What remained consistent through the C5?

[Tom_Wescott]

Paul,

I'm sorry, but I don't understand a lot of the questions you ask, so it's difficult for me to answer them.

NOV9,

Why do you have such a low opinion of Jack the Ripper?

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[paul emmett]

Tom,

You said, "Witness James Kent testified that her hands were curled towards her throat as though she were grabbing at it. "

That may be true, and she would not be a threat to the killer, but some did not have blood on their hands, which suggest?

No! Both Chandler and Phillips tell us that Kent is wrong. See post#23 above

[NOV9]

Which leads to interesting and very important questions regarding his motivation:
Was the age and the "profession" important at all? Or just the vulnerability of the victims? Were younger prostitutes more common amidst the safer confines of the brothels and the older, more worn down ones more common out on the streets?
Which leads me to another question: Were there no pimps around? The East End must have had a high rate of thugs, robbers, burglars and other shady people. Wouldn't they have been pretty annoyed by all the attention focussed on their territory?

His victims being drunk were an easy kill, the great killer was a coward.

[NOV9]

Hi Stan,

I realize you weren't asserting it, just suggesting it, but it made me wonder if that was the case, did his wife experience his rage at all? The police seemed to feel that someone must have known who was doing this, but wouldn't come forward with information. I wonder if they reviewed the past domestic assault cases and police reports.

I would think a common thread here is that the killer dehumanized the womens bodies with his treatment of skin, tissues, organs. Could that same man actually love a woman too....without ever revealing his darker side to her? I wonder. My inclination is probably not.

Pretty awful imagining a woman being so terrorized by her husband that she couldn't go to tell the police that she thought she was Mrs Ripper.

Could a woman watch her husband come in with bloody clothing on Ripper kill nights and be too scared to tell anyone? And for how long?

It raises some interesting questions Stan.

My best regards.

You said,"did his wife experience his rage at all?"

The killer was a coward, and a low life, he would take his rage out on the unsuspected victim and in a cowardly way.

[NOV9]

Paul,

I'm not sure what Stride scenario you read on another thread, but one I wrote about in great detail in Ripper Notes is an idea I have that the victims were 'silenced' by way of robbery. The Ripper pulled his knife, told them it was a robbery, and that if they stayed quiet they'd be okay. This assured the silence of the victim while he worked them into position. Naturally, he asked them to empty their pockets. This is why Eddowes had the thimble, Stride the cachous, and Chapman the various articles at her feet.

Regarding Chapman, I don't believe her arms were 'placed' where they were found. Witness James Kent testified that her hands were curled towards her throat as though she were grabbing at it. This says to me that the final location of her hands has more to do with an involuntary dying reaction than with the killer positioning her arm. Also, the injury to the finger, and its locations, suggests strongly to me that the rings were removed after death and not before.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

Tom,

You said, "Witness James Kent testified that her hands were curled towards her throat as though she were grabbing at it. "

That may be true, and she would not be a threat to the killer, but some did not have blood on their hands, which suggest?

[NOV9]

Paul,

Regarding my post - Nichols' hat was near her hand. The letter portion was probably in Chapman's hand when she went to the ground, her hands curling up on her chest when her throat was cut. I didn't mention anything about 'left hands'.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

That is interesting, do you suppose that the killer may have asked the victims to produce something trivial, just long enough to distract them so he could blitz them?

[JSchmidt]

Hi Nell,

I think one thing that is important about the sobriety of the victims at the time of their death, is in this regard.....they went as quietly and quickly as the others. So I don't see a sauced whore as a significant signal for the killer to move in. Liz was sober, Kate had slept her drunk off, Mary had some sleep likely before her death, and Annie was ill...although I don't recall if she had alcohol in her system.

I personally feel the age range was more important to him...I believe he hunted middle aged whores, because they were worn and the weakest. And no-one stood up for them.

Best regards to you both.

Which leads to interesting and very important questions regarding his motivation:
Was the age and the "profession" important at all? Or just the vulnerability of the victims? Were younger prostitutes more common amidst the safer confines of the brothels and the older, more worn down ones more common out on the streets?
Which leads me to another question: Were there no pimps around? The East End must have had a high rate of thugs, robbers, burglars and other shady people. Wouldn't they have been pretty annoyed by all the attention focussed on their territory?

[Celesta]

Yes, Michael, I think we are more or less in agreement on the tipsy aspect.

There is also the oft-noted possible connections with MJK.

1. Nicholls drinking in a pub on Brick Lane where MJK lived until about January 88.

2. Chapman lived in a lodging house on Dorset Street

3. Stride ditto

4. Eddows living in McCarthy's shed.

If we add Tabram:

5. Pearly Poll living in Dorset Street

Hi Nell,

You can add to that list a pawn ticket for Johns boots where Kate used Mary Kelly of 6 Dorset Street as her name and address, and she was Jane Kelly of Fashion St to the officer booking her.

Methinks there are other possible links between Mary and Kate...mutual friends in self-rule Irish social circles? Seen each other in pubs? Joe Barnett friends with John Kelly? Or Daniel Barnett?...I do know that members of The Royal Irish Constabulary visited the crime scene on the 13th or 14th, the same day members of Parliament and a Senior Post Office Official visited that room. Do we possibly have 2 crimes being investigated in Millers Court?

Kate was killed the weekend of the Post Office robbery.

Hi Celesta,

I think one thing that is important about the sobriety of the victims at the time of their death, is in this regard.....they went as quietly and quickly as the others. So I don't see a sauced whore as a significant signal for the killer to move in. Liz was sober, Kate had slept her drunk off, Mary had some sleep likely before her death, and Annie was ill...although I don't recall if she had alcohol in her system.

I personally feel the age range was more important to him...I believe he hunted middle aged whores, because they were worn and the weakest. And no-one stood up for them.

Best regards to you both.

[Carrotty Nell]

There is also the oft-noted possible connections with MJK.

1. Nicholls drinking in a pub on Brick Lane where MJK lived until about January 88.

2. Chapman lived in a lodging house on Dorset Street

3. Stride ditto

4. Eddows living in McCarthy's shed.

If we add Tabram:

5. Pearly Poll living in Dorset Street

[Celesta]

Hello Michael,


I was just thinking, as you suggested, that the alcohol was a large motivation in their lives, but not necessarily in their deaths. I think JTR may have just assumed they were drunks, and probably drunk. They were just convenient to his purposes.

Cheers,

C

Hi Stan,

I realize you weren't asserting it, just suggesting it, but it made me wonder if that was the case, did his wife experience his rage at all? The police seemed to feel that someone must have known who was doing this, but wouldn't come forward with information. I wonder if they reviewed the past domestic assault cases and police reports.

I would think a common thread here is that the killer dehumanized the womens bodies with his treatment of skin, tissues, organs. Could that same man actually love a woman too....without ever revealing his darker side to her? I wonder. My inclination is probably not.

Pretty awful imagining a woman being so terrorized by her husband that she couldn't go to tell the police that she thought she was Mrs Ripper.

Could a woman watch her husband come in with bloody clothing on Ripper kill nights and be too scared to tell anyone? And for how long?

It raises some interesting questions Stan.

My best regards.

[sdreid]

Hi Michael,

I'm not saying that he had a partner, only that he may have. One of the reasons he was said not to have a spouse or whatever was that he was out at night but if the wife, for example, was gone at certain times of the month then that wouldn't be a factor in that regard.

Hi again,

Stan, thats an interesting idea...in that you surmised the man may have had a life partner. I had always pictured him solo, in a boarding house with another "bolt-hole" he takes his messes to. Ill have to broaden my thinking perhaps.

I think you make a fair point Paul, and it does relate to the issue of "setting the scene" as it were. Interesting on that note....I would think that all of the outdoor victims were left with the knowledge they would be soon found, so if they were "staged" crime scenes, he did that for anyone coming by...not just police. He could not control who found them...and that was ok with him.

Yet Mary Kellys room was locked, curtains drawn.

My best regards gents...ciao for now.

[paul emmett]

Hello.
Michael, I know this is what you just said you weren't looking for, but it has come up, so I want to comment on both the possible posings of the bodies, and "my" significance of left hands theory.
I agree with you on the posings of MJK. But I think Chapman is still at issue. Chandler tells us that her right arm was lying down her right side. And Phillips's Inquest statement reads, "The left arm was PLACED across the left breast." The emphasis is mine because I want to emphasze how it balances with his more renown statement seven sentences later that the comb and muslin "apparently had been PLACED[at AC's feet] in order or arranged there."
Clearly, both disagree with Kent, and the repeated "PLACED" suggests to me that Phillips sees this scene, both body and surroundings, as posed.