Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Conspiracy to suppress the identity of JTR?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #76
    Originally posted by mpriestnall View Post

    Just a thought: Does making MJK hard to identify mean that JTR was connected somehow to her and making her almost unrecognizable was an effort to protect his own identity?

    Martyn
    To protect the killer, or to conceal the victims true identity...I think so. Her killer may have used the available ruse...make it look like the mad butcher...and he slips back quietly into the woodwork and smiles when he reads "Ripper" headlines about Mary.
    Michael Richards

    Comment


    • #77
      As for Mary working the streets, Barnett said he didn't like it when she did...its said Mary was fearful of the killer(s) on the street that Fall, and Barnett gave her money daily even after moving out, presumably so she wouldn't have to solicit. Only George Hutchinsons statement can be used for an argument that she was soliciting on that night at least, and he is discredited soon thereafter, so...essentially no-one that knew Mary well stated she was actively working the streets around that time.
      Michael Richards

      Comment


      • #78
        Originally posted by mpriestnall View Post

        Just a thought: Does making MJK hard to identify mean that JTR was connected somehow to her and making her almost unrecognizable was an effort to protect his own identity?

        Martyn
        This might have carried more weight if Eddowes' face hadn't been mutilated too.

        Comment


        • #79
          Originally posted by Harry D View Post

          This might have carried more weight if Eddowes' face hadn't been mutilated too.
          Not beyond almost all recognition of her "partner" Harry. Barnett could only identify Mary's 'air and eyes.
          Michael Richards

          Comment


          • #80
            Originally posted by Michael W Richards View Post

            Not beyond almost all recognition of her "partner" Harry. Barnett could only identify Mary's 'air and eyes.
            Of course, but it sets a precedent for facial mutilations in this series, which was escalated in Miller's Court.

            Comment


            • #81
              Originally posted by Harry D View Post

              This might have carried more weight if Eddowes' face hadn't been mutilated too.
              Understand what you're saying, but like Michael said, the extent of mutilations was different, so the purpose might be different?

              The two shaped nicks, for example, were possibly meant to be symbolic rather than face destroying mutiliations.

              Martyn

              It was me. I let the dogs out.

              Comment


              • #82
                Originally posted by mpriestnall View Post

                Understand what you're saying, but like Michael said, the extent of mutilations was different, so the purpose might be different?

                The two shaped nicks, for example, were possibly meant to be symbolic rather than face destroying mutiliations.

                Martyn
                For one, Mary Kelly was killed in her own bed in her own room, as opposed to outside. Who else would they expect to find there? Her absence would've soon been noted. If the plan was to destroy any positive ID, why did the killer waste time butchering the rest of her? Why not simply chop her head off and take it with him? Why take the heart of all things?

                Comment


                • #83
                  Originally posted by Harry D View Post

                  For one, Mary Kelly was killed in her own bed in her own room, as opposed to outside. Who else would they expect to find there? Her absence would've soon been noted. If the plan was to destroy any positive ID, why did the killer waste time butchering the rest of her? Why not simply chop her head off and take it with him? Why take the heart of all things?
                  exactly harry
                  the facial mutilations of eddowes, Kelly and the head from the Tottenham torso (very similar to eddowes) was due to the killers own sick fantasy and had nothing to do with trying to hide the identity. and the idea that a killer would try to hide the id of a victim he killed in her own house by mutilating her face is patently ridiculous.
                  "Is all that we see or seem
                  but a dream within a dream?"

                  -Edgar Allan Poe


                  "...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
                  quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

                  -Frederick G. Abberline

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Why did he kill any of the victims in a such brutal way, multiliating them as he did. Why not just cut their throats and leave it there?

                    Destroying MJK's face to inhibit identification wasn't necessarily an was act that mutually exclusive with additionally butchering her.

                    Maybe the authorities already had a good idea who JTR was by the 9th of November, so JTR was limiting the opportunity to identifying himself further with MJK's murder by destroying her face.

                    Martyn





                    It was me. I let the dogs out.

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Originally posted by Harry D View Post

                      Of course, but it sets a precedent for facial mutilations in this series, which was escalated in Miller's Court.
                      Kates face was cut, Marys was slashed. Inherently different actions taken. And I personally agree that the nose and the chevrons were intentional and separately made.
                      Michael Richards

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Originally posted by Harry D View Post

                        For one, Mary Kelly was killed in her own bed in her own room, as opposed to outside. Who else would they expect to find there? Her absence would've soon been noted. If the plan was to destroy any positive ID, why did the killer waste time butchering the rest of her? Why not simply chop her head off and take it with him? Why take the heart of all things?
                        That last point ties in with the fact that this killer almost certainly knew his victim beforehand. That's not in the evidence with either Polly or Annie. Marys killer was in her room, while she was either still drunk or hungover, undressed, in the middle of the night, and was allowed to remain there. She fell asleep....and the rest is history.
                        Michael Richards

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Originally posted by Michael W Richards View Post

                          That last point ties in with the fact that this killer almost certainly knew his victim beforehand. That's not in the evidence with either Polly or Annie. Marys killer was in her room, while she was either still drunk or hungover, undressed, in the middle of the night, and was allowed to remain there. She fell asleep....and the rest is history.
                          That doesn't prove they had separate killers. Isn't it possible that the same man who killed Polly, Annie etc. also knew MJK?

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post

                            exactly harry
                            the facial mutilations of eddowes, Kelly and the head from the Tottenham torso (very similar to eddowes) was due to the killers own sick fantasy and had nothing to do with trying to hide the identity. and the idea that a killer would try to hide the id of a victim he killed in her own house by mutilating her face is patently ridiculous.
                            Hi Abby,

                            Why patently ridiculous? Do you think Kelly was living at Millers Court under her real name? If not, other than her face to potentially identify her, what else was there to definitely to identify her? As far as we know, no letters or similar were left behind.

                            Martyn
                            It was me. I let the dogs out.

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Originally posted by Michael W Richards View Post

                              That last point ties in with the fact that this killer almost certainly knew his victim beforehand. That's not in the evidence with either Polly or Annie. Marys killer was in her room, while she was either still drunk or hungover, undressed, in the middle of the night, and was allowed to remain there. She fell asleep....and the rest is history.
                              Hello Michael,

                              But knew him how is the question? It could have been somebody she met just a few days prior.

                              c.d.

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post

                                exactly harry
                                the facial mutilations of eddowes, Kelly and the head from the Tottenham torso (very similar to eddowes) was due to the killers own sick fantasy and had nothing to do with trying to hide the identity. and the idea that a killer would try to hide the id of a victim he killed in her own house by mutilating her face is patently ridiculous.
                                Harry D and Abby,

                                Agree completely.

                                c.d.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X