Established facts

[gordo]

One of the first things you hear about the JtR case when you first look into it is that certain details that seem to bombard you i.e all victims were poor,prostitutes no home and such like and although i,m not here to try and go up against these facts i was wondering if those established facts are as important as they appear to be.

The main one i,m considering is the fact the all victims were prostitutes and again i am convinced with the facts that they all were to a certain extent but i am not clear on how much prostitution played in their deaths. I know that prostitution fits in very neatly as an explanation as to how Jack managed to get the victims alone and ready for his crimes but i,m not sure it is as clear as it ought to be.
These victims at the post mortems showed no sigh of connextion/intercourse having taken place and as such we gather that rape was not a motive for his crimes but doesn't it seem strange that if they were all active prostitutes that there would have been no evidense of prostitution on the victims.
They were all found without money on their persons although they would have had many layers in which to hide money gained through prostitution incase they were robbed or such like. I again don't personally believe that robbing them was part of Jacks motive either and it would have taking him a lot of time and risk to go through all victims after mutilating them and the mess that would have caused.

In various threads we hear that someone had witnessed the victims with certain suspects and a lot of the replies are that they were prostitutes and therefore we can't guarentee that those who were seen weren't clients prior to Jack taking up with them, so once again its seems that people very much believe that the victims were all very active as prostitutes. This seems strange with the lack of any real indication to their trade in the respect of seamen or bruising to the genitals or other more subtle indications. We surely can't imagine that Jacks was the first client of the night with all 5 of the victims and if all were active prostitutes thats seems to go against all the odd's but would explain the non existance of evidence relating to their prostitution.

One of the my main theories is that all the victims were poor and had no money for their lodging at the time when they took to the streets in order to get money for a bed, is it possible that the victims went looking for money in another way. My idea is that Jack didn't go looking for them but that they went looking for him if he was say a money lender of some sort who had some issue's with these woman from the past in relation to having given them money before which they had not paid him back for.

This is just an idea i have and i,m sure many will be able to discount much of what i have written but atleast i will be clearer in my own mind as to just

[Fisherman]

Hi Gordo!

To begin with, I have to say that it is interesting that our Cap´n Jack on an earlier occasion wrote "semen" when he meant seamen, whereas you now write "seamen" when you mean semen ...?!

At any rate, you ask a good question.

I think that we need to realize that prositutes never have been very positive to the idea of their customers leaving their semen inside them for natural reasons! You may have heard of the so called Victorian "kneetrembler" where the prositutes allegedly were skilful enough to avoid using their vaginas, instead offering thigh pressure. And sure enough, there are many varieties of sex out there that does not leave the woman with semen inside her reproductive organs!

We know that these women were pointed out as "unfortunates", and there has never been much of a discussion about whether they were at least part-time prostitutes or not, but for some slight debate in Eddowe´s case. The evidence, though, clearly points to her prostituting herself.
We also have Strides prostitution on record from way back in her days in Sweden, and Mary Kelly was a full-time prostitute, judging from the evidence existing.

The best!
Fisherman