Indeed, Eddowes "significant other" at the time of her death was John Kelly, and she'd sometimes go by the name of "Kate Kelly" accordingly - her choice of "Kelly" as an alias would thus have been quite natural.

Add to that the fact that both "Mary" and "Jane" were extremely common names at that time - rivaled only, perhaps, by Elizabeth and Anne - then it becomes quickly apparent that "{Something} Kelly", "Mary {Something} Kelly" or "{Something} Jane Kelly" would have been fairly obvious choices as aliases.

[ianincleveland]

Strictly speaking, she didn't, Ian - both "Mary Ann Kelly of 6 Fashion Street" and "Jane Kelly of 6 Dorset Street" aren't too far off superficially, but they are incorrect on a number of counts.

The East End had a superabundance of Irish immigrants, with many Kellys amongst them. Indeed, Eddowes "significant other" at the time of her death was John Kelly, and she'd sometimes go by the name of "Kate Kelly" accordingly - her choice of "Kelly" as an alias would thus have been quite natural.

Add to that the fact that both "Mary" and "Jane" were extremely common names at that time - rivaled only, perhaps, by Elizabeth and Anne - then it becomes quickly apparent that "{Something} Kelly", "Mary {Something} Kelly" or "{Something} Jane Kelly" would have been fairly obvious choices as aliases.



Thats very possible and could be why Mary Jane Kelly cant be traced anywhere in that it was an alias name

[Sam Flynn]

Indeed so, Ian :)

[Howard Brown]

I will stake my reputation on the claim that Smith, Tabram, Nichols, Chapman, Stride, Eddowes and McKenzie probably held out their hands as beggars before offering their bodies as prostitutes, in nearly every solicitous approach that any one of them ever made. --Colin

I wouldn't. Since these women functioned and socialized within a common prole social strata and were "vagrant" or in between menial jobs ( great point,by the way,Colin...), its less likely to me that they would even think or attempt to "ask" for something from someone within that same social milieu without offering something in return at the same time: i.e.,a kneetrembler for 2d. Why? The chances are greater that one of the women would get something in return and probably more quickly with a "give and take" proposition. Factor in the "experience" that the fortysomething victims had with what begging got them as opposed to what turning tricks could. Hard to imagine a poor person successfuly begging off of someone whose meager & hard earned earnings were intended to feed and house their kin.



The point about Coles,Kelly and Mylett rings true for me.

[Suzi]

Hi all-
A great conversation here- OK- Mary Jane,Mary Ann etc were very common names see many Music Hall songs of the time... 'Oh shout hooray for Mary Ann, I'm going to get wed' being a good example.

Kate was probably tired and emotional most of the time since she got back from 'opping with Kelly and to use a 'soubriquet' would be an easy way out and also a good way to disappear into the ether...as long as you could remember which particular 'soubriquet' you had used when you went to pick up whatever you'd dropped off at 'Uncles'

I think the term 'Professional' prostitute applied to many at the time but maybe there weren't that many at the 'top of their trade ' so to speak (Certainly not in the East End!) -I can't see it applied to any of the C5 anyway- if we have to stick with that phrase.

These poor dabs looked at that option as a way to earn 4d, not as a 'profession', after all, as Sam said they were often content,and obviously happier cleaning rooms,sewing little bits of this and that etc etc.

The thing about bag-ladies is a great image of course- didn't someone describe Kate as a snail- carrying her life and home on her back- love 'er.

Failing that you could always be 'taken poorly' and spend a few nights free and gratis in the Infirmary or do a bit of oakum picking -if push came to shove- (a serious shove IMHO!)...Either way you were out of the rain and cold!

I reckon a quick "trembler" up the alley was a last ditch attempt to keep things that way.

......'Jolly bonnets' or not!!!!..............Incidently......where did THAT bonnet come from??? .......and how did Kate get so jiggy on no money??? (When you find that one out let me know!!)

Suz xx

[protohistorian]

I'd be more surprised if they didn't know each other to be honest. There was a much stronger community spirit in general in those days, and for these women, living in the same area, living out similar lives, it is highly likely they knew each other. But I think you could've picked out a group of 5 or so prostitutes from the east end at random at that time and found some link between them. I don't think it holds too much significance myself.

I agree. These women may have been casual associates by virtue of plying the same trade occassionally within the same geographic area, but beyond that it seems a push of imagination. There would have been other women within the sorority of casual prostitutes in Whitechapel, equally connected. I have found nothing to suggest more.

[Suzi]

Without a doubt these women knew each other by sight, well maybe as passing drinking partners in the pubs various (and in the area they were legion!- three in Dorset St alone!!)...they MUST have known each other!!

Come on how many of us have used a regular pub -and OK- you don't know the names of the 'regulars'... la la la- but you know things like ...'Oh, you know 'im- he's that bloke who knows/lived with whats'er/is name,down the road behind the shops,over the fish shop, with that woman,with the funny hair, you know the one' ............'Oh 'Im.. the one with the 'tache?...nice bloke, bought me a pint'!!! etc etc .............

So, maybe not by name (names- various) but they knew each other without a doubt!!!!!.......maybe like Caroline Maxwell 'knew' Mary.......Hmmmmmmmmm

[Sam Flynn]

Think about it, though, Suzi... Nichols had spent much of her life in the years leading up to her murder outside the district, primarily in Lambeth, until she moves to Whitechapel in the early part of 1888. Stride also had spent a significant proportion of her (London) life outside the district, eventually moving into Whitechapel, albeit to St George's East, rather than Spitalfields itself. Kelly, as we (think we) know, spent less than two years in Spitalfields; prior to which she was briefly knocking about Ratcliffe and - allegedly - the West End.

Chapman and Eddowes seem to have been the longest-standing residents of Spitalfields, but neither appear to have been full-time prostitutes, and both were in "quasi-stable" relationships in the years leading up to their deaths. Furthermore, whilst Chapman seems to have been practically rooted to Dorset Street, Eddowes and John Kelly seem to have favoured Flowery Dean.

It's interesting to note that, in the case of the first group (Nichols, Stride and Kelly), many of those who came forward to identify the bodies, or to give information to the police and press, were from outside Spitalfields itself.

[Suzi]

OK good points Sam- Of course- so had Annie and who knows, at the end of the day- all of 'em (Gawd knows where Mary was probably looking at the sun at times- in a puddle probably....or was that the moon in 'Hobson's Choice' ? :))


'Longest standing' ?!!!!!!!!!! eeeeeeek!!! Blimey 1/6d at least!!


Seriously.....


...... the pub thing is true though isn't it- Mind you once you start on Ratcliffe Highway (cue for a song) Gawd knows where you went,how you went,who you with and why you went in the first place!!! (That is if you had the slightest memory of it at all!....... apart from the odd farthing polished up a treat found in your drawers!.......Hmmmmmmmmm)



Exactly though FULL TIME isn't what we're talking about here is it- if it was they wouldn't have been grubbing about for the odd 2d or 4d!!!....let alone 4/6d for the rent!.......unless they were pretty poor 'full-timers'


Interesting though as you say there was a good 'turn out' at the funerals Hmmmmmmmm

The 'quasi-stable' wouldn't be 'The Shed' would it..............

Suz xx

[Sam Flynn]

the pub thing is true though isn't it
Not so sure about that, either, Suzi. The area was littered with pubs, as a glance at the 1885 map "The Modern Plague of London" will illustrate:

4371

The red blobs indicate one or more drinking-holes. I've highlighted the area we're most interested in by drawing a green box around it - plenty of choice there, whichever side of Commercial Street you lived on. For Kelly and Stride-watchers (pre-1888), it's also clear that there were plenty of pubs to choose from either side of Commercial Road as well.

Apologies for the poor quality of the image, but it was a rush job.

[The English Gardener]

Damn, I just wittered about this in another thread. I'll c & p it here, as it's more than pertinent here."
[if you assume they knew each other]"Then you must also assume that level of aquaintance to be with absolutely everybody who lived in the area. It's not nearly enough to make assumptions like this. They could have known each other, that's for certain. But "could" and "must have" are a long long way removed from each other. If their lives did indeed crisscross, then they also crisscrossed with thousands of others. And, as Sam has pointed out, The Ten Bells was only one of the many pubs and beer houses in the immediate area. Any directory will show how many you're looking at. You might also consult any OS map of the area- bearing in mund that only the pubs are shown. As Sam has already mentioned, Dorset Street alone had two pubs {The Blue Coat Boy and The Horn Of Plenty} and one beer house {The Britannia}. There is absolutely no evidence that any of the C5 knew each other, and the sheer weight of the odds against such intimacy mitigates against it. With no evidence to even imply aquaintance, and every reason to doubt aquaintance, I entirely fail to see why anyone would consider it even likely that any 2 of the 5 women we are talking about here knew each other. The odds are stacked hugely against it. And the odds against all 5 knowing each other are, correspondingly, vanishingly small."
Just my bit.

[Mrs Darrell]

I saw a programme a few years ago where some scientist used a computer to suggest where the ripper may have lived- and the conlusion was Flower and Dean Street. I wonder if he chose his victims in advance- perhaps seeing the woman around the vicinity and noting their behaviour?

[anna]

Suzi is absolutely spot on!

OF COURSE they knew each other.....no doubt about it...


Others have such a problem accepting the obvious.IMHO,:lol:

[Nothing to see]

I saw a programme a few years ago where some scientist used a computer to suggest where the ripper may have lived- and the conlusion was Flower and Dean Street. I wonder if he chose his victims in advance- perhaps seeing the woman around the vicinity and noting their behaviour?

OK This info comes from Paul Begg's " JTR The Facts" p486. Dorset St features prominently in the story as most of the victims lived in Dorset St. Chapman at 30 and when killed 35 (Crossingham's); Stride at at 38 with Kidney; Eddowes used 26 as an occasional doss; Kelly in Miller's Ct.

That leaves Nicholls.

[Nothing to see]

Did the victims know each other? It's quite possible, but not definite that they did. Using each other's names as aliases I think would have been common enough then. I mean, Kelly isn't exactly an uncommon name.

I can't prove they didn't know each other but it's not enough to base that dimwitted Royal/Freemason/doctor scenario on.

IMO:tophat:

[Sam Flynn]

OK This info comes from Paul Begg's " JTR The Facts" p486. Dorset St features prominently in the story as most of the victims lived in Dorset St. Chapman at 30 and when killed 35 (Crossingham's); Stride at at 38 with Kidney; Eddowes used 26 as an occasional doss; Kelly in Miller's Ct.
... but - Chapman and Kelly apart - not at the same time. That's the point.

Besides, there are a couple of points that need bringing out in this connection:

1. Michael Kidney might have lived on Dorset Street at the time of Stride's inquest, but there's no record that he lived there before, or that Stride had lived there at all. Both she and Kidney are known to have lived together in Devonshire Street, St George's East, for some years - but, just as the counties of Dorset and Devon are separated by some distance, so too (comparatively speaking) were the East End streets named after them.

2. The idea that Catherine Eddowes dossed in the "shed" at the front of 26 Dorset Street is probably a myth. Even if it weren't, it's certain that the "shed" was used by McCarthy as a store-room (for barrows, amongst other things) at the time Kelly resided in the room at the back.

3. There is no hint of any evidence that Polly Nichols ever lived in Dorset Street.

4. That leaves only Kelly and Chapman. These may have been contemporaries in Dorset Street, but they lived at opposite ends and were a generation apart from one another.

[DVV]

[QUOTE=Sam Flynn;78168
Michael Kidney might have lived on Dorset Street at the time of Stride's inquest, but there's no record that he lived there before, or that Stride had lived there at all.
[/QUOTE]

Hi Sam,
Begg actually mentions Stride and Kidney living together in Dorset Street in 1885.
Is that a mistake?

Amitiés,
David

[Sam Flynn]

Hi Sam,
Begg actually mentions Stride and Kidney living together in Dorset Street in 1885. Is that a mistake?
I believe so, Dave - and an easy one to make, not that I'm suggesting that Paul Begg was the originator! Dorset... Devon... I'm sure that the two have been confused in quite different contexts than just the Ripper murders :)

The only evidence I'm aware of points to their having been fairly settled in Devonshire Street from 1885 until mid/late 1888.

[richardnunweek]

Hello,
To answer the question 'Did all the victims know each other', one must ask the question' Was Jack a random killer, or was Mjk the reason for the killings?
If the former... proberly No, at least not personally, but if the later, i would suggest that all of the victims before Kelly, were known to Mary Jane. and each victim in turn was more known to her, ie, Tabram- Eddowes.
When a series of murders like the Whitechapel ones occur, and the last victim is different then the others in many respects, and there are domestic issues at hand, one must start from that murder, and work backwards,to obtain a possible solution.
I feel Bruce Paley is the nearest to date.
Regards Richard.

[DVV]

Thanks for the correction, so, Sam.

Hi Richard,
Mary Kelly may well have been the "key" victim. But that doesn't imply that the other victims knew her, nor it implies necessarily that Barnett was Jack.
Fish-porter versus plasterer!

Amitiés,
David

[perrymason]

To my eye the key murder in the Canonical Series is the one that suggested a reason for creating one in the first place, its got the "standards"/requisite elements/signatures that remain consistent...without Liz Stride, for 5 weeks and 3 consecutive murders.

Theres really nothing that would suggest they knew each other, only that at least one may have known her killer. I think on the basis of evidence, only Mary Kellys murder has overtures of a personal relationship of some kind between killer and prey.....and anyone who has suggested that that same personal killer killed 4 women first just to scare her before killing, is someone that enjoys weak plotted, modern slasher horror movies.

Hey...just thought, maybe Mary Kellys death is the LVP equivalent of a modern horror flick chick death, she is in her underwear when the killer arrives, and she may have opened the door for him.

Best regards all.

[Sam Flynn]

Theres really nothing that would suggest they knew each other, only that at least one may have known her killer.This "General discussion thread" was about whether the victims knew one another, Mike - not whether they knew their killer. It's certainly not a thread on the very specific subject of whether Kelly knew her killer (which would belong on a Kelly thread), still less the contentious subject of how "different" her murder was compared to the others.

Whether the victims might have known their killer is an interesting enough subject in itself, so you may consider starting another thread on that very topic. Let's keep this one focused on whether they knew each other, please.

No disrespect meant, but could we not discuss these aspects further here? They're way off-topic.

[perrymason]

This "General discussion thread" was about whether the victims knew one another, Mike - not whether they knew their killer. It's certainly not a thread on the very specific subject of whether Kelly knew her killer (which would belong on a Kelly thread), still less the contentious subject of how "different" her murder was compared to the others.

Whether the victims might have known their killer is an interesting enough subject in itself, so you may consider starting another thread on that very topic. Let's keep this one focused on whether they knew each other, please.

No disrespect meant, but could we not discuss these aspects further here? They're way off-topic.

I understand your point Gareth, but a possible connection of killer and prey in even one Canonical murder is a part of the question contextually....if he knew one, did he know others in the series, and if so, was that in part because some of the victims knew each other.

Not intending to redirect at all...just suggesting that there is some proof that the above may be applicable here....any connection of Jack to any single victim opens the possibility that he knew more of them, which then begs the question, why these particular women? What link might they have had to each other, or with him?

I know that one commonality for all 5 can be eliminated, they wouldnt have met Mary in a doss house, she had a bed and a room, unlike all the others. Ill leave it be though.

Cheers Sam.

[Sam Flynn]

Not intending to redirect at all...But others might, Mike - in which case this somewhat focused thread is apt to become another rehash of "The Mystery of the 9th November" all over again.why these particular women?... yet another subject in itself, almost certainly quite divorced from whether they knew one another.What link might they have had to each other, or with him?Given that the likelihood of the victims knowing each other was risibly small, we can treat the question of whether the killer knew only one of the victims separately. It's a palpably different question anyway.

If you have a certain victim in mind (which you might well have ;)), then that ought to be discussed on her dedicated board, not a "General victim discussion" thread.

Here to help :)

[Mr.Hyde]

One of the things that I always found attractive about Stephen Knight's Walter Sickert/William Gull/Netley theory was that the victims were not randomly chosen but were killed for a purpose. This explains why the murders started and, then ended. The latter ppoint is interesting since once they have started serial killers typically do not stop until they are caught.

I believe to suppport his theory he calims that the women all came from a very small area and drank in the same pub. Is this true? Is there any evidence that they did know each other, except for the fact that living in a small area they probably did have some social interactions?

Bill S

Heaps.
These were not random murders.Blackmail was the reason for at least the last three murders.

[Sam Flynn]

Tricky to find a reason for blackmailing three women who almost certainly didn't know each other.

[Nothing to see]

Tricky to find a reason for blackmailing three women who almost certainly didn't know each other.

And what would a blackmailer want from them anyway? Their bodies? U'm I thought they were selling them anyway.

[DVV]

And what would a blackmailer want from them anyway?

The killer wanted Barnett's claypipe, no doubt.
But driven out of his mind by his awful glut, he incredibly forgot it on the chimney.
You can't imagine how depressed he was after that.
Until he killed Claypipe Alice, of course.

[Nothing to see]

Maybe they were all secret pipe smokers. That's how they knew each other. Went to the same chandler's shop for their ounce of baccy maybe? Jack was lurking, decided he didn't like women smoking. :scratchchin:

[Mr.Hyde]

Tricky to find a reason for blackmailing three women who almost certainly didn't know each other.

Highly likely that all 5 CVs knew each other.

[Nothing to see]

Highly likely that all 5 CVs knew each other.

So what's your % for highly likely? 90, 80, 75? It's possible that they knew each other but that's as far as I'm prepared to go. Highly likely, to me, means you have something to back that statement up. I'm interested to hear your theory.

[DVV]

Maybe they were all secret pipe smokers. That's how they knew each other. Went to the same chandler's shop for their ounce of baccy maybe? Jack was lurking, decided he didn't like women smoking. :scratchchin:

Exactly, Nothing to See,
and that's why he savagely cut their windclaypipes.

Amitiés,
David

[Mr.Hyde]

So what's your % for highly likely? 90, 80, 75? It's possible that they knew each other but that's as far as I'm prepared to go. Highly likely, to me, means you have something to back that statement up. I'm interested to hear your theory.

100%.
http://forum.casebook.org/showthread.php?p=75970#post75970
Post #10.
Also links through other street addresses.
Feel free to check my listings through my profile.Will save cross posting.

[Sam Flynn]

Highly likely that all 5 CVs knew each other.
It is highly UN-likely that they knew each other, for reasons (NB: not hunches or beliefs) explained on this thread.

[Mr.Hyde]

It is highly UN-likely that they knew each other, for reasons (NB: not hunches or beliefs) explained on this thread.

Good to see that you have spent less than 26 minutes reviewing the facts.

[Sam Flynn]

Good to see that you have spent less than 26 minutes reviewing the facts.
I have spent years learning about social conditions in Late Victorian London, at least five of which have been taken up in avid study of the Ripper case. Five years might not sound like much, but it's certainly more than 26 minutes.

[Mr.Hyde]

I have spent years learning about social conditions in Late Victorian London, at least five of which have been taken up in avid study of the Ripper case. Five years might not sound like much, but it's certainly more than 26 minutes.

Which makes your opinion much greater than Paul Begg's or anyone else.

[Mr.Hyde]

Tricky to find a reason for blackmailing three women who almost certainly didn't know each other.

I don't think you get it!
Last 3 CVs were blackmailing JTR.
Plenty of evidence to support their knowing each other.

[Malcolm X]

I don't think you get it!
Last 3 CVs were blackmailing JTR.
Plenty of evidence to support their knowing each other.

come on then tell us all

[Sam Flynn]

Which makes your opinion much greater than Paul Begg's or anyone else.I looked at the facts and derived an eminently reasonable conclusion from them - it is not my "opinion" at all. I very much doubt that Paul Begg's opinion (which I value highly) is that the victims knew one another, still less that they were embroiled in any conspiracy.

That most of the victims had even a vague connection with Dorset Street at one time or another is, in itself, by no means a fact. There were some 900 people crammed into that street, so it doesn't even follow that they'd have known each other if they'd lived there at the same time - which they emphatically did not.

[halomanuk]

I don't think you get it!
Last 3 CVs were blackmailing JTR.
Plenty of evidence to support their knowing each other.

Can you list the evidence ?

[perrymason]

I cant say for sure that this is evidence of knowledge of one Canonical by another, or just a very odd coincidence, but the fact that the last two women who died called themselves Mary Kelly on the night they died is suggestive.

Kate had pawned Johns boots as Jane Kelly of 6 Dorset Street, then gave Hutt the name of Mary Kelly of Flower and Dean or Fashion St...I dont recall which....when being released from Bishopsgate. All three of Marys names were used in some form between the 2 "aliases"....and the name of the street she lived on with the digit "6".

Perhaps John knew Barnett, or they knew Mary, or maybe its just as I said, very odd but benign.

Best regards

[Sam Flynn]

Kate had pawned Johns boots as Jane Kelly of 6 Dorset Street, then gave Hutt the name of Mary Kelly of Flower and Dean or Fashion St...I dont recall which....when being released from Bishopsgate. All three of Marys names were used in some form between the 2 "aliases".If her "spouse" had pawned the boots under the name of "John Smith", and was later taken in for drunkenness and discharged under the name of "Tom Smith, 6 Thrawl Street" would we read anything "odd" into that?

[perrymason]

If her "spouse" had pawned the boots under the name of "John Smith", and was later taken in for drunkenness and discharged under the name of "Tom Smith, 6 Thrawl Street" would we read anything "odd" into that?

First off no-one would care about someones alias involved in a D&D Sam....we are looking at an unsolved murder.:wink2:

Yes, she may have just thought them up...she may have just used Johns surname and just added all three of Marys names and her street in the 2 versions coincidentally.

If the circumstances were that we knew what Kate had been up to her last 24 hours, that we knew why she turned left out of Bishopsgate when to find her "husband" was a right turn, that we knew she had used those same names and streets before, or that the next woman murdered after her by Jack the Ripper wasnt called Mary Jane Kelly of 13 Millers Court, 26 Dorset Street.....Id be inclined to pay it less attention as well.

Best regards Gareth.


editted to add: Its interesting when you consider the name she gave when she was being booked, "nothing"...maybe she behaved like a clean slate and used names as she felt she needed....just a damn interesting coincidence when coupled with Ms C5.

[Mr.Hyde]

I looked at the facts and derived an eminently reasonable conclusion from them - it is not my "opinion" at all. I very much doubt that Paul Begg's opinion (which I value highly) is that the victims knew one another, still less that they were embroiled in any conspiracy.

That most of the victims had even a vague connection with Dorset Street at one time or another is, in itself, by no means a fact. There were some 900 people crammed into that street, so it doesn't even follow that they'd have known each other if they'd lived there at the same time - which they emphatically did not.

Yep-"eminently",etc,etc-that is not your "opinion"?Suggest rereading Paul Begg.
May I suggest any more questions aimed at me be done after a review of my postings,particularly very recent ones on this topic.Might take more than 26 minutes.

[Jon Guy]

Mr Hyde

"Nichols,Chapman and Kelly are all reported as living in,or frequenting 35 Dorset Street."

Where is it reported that Nichols and Kelly had a connection to Crossinghams ?

[Mr.Hyde]

http://www.casebook.org/press_reports/echo/18881110.html
Think that is what you are after.
Again-amongst my previous posts.

[Sam Flynn]

Yep-"eminently",etc,etc-that is not your "opinion"?No - those were facts.Suggest rereading Paul Begg.Suggest you read the facts I posted earlier, or - better still - find out for yourself by reading more than one source.

[Mr.Hyde]

Yes,your Eminence!

[Sam Flynn]

Yes,your Eminence!
You'll go far.

[Mr.Hyde]

Yep.Aus$8-10 million screenplay.
Honestly reckon I know who JTR was.

[Jon Guy]

http://www.casebook.org/press_reports/echo/18881110.html
Think that is what you are after.
Again-amongst my previous posts.

Thanks for the link, I had seen that newspaper story, thought you had something else.

Couldn`t see anything on Nichols and 35 Dorset St?

Interestingly, according to Sugden, Kelly lived down Paternoster Row, which may be where the story of 35 Dorset St comes from as the entrance to Paternoster Row was next to Crossinghams.

[Mr.Hyde]

Thanks for the link, I had seen that newspaper story, thought you had something else.

Couldn`t see anything on Nichols and 35 Dorset St?

Interestingly, according to Sugden, Kelly lived down Paternoster Row, which may be where the story of 35 Dorset St comes from as the entrance to Paternoster Row was next to Crossinghams.

http://www.casebook.org/victims/polly.html
Sorry about that-5am here,now.Check out the death certificate.
If you cross reference all 5 CVs and where they lived you will have a fair picture of what I mean.Add in where they drank,etc.

[Cap'n Jack]

I have yet to see any good or valid reason why all of the victims were not known to each other, on a nodding basis where names were known.
I think that concept to be without flaw.
They shared a trade, they lived in the same small area, they drank in the same pubs... and no doubt they served the same customers.
But I fail in regard to a customer blackmailing a prostitute.
Surely it always happens the other way around?

[Mr.Hyde]

I have yet to see any good or valid reason why all of the victims were not known to each other, on a nodding basis where names were known.
I think that concept to be without flaw.
They shared a trade, they lived in the same small area, they drank in the same pubs... and no doubt they served the same customers.
But I fail in regard to a customer blackmailing a prostitute.
Surely it always happens the other way around?

Yep!JTR was being blackmailed.Not the other way round.
Think you got sidetracked by "His Eminence".

[Roy Corduroy]

Again-amongst my previous posts.

Hi Mr. Hyde,

Yes I have been reading your posts, including back on the Prostitutes 1881 thread where you posit Mary Kelly was a local woman. Your solution seems to do with the victims knowing each other and their killer, if I read between the lines correctly. Sort of an interwoven situation.

You drop a little bit here, a little bit there. Like feeding birds. Why not start a big post and lay out your scenario to the inth degree? Let the hammer down. :pleased:

Roy

[c.d.]

Hi Mr. Hyde,

If Jack was being blackmailed by prostitutes who allegedly knew his indentity, it would seem to imply that Jack was capable of paying them more money than they could get by turning him in and claiming the reward money. Would this not be true?

c.d.

[Simon Wood]

Hi Mr Hyde,

If I was Kelly [one of five prostitutes involved in a blackmail plot], and one, two, three and then four of my number were murdered in gruesome fashion, I think I might smell a rat and be out of Dodge City quicker than Puffed Wheat from a gun.

Regards,

Simon

[John Bennett]

Don't you think that if the victims knew each other, one of the friends or partners of the latter victims (John Kelly, Joseph Barnett, Michael Kidney, to name the 'closest' ones) would have mentioned something about it?

If you were living with your girlfriend/partner, surely they would have been affected in some way (even if it was just to say "oh heavens, Kathy's been murdered") by the death of somebody familiar to them?

And yet nobody mentioned anything like this.

PS. Apologies if this has been mentioned already.

[Mr.Hyde]

Hi Mr Hyde,

If I was Kelly [one of five prostitutes involved in a blackmail plot], and one, two, three and then four of my number were murdered in gruesome fashion, I think I might smell a rat and be out of Dodge City quicker than Puffed Wheat from a gun.

Regards,

Simon

Possibly why MAK was behind in her rent.Not game to go out.

[Mr.Hyde]

Hi Mr. Hyde,

If Jack was being blackmailed by prostitutes who allegedly knew his indentity, it would seem to imply that Jack was capable of paying them more money than they could get by turning him in and claiming the reward money. Would this not be true?

c.d.

Yes.In the minds of the blackmailers.Think the reward was 100 pounds initially.

[richardnunweek]

Hello John,
It was rumoured that Mjk, was aquainted with Annie Chapman, although only oral history, what you suggest seems logical, however it is quite possible that Mary did mention the fact that the women were known to her, at least to Barnett, just because he does not annnounce it to the media, does not say he was unaware of that, he may have had reasons why he never mentioned it.
For instance if Lottie was telling the truth in Kit watkins interview, when she refers to Mary having a bad dream, it is almost certain that Barnett would have been familiar with that occurance, especially as the dream refered to a prophecy of her murder, and he surely would have been the first to have heard of Marys distress, yet no mention was made, again reasons for keeping quite perhaps?.
I am not suggesting that all of the women knew each other, but a possiblity that Mary was aware who they were.
Regards Richard.

[Mr.Hyde]

Hi Mr. Hyde,

Yes I have been reading your posts, including back on the Prostitutes 1881 thread where you posit Mary Kelly was a local woman. Your solution seems to do with the victims knowing each other and their killer, if I read between the lines correctly. Sort of an interwoven situation.

You drop a little bit here, a little bit there. Like feeding birds. Why not start a big post and lay out your scenario to the inth degree? Let the hammer down. :pleased:

Roy

Just spent a fair amount of time replying.Hasn't come up.Really.Will redo later this afternoon.7.20am in the Land of Oz.

Dooh!Don't know what happened-has come up now.Doesn't do much for my credibility!

[Mr.Hyde]

Hi Mr. Hyde,

Yes I have been reading your posts, including back on the Prostitutes 1881 thread where you posit Mary Kelly was a local woman. Your solution seems to do with the victims knowing each other and their killer, if I read between the lines correctly. Sort of an interwoven situation.

You drop a little bit here, a little bit there. Like feeding birds. Why not start a big post and lay out your scenario to the inth degree? Let the hammer down. :pleased:

Roy

Thanks for that Roy,
You are right!
I am in a difficult position.
Firstly I'm a newbie and not taken seriously.
Secondly I have a substantial financial interest at stake-not just for myself,but for my screenwriter.
I have explained that in two previous posts.In fact I did so in an email before I joined.Frankly,I am looking for a researcher-Riding and London/Whitechapel.
I believe that after CVs 1 & 2 were murdered,CV5 and then CV4 knew what was going on.Also CV3.Blackmail!That is, the last 3CVs fell in order due to circumstance.
I apologise for "feeding the birds"-think I've been above board though.Reckon most of my posts have been fair dinkum and informative,bit of humor,got roped in a bit this morning.
Probably given away more than most people in my situation.I am 100% sure who JTR was-I could be wrong.
I have specific information that I am after.I am after the truth.Not going ahead with screenplay unless I am damn sure.
Again,anyone with research skills and location are welcome to PM me.Not asking anyone to help for free.
Thanks Again,
Dave.
PS.My scriptwriter has been pretty much extremely interested since August 2008.

[John Bennett]

Hello John,
It was rumoured that Mjk, was aquainted with Annie Chapman, although only oral history, what you suggest seems logical, however it is quite possible that Mary did mention the fact that the women were known to her, at least to Barnett, just because he does not annnounce it to the media, does not say he was unaware of that, he may have had reasons why he never mentioned it.


'Oral history' can be a dodgy source, Richard. Check out Mary Ann Cox's neice's recollections to Dan Farson about the Kelly murder (in his 1972 book), for example.

However, we have here a case of 'just because it wasn't said, doesn't mean it didn't happen', in which case, anything is possible.

JB

[Jon Guy]

Check out the death certificate.


Hadn`t noticed that before, nice one.

[Mr.Hyde]

I've read your posts.
What do you make of it?

[John Bennett]

I believe the matter of Polly Nichols' death certificate came up on another recent thread.

The movements of Nichols prior to her death are pretty well documented, with 56 Flower and Dean Street and 18 Thrawl Street being her last known 'addresses'.

Annie Chapman was a resident of 35 Dorset Street. The Nichols and Chapman inquests overlapped considerably. Clerical error?

[Sam Flynn]

The movements of Nichols prior to her death are pretty well documented, with 56 Flower and Dean Street and 18 Thrawl Street being her last known 'addresses'.Quite so, John.Annie Chapman was a resident of 35 Dorset Street. The Nichols and Chapman inquests overlapped considerably. Clerical error?Probably. Whether it was or wasn't, it was still wrong and - in any case - Kelly had moved out of 35 Dorset Street (or - more likely - the adjacent Paternoster Row) in 1887, ending up in Miller's Court via Brick Lane.

[Roy Corduroy]

Thanks for the reply, Dave

I am looking for a researcher-Riding and London/Whitechapel.
I apologise for "feeding the birds"

No apology needed, Dave, and good luck with your project. Looks like you are gaining some consults already.

Roy

ps You consults. Was the prostitute Mary Ann Kelly in the 81 census ruled out as being the victim? Or not.

[Mr.Hyde]

If she was "dead" in the 1891 census.........

[Mr.Hyde]

Thanks Roy.
Motive for GH testimony days after-with MAK dead,GH inherits the "tontine".

[Sam Flynn]

I have yet to see any good or valid reason why all of the victims were not known to each other, on a nodding basis where names were known.
Perhaps some visuals might help, AP? This is what Dorset Street looks like today:

5185

I have drawn precisely 825 dots along its length, which is of the order of the number of people living in that street in 1888. You can just make out two yellow dots that represent Annie Chapman and Mary Kelly.

I could repeat a similar exercise for Flower & Dean Street, Thrawl Street and Devonshire Street (St George's East), where the other victims were known to live at the time, but that would drive us all dotty. And that's without the dottiness of the multitude of other streets in between.

[Cap'n Jack]

Sending visuals to a blind man is never going to help, Sam, but I appreciate the gesture even when I can't see it.
How many of those dots are prostitutes?
How many pimps?
Do you have a big red dot for Jack 'Carthy?

[Sam Flynn]

How many of those dots are prostitutes?Oooh... about 30 tops, I'd guess, AP - vocationally speaking, that is. As to "circumstance-driven" streetwalkers, vagrants or occasional prostitutes - like Dark Annie - a few more.

Pimps - hardly any, if any at all. Carrion needs no butcher.

[John Bennett]

Another example:

Flower and Dean Street had a total of 31 common lodging houses in 1888, registered to have 1127 lodgers in total.

Considering it is reckoned that many such places illegally exceeded their quota, who are you going to 'know' out of that lot?

[Mr.Hyde]

Oooh... about 30 tops, I'd guess, AP - vocationally speaking, that is. As to "circumstance-driven" streetwalkers, vagrants or occasional prostitutes - like Dark Annie - a few more.

Pimps - hardly any, if any at all. Carrion needs no butcher.

No offence intended.
Your last sentence-Carrion needs no butcher-straight out of JTR's philosophy.
Ever read Spinoza and Carlyle?
Lenin and Hitler did.
Again,no offence meant-pure synchronicity!

[Nothing to see]

Another example:

Flower and Dean Street had a total of 31 common lodging houses in 1888, registered to have 1127 lodgers in total.

Considering it is reckoned that many such places illegally exceeded their quota, who are you going to 'know' out of that lot?

Good point and I thought the dots were informative. So many people living, maybe 'existing' is a better word, on a hand-to-mouth casual manner, moving constantly. Again, I think it's possible the pros knew each other but I can't prove or disprove it. If there's definitive, absolute proof that there was a link between two or more of them, then that would change the mix. But...until that proof is offered to scrutiny, then I'll continue to believe what is a reasonable theory: possible they could have known each other, not probable.

[Mascara & Paranoia]

I doubt they knew each other, or if they did they just walked past one another every once in a while. That's the same as expecting me to know everyone in the area I live, and it's not as big or as crammed as Whitechapel was back in the 1888. In some of the old pictures there's hundreds (probably literally) of people in one shot of a street or a market or whatever.

[jason_c]

They may have known each other by sight.

There is no record of any victim having mentioned a friend being killed by the Ripper. Kelly told no-one that a friend of hers had been killed by JtR. Neither did Eddowes, Stride or Chapman.

[Nothing to see]

I doubt they knew each other, or if they did they just walked past one another every once in a while. That's the same as expecting me to know everyone in the area I live, and it's not as big or as crammed as Whitechapel was back in the 1888. In some of the old pictures there's hundreds (probably literally) of people in one shot of a street or a market or whatever.

Agreed. I walked those streets in Sept/Oct last year and to think of that mass of humanity existing in that small area is mind boggling. There were so many people. And their lives were so fluid. It's not like they put down roots and bought or rented places to live. Their lives were day to day, survival. I don't accept the Stephen Knight and everyone else who's jumped on the bandwagon idea of the doctor/Freemason/ royal conspiracy.

Because, so far, that's the only theory about the pros knowing each other that's had any legs.

[Sam Flynn]

Again, I think it's possible the pros knew each other but I can't prove or disprove it.Add to that the fact that few of these women were "pros" in the conventional sense (i.e. they would not have met up with fellow "Ello, dearies" on a regular basis, or shared the same "patch" night after night) and the "reasons" for their being anything other than faces in an enormous crowd become ever more difficult to defend.

[Nothing to see]

Add to that the fact that few of these women were "pros" in the conventional sense (i.e. they would not have met up with fellow "Ello, dearies" on a regular basis, or shared the same "patch" night after night) and the "reasons" for their being anything other than faces in an enormous crowd become ever more difficult to defend.

We both agree, I think, that it's possible the pros knew each other but not probable. Knight's theory is about the only one that deals with this. And that's a load of cr**.

But say, two of them met each other. How would that be a basis for Jack to go after them?

Actually, that's not a bad idea for a new thread. I'm sure Jack went for opportunity, not the person.

Anyway. If there is any proof that any of the pros knew each other, I'd be interested.

[Sam Flynn]

We both agree, I think, that it's possible the pros knew each other but not probable.I also disagree with calling them "prostitutes" - it perpetuates a somewhat distorted perception of what the majority of these women were.

[Nothing to see]

I also disagree with calling them "prostitutes" - it perpetuates a somewhat distorted perception of what the majority of these women were.


Well then, what were they? Housewifes? Homemakers?

A distorted perception? In your mind, OK maybe. The truth. They were hookers. Professional, semi, occasional. That's what they were. If you want to prove they weren't, then go for it. I'll take a bet you can't.

[Sam Flynn]

Well then, what were they? Housewifes? Homemakers?

A distorted perception? In your mind, OK maybe. The truth. They were hookers. Professional, semi, occasional. That's what they were. If you want to prove they weren't, then go for it. I'll take a bet you can't.Instead of revealing your ignorance by adopting that insulting and hectoring tone, why don't you go and read up about it?

[Nothing to see]

Instead of revealing your ignorance by adopting that insulting and hectoring tone, why don't you go and read up about it?

Son, sorry Sam, you need to get over the fact that not everyone agrees with everything you say.

Adults are prepared to discuss topics. Like the fact that Jack's victims were pros. Professional, semi, or occasional.

Like I said. You have proof they weren't pros provide it.

I thought you were an upright guy. Obviously, I'm wrong.

[perrymason]

As Sam pointed out, Unfortunates is a term that is used to describe women without consistent financial support from either a man, a family or conventional employment. Divorcees, unmarried women, widows, ....the act of prostitution was for many their last resort each day I would imagine. Do you think Annie felt like being out soliciting...or that Mary Ann Cox was eager to solicit in the rain and gain only infrequent warmth from her room and its fire in early November?

And even a "pro" like young Mary Jane expressed to a friend that she wished her life was much different.

They prostituted themselves to survive...to earn bed money, food money, money for clothing...and sadly many for the booze that came with the pick-up process in many pubs, or after when the deed was done and a few coins in the skirt pocket.

Best regards.

[Sam Flynn]

Indeed, Mike - these weren't by any means the professional painted ladies conjured up by the term "prostitute", which is why the term is misleading. These women would as likely beg, steal, borrow or undertake a menial job as they would take to the streets on an occasional basis. In that sense, it's even a stretch to lump all of the C5 under the heading of "casual prostitutes" - they were middle-aged, drunken, poverty-stricken vagrants for the most part.

[perrymason]

It seems to me Sam that the booze problem for many of them wasnt always escapism, or forgetting their woes...but a legitimate way to stave off the cold on some nights as well. Ive enjoyed some scotch in the wine sack while skiing before, for the same reason.

It seems that "drunk" and "prostitute" come up lots in these threads, and I tried to address that recently in a thread of my own.

Threadwise though, I do think for at least 4 of these women, it would be a safe guess that at some point some might have encountered each other....being as their circumstances were the same, and we are talking about less than a square mile of land.

Best regards

[Sam Flynn]

Threadwise though, I do think for at least 4 of these women, it would be a safe guess that at some point some might have encountered each other....being as their circumstances were the same, and we are talking about less than a square mile of land....... in which twenty thousand other people lived - and that's just Spitalfields. That doesn't include Poplar and St George's East where Stride had spent most of her time. The victims might have breezed past one another on a fairly frequent basis, but when they did so, they'd have done so in a crowd. The chances of them knowing one another on a "sight-only" basis would therefore be comparatively low in itself, and the chances of their being personally acquainted is vanishingly small.

[perrymason]

I realize that the numbers are large Sam, but when you have a culture that involves some of the people within it being out on the streets 24 hours a day...and in these cases, perhaps regularly out all night, common "employment", common fondness for drink, the possibility that they served some of the same clients, in the same areas.

If we were talking about a modern city core, with the monied tenants living in high rises, you hardly ever see them as foot traffic in that same area. They use elevators, and underground garages, and shop in shopping areas perhaps outside the immediate area where they live.

In 1888, in Whitechapel, the streets are full daily....all the local residents had to exit their domiciles and seek or attend work locally. Similarly at night, when the women who had to solicit or chose to solicit came out...thats a different socio economic group than the working poor, but no less a society unto itself.

I would think just like a man or woman might see someone a few times a week when off to work, or at the train, these women might have encountered each other when their world took to the streets, after dark.

Cheers Sam

[Sam Flynn]

I realize that the numbers are large Sam, but when you have a culture that involves some of the people within it being out on the streets 24 hours a day...... they'd be mixing with up to 20,000 others in the same boat, Mike.the possibility that they served some of the same clients, in the same areas.This is another example of how the "prostitute" notion kicks our logic in the nuts. We're not talking about regular clients or regular beats - we're talking about "fourpence a grope" for any drunkard desperate enough, on those occasions when an "unfortunate" was short of the price of a bed or a glass of rum. It's not as if most of these women's appearance lent itself to "call-again" customers, either - there were younger women, comparatively less ravaged by time and place, to cater for those.

[perrymason]

We do know though Sam that some of the Canonical Group were known to frequent locations or areas to solicit, which in and of itself suggests that they would see some people in that area semi frequently.

As you pointed out once on here, Dock workers are the single largest occupational category at that time for the treatment of sexually transmitted diseases in local clinics. When they left work, they likely walked in all directions North from the Waterfront, most, probably using the same route home.

A whore might place herself at a station along a route such men might travel..thereby enhancing the chances that she would see the same people often.

I think it would be a mistake to imagine that the bulk of the men they serviced they did so only once. Likely many had "regulars."...sometimes like our pensioner story.

Best regards Sam

[Cap'n Jack]

Sam, what's the population of Ipswich?
Then divide that by the number of streetwalkers, 'unfortunates' if you like, and then tell me how in the recent murders of five 'unfortunates' they were all known to one another?
But we would not have known that if the police had not caught Wright for the murders.
It was only through Wright that the fact emerged that the victims were all known to one another.
As the Whitechapel Murders remain unsolved it is entirely possible that our reluctance to link the victims through familiarity is based on the lack of a viable killer.
So get the killer and then get the link that binds the victims.
It is also worth pointing out that the victims in the Ipswich murders were in exactly the same position as the victims of the Whitechapel Murders, as streetwalkers in search of substance... just the substance was different, but the victims in both crimes are identical.

[Mr.Hyde]

Put the "odds" away for the moment.
Consider the idea that these five women knew each other.
Things then fall into place.

[Malcolm X]

Put the "odds" away for the moment.
Consider the idea that these five women knew each other.
Things then fall into place.

you have a point, because everything falls into place if you believe it's the occult too................the Ripper seems to fit so many theories

[anna]

My Hyde...

Exactly!:pleased:

ANNA.

[Sam Flynn]

Put the "odds" away for the moment.
Consider the idea that these five women knew each other.
Things then fall into place.Well, they would, wouldn't they - if you're working backwards from a preconception. That's not the proper way to go about things.

[Sam Flynn]

Sam, what's the population of Ipswich?Wikipedia tells me 121,000 spread over a surface area of 15 square miles, or 8 persons per square mile. Contrast that with Spitalfields, whose population of circa 20,000 was crammed into an area of roughly 1.5 square miles - that's 13,000 people per square mile, or a population density 1,600 times greater than modern-day Ipswich.Then divide that by the number of streetwalkers, 'unfortunates' if you like, and then tell me how in the recent murders of five 'unfortunates' they were all known to one another?Because they were a small number of professional women, regularly working the same confined "strip", at specific times of day in a well-lit modern-day town. The casual unfortunates of Spitalfields were numerous, worked sporadically, at all hours, wandering the streets until they found someone to sponge off in one form or another, and did so in semi-darkness.

This is another reason why using the term "prostitutes" to describe the unfortunates of Spitalfields is misleading. Conditions were unimaginably different back then. The good news is that you don't need your imagination to begin to understand how different it must have been - you can "do the math", as they say.

[Mr.Hyde]

Well, they would, wouldn't they - if you're working backwards from a preconception. That's not the proper way to go about things.

Your Eminence,
One thing I learned in childhood-lot of puzzles are easy to solve backwards.
Abstract thought coupled with constructive reasoning are amazing tools.
You seem to lack both,
Dave.

[Sam Flynn]

We do know though Sam that some of the Canonical Group were known to frequent locations or areas to solicitWe don't though, Mike. The only "reliable" information we have on that point is about Kelly - with her "beat" down at Leman Street/Commercial Road, whatever. Unless I've missed something, we have no such information about where the others hung out - if, as "unfortunates", they had any particular "hangouts" at all.

[Mr.Hyde]

Wikipedia tells me 121,000 spread over a surface area of 15 square miles, or 8 persons per square mile. Contrast that with Spitalfields, whose population of circa 20,000 was crammed into an area of roughly 1.5 square miles - that's 13,000 people per square mile, or a population density 1,600 times greater than modern-day Ipswich.Because they were a small number of professional women, regularly working the same confined "strip", at specific times of day in a well-lit modern-day town. The casual unfortunates of Spitalfields were numerous, worked sporadically, at all hours, wandering the streets until they found someone to sponge off in one form or another, and did so in semi-darkness.

This is another reason why using the term "prostitutes" to describe the unfortunates of Spitalfields is misleading. Conditions were unimaginably different back then. The good news is that you don't need your imagination to begin to understand how different it must have been - you can "do the math", as they say.

Your Eminence,
Your "math" is pathetic,
Dave.
PS.Seems to be a long standing trend.

[Sam Flynn]

One thing I learned in childhood-lot of puzzles are easy to solve backwards.This is no childish puzzle. It's an historic series of events that took place in the real world, a world which - like it or not - is governed by certain physical and mathematical constraints.Abstract thought coupled with constructive reasoning are amazing tools.
You seem to lack bothLateral thinking is one thing, simply conjuring up bollocks and then reading, or distorting, the evidence to suit your agenda is quite another.

The latter is not constructive reasoning. It's the adult equivalent of a child smearing its own faeces over the nursery wall and squealing with delight as it does so.

[perrymason]

I think to be fair to both sides of this coin, as AP suggested there may well be a connection that existed between the 5 women for all we know, its not impossible at all.... and as Sam suggests, its not like they all gathered at the Ten Bells each night then branched off their separate ways either. Theres nothing compelling that we know of that would create a scenario in which we can see that they knew each other...nor is there anything that would prevent them meeting, or having met.

When the population of an area is discussed in relation to this, we would never have all of the local population out in the streets at one time, so those numbers mislead. At any given time after midnight there were indeed lots of people around....but many can easily be identified for their trade that has them out late....prostitutes, butchers, shift workers, Dockers, Slaughterhouse men, market folks...

I dont think any of the women would be lost in a crowd each night and therefore less likely to bump into another of the Fab Five. They whored on the streets in a relatively small area, they all drank, a few were fighters, and some had partners who could have facilitated an introduction to someone they knew.

The bottom line is....and I agree with Sam on this.....we have zero evidence that suggests all 5 might have known each other, and the last way to figure this problem out is by assuming they did and working the theory from there.

If it was that easy I would have had a Canonical Four to work with long ago, and maybe whittled it to three or less by now.:laugh4:

Best regards all.

[Cap'n Jack]

Sam,
8 persons per square mile of modern Ipswich?
I want whatever it is you are taking.
You'll be aware, I hope Sam, that there are several reports on prostitution in Ipswich available on the net, published prior to the murders.
These show that the girls were working in exactly the same manner and fashion as the Whitechapel victims.
If you examine the home address of each individual victim in the Ipswich murders you'll find that there is no link between them, but then if you examine their working territory you'll quickly find that they must have known each other, for the pressure of their pimps and the police forced them to work in severely restricted areas, just like the Whitechapel girls.
I don't know why you are so wary of giving these girls a common purpose and fate, to me it seems obvious. That doesn't mean it's a conspiracy, just ripe old life.

[Mr.Hyde]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lateral_thinking

[Sam Flynn]

Sam,
8 persons per square mile of modern Ipswich?
I want whatever it is you are taking.It's called "Facto", AP - a new wonder drug. I heartily recommend it.

[Cap'n Jack]

And there was me, Sam, thinking that your de facto was flapping in the ill wind of an Ipswich alleyway.

[Mr.Hyde]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_facto
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nietzsche

[Mr.Hyde]

Way off post-however this is getting as funny as "Harry" and "The Rope".
Sam,you are a mental midget.
A legend in your own tea break.

[perrymason]

Ok.....the mudslides are starting....change of pace... and thread related, sort of.

Did anyone read Jack Knife last year? It was promoted on the site here a bit, and its a great piece of fiction that paints the Ripper as a time traveler, gone back to collapse the economy of England and rise to power through large gold holdings. I dont recall the author, and Ive got it in a box in storage I believe, but Ill see if I can get her name.

My point is ...she has a scene in the book where all 5 Canonicals meet at the Ten Bells for drinks. Another time traveler after this Jacky fella sits with them.....knowing how each of them dies cause shes read the stories....and for a few minutes has the opportunity to talk with all 5 of Jacks Victims as Unfortunate women in the LVP...and also historical figures.

That scene was magic for me....the thought of actually meeting them as humans, and coupled with the knowledge of their place in history before it had happened.

Its a very romantic notion, and one that for me made me think a little more about individual people rather than cumulative victims.

Its a great read...two thumbs up for a fun adventure.

Best regards all.

[Sam Flynn]

Ok.....the mudslides are starting...Indeed, Mike. It's usually the outcome of muddy thinking, or so I've found.

[Mr.Hyde]

http://www.jackknifethebook.com/reviews.html

[perrymason]

http://www.jackknifethebook.com/reviews.html

Nicely done Old Sod....Im assuming you enjoyed it as well?

One other thing I did like.....the suggestion that if Jack had killed a man during that period we would never have known it. Nor would they have.

Cheers.

[Mr.Hyde]

Nicely done Old Sod....Im assuming you enjoyed it as well?

One other thing I did like.....the suggestion that if Jack had killed a man during that period we would never have known it. Nor would they have.

Cheers.
Haven't read it.Just ordered it.Haven't read Sci Fi for yonks.Thanks.
Never know what is in that book.
Some researchers have a term-"Library Angels".You go into a library looking for something and can't find it.Come out with a book anyway-turns out to be what you were after.
Reminds me of a Rolling Stones song.

"All knowledge is self knowledge"-Bruce Lee.

[Mr.Hyde]

JTR may have murdered one student that he mentored.

Think Abberline was credited with mentioning that.Do not pursue me on that-off the top of my head.8.20 am here.

[perrymason]

JTR may have murdered one student that he mentored.

Think Abberline was credited with mentioning that.Do not pursue me on that-off the top of my head.8.20 am here.

You know there was a murder near Bradford during the Fall of Terror, a young boy was cut in half, stuffed in a barrel and had his shoes stuck in his chest. There were Ripper letters that threatened the killing of a child.

It seemed particularly brutal, and Im guessing in not a highly populated area at that time. I think its largely farm country, or was then, wasnt it?

I do think that type of crime, and the Torso's, and a copycat murder like Alice, stabbing death like Marthas and the gang attacks adds up to plenty of unsavory types, in the area... co-existing. The East End didnt belong to Jack....he was just the most threatening. He was the only one aside from the Torso man that we can safely assume worked multiple times.

Best regards.

[DVV]

I am in a difficult position.
Firstly I'm a newbie and not taken seriously.


Hi Mr Hyde,
and no, that's simply false.
I've seen, and still see, a lot of newbies whose posts and thoughts are seriously discussed on these boards.
You certainly understand how difficult it is to discuss with someone who thinks he knows everything.

Amitiés,
David

[DVV]

"All knowledge is self knowledge"-Bruce Lee.

Hi again,
Have we authored all the books we've read?

Amitiés,
David

[Sam Flynn]

Hi Mr Hyde,
and no, that's simply false.
I've seen, and still see, a lot of newbies whose posts and thoughts are seriously discussed on these boards.Indeed, Dave - and they're generally the ones who make polite contributions and/or make interesting observations based on the evidence. Those who exhibit a premature cockiness from Day One, making unsupported assertions to flog a pet theory, tend to fare less well - which is hardly surprising.You certainly understand how difficult it is to discuss with someone who thinks he knows everything.That's rather easier than it is to have a discussion with someone who acts as if they've solved the case based on little or no knowledge at all. When that "solution" shows a flagrant disregard for the facts, and is delivered in a belligerent or sarcastic manner, even those with a little more knowledge about the case are apt to lose patience. Who can blame them?

[The Good Michael]

When that "solution" shows a flagrant disregard for the facts, and is delivered in a belligerent or sarcastic manner,

Gareth,

You passed up an opportunity to use "bellicose", but maybe next time?

Mike

[Sam Flynn]

You passed up an opportunity to use "bellicose", but maybe next time?"Casus belli" = "corset" ;)

A bit of trivia, Mike... you may know that in Herman Melville's novelette, Billy Budd, the name of Cpt Vere's ship is the Bellipotent. When Benjamin Britten came to write his opera of the story, he thought that the name of the ship sounded rather rude - the combination of "belly" and "potent" being too much for his delicate middle-class sensibilities. Instead, Britten and E.M. Forster (who wrote the libretto) chose to use Indomitable, which was Melville's name for the ship in an earlier version of the book.

[perrymason]

"Casus belli" = "corset" ;)

A bit of trivia, Mike... you may know that in Herman Melville's novelette, Billy Budd, the name of Cpt Vere's ship is the Bellipotent. When Benjamin Britten came to write his opera of the story, he thought that the name of the ship sounded rather rude - the combination of "belly" and "potent" being too much for his delicate middle-class sensibilities. Instead, Britten and E.M. Forster (who wrote the libretto) chose to use Indomitable, which was Melville's name for the ship in an earlier version of the book.

Is that sort of the same reason that John Hancock of the Declaration of Independence changed his name from John Footpenis?:pleased:

Its a Family Guy joke...only throw soft stones please.

Best regards.

[Malcolm X]

I do think that type of crime, and the Torso's, and a copycat murder like Alice, stabbing death like Marthas and the gang attacks adds up to plenty of unsavory types, in the area... co-existing. The East End didnt belong to Jack....he was just the most threatening. He was the only one aside from the Torso man that we can safely assume worked multiple times.

Best regards.

yes but before this era and after it, there was a much lower murder rate and these attacks started before the Ripper, the Ripper was in the middle of a crime spree and far worst than the others, or the other person..

i've always thought that there were 2 serial killers at large, the other one being the Torso killer and a few of the others too, especially McKenzie; but she could be the Rippers too.

[perrymason]

Actually Malcolm, it appears that the murder rates in 1888 for that neck of the woods were consistent with previous years stats....there was no appreciable spike in overall murders when Jack arrived. The way they were committed changed.

AP Wolf mentioned this on another thread recently.

We know that a man killed at least some of the Canonicals, and we have reason to suspect he didnt also cut women into Torsos...since thats the part Jack mutilates, so we can be fairly sure at least 2 serial killers were present in London at that time. Now look at Martha...if not a "serial" victim, a brutal one. Could that guy have killed others too? Maybe. Alice McKenzie starts up the whole Ripper mania with the police the next late spring, if she isnt Jacks, it was someone who liked his style.

Best regards.

[Malcolm X]

Actually Malcolm, it appears that the murder rates in 1888 for that neck of the woods were consistent with previous years stats....there was no appreciable spike in overall murders when Jack arrived. The way they were committed changed.

AP Wolf mentioned this on another thread recently.

We know that a man killed at least some of the Canonicals, and we have reason to suspect he didnt also cut women into Torsos...since thats the part Jack mutilates, so we can be fairly sure at least 2 serial killers were present in London at that time. Now look at Martha...if not a "serial" victim, a brutal one. Could that guy have killed others too? Maybe. Alice McKenzie starts up the whole Ripper mania with the police the next late spring, if she isnt Jacks, it was someone who liked his style.

Best regards.

ok....... i'm cool on that

yes the torso murders are totally different, they're done to hide the victims identity, plus to dispose of the body easily.........this suggests that the killer knew the victims well...very well.

Martha doesn't look like the Ripper's at all, but A. Mckenzie does, or somebody similar to him but far less experienced.... it definitely looks like 2, or even more killers.

the Torso murders look organised, but the others look like a disorganised killer..........if the same Torso killer had a car nowadays, you'd see the body parts littered all over our country.... he didn't so he had to dump them close to home..................my outside bet for these murders is G.Chapman :lol:

[Cap'n Jack]

Good thoughts, but one needs to tread with caution when it comes to the Torso murders of the LVP, for one of the most famous cases actually involved a female killer; and many other cases appear to be the results of botched abortions; and still others could have been the result of Thames boatmen splitting entire bodies to make more money from their finds.
As tempting as it might be to see the Torso murders as a series with a common killer at the helm, I think them to be more the result of the day to day grind of life in the LVP... I believe that more than 230 corpses were found in the Thames in the period we discuss, and many of 'em the result of murder.

[Mr.Hyde]

"Casus belli" = "corset" ;)

A bit of trivia, Mike... you may know that in Herman Melville's novelette, Billy Budd, the name of Cpt Vere's ship is the Bellipotent. When Benjamin Britten came to write his opera of the story, he thought that the name of the ship sounded rather rude - the combination of "belly" and "potent" being too much for his delicate middle-class sensibilities. Instead, Britten and E.M. Forster (who wrote the libretto) chose to use Indomitable, which was Melville's name for the ship in an earlier version of the book.

And Herman Melville's novel,Moby Dick was initially named........?

[perrymason]

Good thoughts, but one needs to tread with caution when it comes to the Torso murders of the LVP, for one of the most famous cases actually involved a female killer; and many other cases appear to be the results of botched abortions; and still others could have been the result of Thames boatmen splitting entire bodies to make more money from their finds.
As tempting as it might be to see the Torso murders as a series with a common killer at the helm, I think them to be more the result of the day to day grind of life in the LVP... I believe that more than 230 corpses were found in the Thames in the period we discuss, and many of 'em the result of murder.

Hi Ap, nice to speak with you....

I know youre a Old Bailey addict, so perhaps you know better what I think I remember....wasnt there a Torso or 2 that pre-dated Pinchin and Whitehall by a few years?

Its an act I dont see too far astray from the killer called Jack, in that Mary is but a few chops short of becoming one. But you shocked me when you play down the significance of a finding a human cut up....cause if it was so insignificant in the big scheme....then what are we bothering about here?

Im a pure amateur...I dont study serial killers or crimes, and Im a limited historian at best....so from that point of view, "Jacks" acts to me seem so specific that they could only have been committed by very few people in a general population the size of Greater London at the time. For the skills required and the guts or desire to stomach the work.

And Im talking about just Jacks acts...not The Canonical 5....Polly, Annie and perhaps Kate, IMHO.

Was this guy a Unicorn....or not really?

All the best AP.

[Mr.Hyde]

And Herman Melville's novel,Moby Dick was initially named........?

Time's up-"The Whale".

Now what do you find in the bottom of some bird cages that starts with "sh" & ends in "it"?
Yep-shellgrit!

[jodi]

Where can I find out more about the Britannia Pub?

Hi Bill,

Some did frequent some of the same places like The Britannia, but no link has ever been found to suggest that they specifically knew each other...and by extension, they might also know the man who killed them.

There is one case that intrigues me personally though, and its that Catherine Eddowes uses a version of Mary Kellys name and her address the night before she dies, on a pawn ticket for Johns boots...Jane Kelly of Dorset St. She also uses Mary Kelly of Fashion Street with Hutt in the Police Station Saturday night/Sunday morning.

With Mary being the next victim, and Kate effectively being identified as Mary Kelly, by herself,..... the night she is killed...it does make for interesting fodder.

Cheers.

[The Grave Maurice]

Where can I find out more about the Britannia Pub?
You could start here (http://wiki.casebook.org/index.php/Britannia).