Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

How Jack struck

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

  • How Jack struck

    Hello all,
    I have just had a vision of how Jack could have operated.
    I have always had the belief that the killer of Annie Chapman ,actually was not the man Mrs Long saw talking to her, but he was the man who accompanied her into the backyard, however I feel her killer had been watching the couple and entered the passage after her client left.
    So could there be that pattern in the other events.
    In the case of Nichols she was last seen around 230am, by Emily Holland heading in the direction of the London Hospital, because of the distance to Brady street and the time of the assault it is entirely possible that she was engaged with a client [ other then her killer] and followed into the darkness of Bucks Row, which may explain the sounds heard of a woman running around the time of the murder.
    Now Stride, it was recorded that she was in the company of at least one admirer that night, and appeared to have been waiting for someone at the entrance to Dutfields yard, and we have a witness who claimed an attack took place on the soon to be dead woman.
    Eddowes.
    Was seen talking to a man at the entrance to Church passage shortly before her death, however to me that encounter was nothing more then a passing seaman trying his luck, and shows no hallmarks of a Blitzkreig attack, it is therefore more then possible that she cut through the square after declining her Romeo, and was then grapped.
    And as for Mary Kelly, we have the perfect scenerio here, of a man making a offer , witnessed heading back to Millers court, and we have another seeing a man observing the court, whilst the couple were inside room 13.
    I hate to say it , but this could imply that Gh was 'Jack the Ripper' and I will have to eat humble pie. but of course they may have been two men following Kelly back with Astracan, and her killer simply took up a closer venue after Hutchinson left?
    Regards Richard.

  • #2
    Well, this scenario certainly sounds plausible to me. So, we have a kind of peeping tom, waiting for an opportunity to grab a victim after a client has left her.

    Comment


    • #3
      " we have a kind of peeping tom, waiting for an opportunity to grab a victim after a client has left her"

      ...the intention and reasoning behind it all on the Rippers behalf being....???

      The best,
      Fisherman

      Comment


      • #4
        The idea of the Ripper indulging in "sloppy seconds" seems unlikely in the light of the fact that at least two of the victims (Chapman, Eddowes) being seen with their potential killers within very short times of their probable deaths, with the witnesses reporting nobody else in the vicinity - which militates somewhat against the idea of his trailing couples around the place. That being so, we're left with a scenario where Jack either skulked in the shadows in the back-yard of 29 Hanbury Street and Mitre Square, or that he just happened to walk past an adjoining thoroughfare as a man emerged, and surmising that he "must" have been a client who left a lone woman behind. Neither of these strike me as particularly successful strategies.
        Kind regards, Sam Flynn

        "Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)

        Comment


        • #5
          I was just quickly consulting Sugden's "Complete History of JTR" to refresh my memory on the timeline in Annie Chapman's murder, and the witness testimony. Elizabeth Long said she saw Annie with a man outside #29 at 5:30 a.m. Next door neighbor Albert Cadosch said he came out into his yard at about 5:20 and heard voices, making out a woman's voice saying "No." He came out again three or four minutes later and heard something heavy fall against the dividing fence. There is discrepancy there, but Sugden concludes that "The experiences of these two witnesses are surely related and, given the vagaries of eyewitness evidence, the slight discrepancy in the times is not significant. We may thus place Annie's death at about 5:30."

          Sorry to just be quoting a book, but since there was no other known activity in the back of #29 within that window of time then it seems Sugden's conclusion is probably accurate and would rule out the theory presented here, since there just wouldn't have been enough time for Annie to complete a transaction with one man and for another to then enter. Cadosch must have heard the murder taking place within a couple of minutes of Mrs. Long's sighting in the street.
          Last edited by kensei; 08-26-2008, 02:09 PM. Reason: misspelling

          Comment


          • #6
            Hi Fisherman,
            Two reasons spring to mind.
            The soliciting angered him,
            The fact that he remained elusive, and others seen by witnesses, ie Long, [ constable/packer etc in Berner street] and Lawande, and Hutchinson , descriptions give were irrelevant to his own appearance.
            Regards Richard.

            Comment


            • #7
              Hi Richard

              Your idea sounds interesting to me, but there is a thing I wondered already before I read your post:

              There were no signs of sexual intercourse found on the victims!

              So if there was a client before Jack took the stage, why do they miss? And in generell: I wonder why the victims haven`t had a client before they were murdered or why they haven`t had any signs of sexual intercourse. Was Jack always the first man taking the prostitutes with him? I can`t imagine one single client would be enough...or was a single client enough for unfortunates?

              Damien

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Damien View Post
                Hi Richard

                Your idea sounds interesting to me, but there is a thing I wondered already before I read your post:

                There were no signs of sexual intercourse found on the victims!

                So if there was a client before Jack took the stage, why do they miss? And in generell: I wonder why the victims haven`t had a client before they were murdered or why they haven`t had any signs of sexual intercourse. Was Jack always the first man taking the prostitutes with him? I can`t imagine one single client would be enough...or was a single client enough for unfortunates?

                Damien
                "No sign of connection" I think was the wording often used in the police surgeons' reports. It doesn't seem to make sense, does it, for victims who were of that profession? But if we want to get into gruesome details, I've seen it written that East End prostitutes would employ certain alternative methods of conducting their business that satisfied their clients but left them safe. Otherwise they would have found themselves pregnant constantly.
                Last edited by kensei; 08-26-2008, 02:52 PM. Reason: wording

                Comment


                • #9
                  Not to mention, it's not always evident, particularly in the presence of lots of other fluids, contusions and so forth.
                  best,

                  claire

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Hi Kensei

                    Your right. Like I said, I always wondered about this...

                    I can´t believe there was no sign of sexuality, even if the unfortunates would have used tricks - wouldn`t the doctors and police officers noticed some remains of the clients?

                    Maybe the conclusion "no signs of" means, that there was no violently influenced sexual intercourse like rape or something like that connected with the murder and the murderers motive?

                    Damien

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Hi,
                      No signs of connection.
                      In the cases of Chapman, Eddowes, Kelly, signs of sexual activity would surely be hard to detect, even in the case of Nichols, the mutilation was vicious.
                      That leaves Stride, but evidence would suggest that the night was still young regarding sex.
                      And of course we have another reason that no staining was present ie heavy petting , so to speak.
                      Regards Richard,

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Sam Flynn View Post
                        The idea of the Ripper indulging in "sloppy seconds" seems unlikely in the light of the fact that at least two of the victims (Chapman, Eddowes) being seen with their potential killers within very short times of their probable deaths, with the witnesses reporting nobody else in the vicinity - which militates somewhat against the idea of his trailing couples around the place. That being so, we're left with a scenario where Jack either skulked in the shadows in the back-yard of 29 Hanbury Street and Mitre Square, or that he just happened to walk past an adjoining thoroughfare as a man emerged, and surmising that he "must" have been a client who left a lone woman behind. Neither of these strike me as particularly successful strategies.

                        Not quite as I imagined. I certainly do not think a man laid in wait in the back yard of 29 Hanbury Street but I would not totally rule out the idea of a man looking out for women picking up men.

                        The point about no sexual contact being evident does seem to throw doubt on this scenario but having said that, we do not know the full details of what type of sexual liaison took place between prostitutes and clients. We do know, and it has been discussed elsewhere on this forum, that sexual union most often did not include full penetration so perhaps some kind of sexual activity did take place but was not evident.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          A mixture of approaches

                          It's easy to be swayed by the time-worn assertion that all the victims were prostituting themselves at the times of their deaths - they may not all have been. Many of such women in that area were desperate for cash, shelter or drink, and were more like what we'd call vagrants, rather than prostitutes. That being so, it's not inconceivable that Jack would have used a mixture of approaches, using empty promises just to get the women "on-side", not necessarily adopting the same strategy of propositioning for sex every time.

                          Nichols had been thrown out of her lodgings, and might just have been begging. The same circumstances applied to Chapman, who was very ill: another factor which Jack might have turned to his advantage, with promises of help. (What reason was there for Annie to be actively prostituting herself for doss money at that time of the morning anyway?) Stride, it seems to me, might feasibly have been on a date that night, and seems to have been roughed up prior to her death (some small-talk, there!). Eddowes was found with a thimble on the ground just off her hand - perhaps she'd offered to do some clothing repairs in return for some much-needed doss money, or a free drink.

                          I'm not saying that all the above happened, but that something similar might have happened in some instances. Either way, I see no reason to insist that Jack stuck rigidly to the pretence of hiring his victims for sex, or that each and every one of the women were soliciting at the time they met him.
                          Last edited by Sam Flynn; 08-26-2008, 03:34 PM. Reason: spelling/grammar
                          Kind regards, Sam Flynn

                          "Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            I think you have raised some very valid points Sam. It is quite probable that if the victims could have made some doss money from hawking or begging rather than sex they would have chosen that option. I have come across this argument in several highly regarded studies of the case.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              I have always been interested by the theory that the ladies were attacked from behind initially after, er, 'presenting' themselves to him with their backs to him.
                              Not sure what anyone else thinks about this theory or if it has been debunked before.
                              In order to know virtue, we must first aquaint ourselves with vice!

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X