Was Barnett guilty after all?

[Michael W Richards]

Because Mary Kelly was younger and more attractive? Had she been a middle-aged frump, McCarthy might have turfed her out ages ago.

Based on the description of Mary Ann Cox, who it seems plied her trade at night as well, perhaps not.

[Michael W Richards]

Presumably, a triangle comprising Kelly, Barnett and Fleming?

Not sure about Fleming Sam, but Joe Barnett-Mary-Joe someone is what we seem to have been looking at. For my money Issacs makes a better second Joe, plus his move to a close by location to Dorset, and his subsequent disappearance On the night Mary is killed is at least interesting. I don't recall reading anywhere that Fleming treated Mary poorly, but Mary herself said that the other Joe she was seeing did.

[Michael W Richards]

[QUOTE=Pierre;427369]

"Love triangle"?

Mary confessed to Julia that she had been seeing another Joe while Barnett lived with her. Hence..triangle. Not a difficult concept to grasp.

[Michael W Richards]

There isn't, Michael. I could list horrific murders with no prior connection between killer & victim.

No? What about the fact that she is killed indoors in her own bed in her underwear? What about the fact that we have no evidence at all she ever brought a client to her room? What about the fact that she has injuries which are extremely consistent with personal knowledge rage and venting..facial slashes for one? What about the cry out from the courtyard that no-one claimed and could easily have been Mary answering her door groggily and then letting someone in without struggle..or noise?

To say that Marys murder, while undressed in her bed, in a tiny courtyard with one entrance back to the street, resembles in any way the impersonal attack and murder of Polly for example, is reaching for contrary arguments...not following the evidence. Or the clinical dissection of Annie, for that matter.

[MysterySinger]

Mary Kelly was supposed to have teeth missing too (and a denture in their place).

[Harry D]

No? What about the fact that she is killed indoors in her own bed in her underwear? What about the fact that we have no evidence at all she ever brought a client to her room? What about the fact that she has injuries which are extremely consistent with personal knowledge rage and venting..facial slashes for one? What about the cry out from the courtyard that no-one claimed and could easily have been Mary answering her door groggily and then letting someone in without struggle..or noise?

To say that Marys murder, while undressed in her bed, in a tiny courtyard with one entrance back to the street, resembles in any way the impersonal attack and murder of Polly for example, is reaching for contrary arguments...not following the evidence. Or the clinical dissection of Annie, for that matter.

In November 1993, in the Bisset home in Plumstead, Napper stabbed 27-year-old Samantha Bisset in her neck and chest, killing her, and then sexually assaulted and smothered her four-year-old daughter, Jazmine Jemima Bisset. In her sitting room, the 6'2" Napper mutilated Samantha's body, taking away parts of her body as a trophy. The crime scene was reportedly so grisly that the police photographer assigned to the case was forced to take two years' leave after witnessing it.

Robert Napper had no prior connection or relationship with the victim.

[Joshua Rogan]

Robert Napper had no prior connection or relationship with the victim.

Do you think Napper had any prior connection to JTR literature, though? I can't help feeling that he was trying to recreate the scene in Miller's Court.

[c.d.]

Hello Michael,

What about the very extensive slashes to Kate's face? Do you believe they indicate a personal connection to the killer as well?

c.d.

[miss marple]

The Ripper's crimes seem to indicate a hatred and contempt for women, particularly prostitutes that appears to be visceral. I think it has something to do with his relationship with his mother. I believe his mother is the key. I think his mother was a prostitute and he was abused as a child.

Miss Marple

[Darryl Kenyon]

On 15 July 1992 on Wimbledon Common, Napper stabbed the young mother Rachel Nickell forty-nine times [ Martha Tabram ] in front of her son Alex, then aged two, who clung on to his mother's body begging her to wake up.

This attack happened before the violent murder of Samantha Bisset.
Samantha indoors at a later date, Rachel earlier, stabbed violently but not mutilated outdoors earlier. Surely time factors and the fact that somebody could possibly see/interrupt him if he stayed at the scene, as in the ripper murders comes into the equation.
Other points about Napper are he was sexually assaulted when 13.The marriage of his parents was violent and Napper witnessed violent attacks on his mother. He has been diagnosed with paranoid schizophrenia as well as Asperger's syndrome.and he is also believed to have committed other violent attacks on women before and i believe between the murders and possibly after as well.
I feel that some of these, if not all of these points could relate to the ripper as well.

[Michael W Richards]

In November 1993, in the Bisset home in Plumstead, Napper stabbed 27-year-old Samantha Bisset in her neck and chest, killing her, and then sexually assaulted and smothered her four-year-old daughter, Jazmine Jemima Bisset. In her sitting room, the 6'2" Napper mutilated Samantha's body, taking away parts of her body as a trophy. The crime scene was reportedly so grisly that the police photographer assigned to the case was forced to take two years' leave after witnessing it.

Robert Napper had no prior connection or relationship with the victim.

And that relates how to a murder of a young woman in London in 1888 during what was a string of murders with various bits taken from 2 girls prior?

Citing a modern example of a murder is without proper context, and without any of the circumstantial variables that applied in these cases.

If it wasnt so damn pathetic using modern cases to try and make a point about 130 year old murders, it would be funny.

[Michael W Richards]

Hello Michael,

What about the very extensive slashes to Kate's face? Do you believe they indicate a personal connection to the killer as well?

c.d.

Kate didnt have slah marks cd, as the evidence shows perfectly plainly. She had almost had her nose cut off....like some other people of that era did when they became snitches, and she had specific marks on her face that may just be collateral damage from the nose slicing. She was recognizable. Marys hair was recognizable, and her eyes were not visible in the photos of the crime scene...a flap of forehead obscured them.

Mary was taken apart, Kate and Annie were opened up.

[Joshua Rogan]

She had almost had her nose cut off....like some other people of that era did when they became snitches

Another word for "snitch" was "nose".
That said, can you cite any examples of other people being de-nosed? Aside from Kelly.

[Sam Flynn]

That said, can you cite any examples of other people being de-nosed? Aside from Kelly.

Tycho Brahe?

[Herlock Sholmes]

Was Joe Barnett an Idiot?

Why would Barnett kill and mutilate his ex in a room that, until recently they had shared, before they argued and split up, in a small court where he would have been a familiar face known to most of the residents(who were known to be out and about at all hours?) It would take an equally stupid police force not to make a bee-line for Barnett as first man on the list of suspects!
If he wanted to kill her he could have either taken her out for a drink or just followed her on the streets and killed her somewhere else.
Barnett makes little sense to me as a suspect.