Whether we like it or not

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • curious
    replied
    Originally posted by Tom_Wescott View Post
    Just 'Indian Harry'.



    Don Souden wrote an essay called 'Time On My Side' for Ripper Notes a few years back that brought up a very good point. McCarthy would have had a key to Kelly's room, and probably would have known about the latch, since he installed it. However, had he mentioned either to the police he would have become a suspect, so instead he allowed them to obliterate his door.

    Yours truly,

    Tom Wescott

    That same essay also suggests that Jack had visited Mary in the past. That was when the key went missing. So, Jack had the key to let himself in and then locked it (not latched it) on his way out. (I'm going on memory here and realize that's very dangerous.)

    Now, if Mary were in a drunken stupor, as witness testimony suggests that likely she was, getting into the room without rousing her might have been very possible.

    So, did he supply the drink, or had he just been keeping an eye on her?

    or did it go down a different way?

    But about McCarthy having a key -- to me his neglecting to mention that he would naturally have a key makes him appear more suspicious than if he'd just said "I'll go get my key." Surely the police would know landlords keep keys to their properties?

    curious
    Last edited by curious; 02-09-2010, 12:22 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Observer
    replied
    Originally posted by spyglass View Post

    2.She believed that she new who the killer was and was in fear for her life ( acccording to Barnett )
    Hi Spyglass where did you get the above from? It has no foundation in truth.

    all the best

    Observer

    Leave a comment:


  • Supe
    replied
    Spyglass,

    She believed that she new who the killer was and was in fear for her life ( acccording to Barnett )

    No, there is no record anywhere of Mary Jane Kelly saying she "knew" who the Ripper was, nor that she feared for her life. Barnett said at the inquest ". . . she seemed afraid of someone, she did not express fear of any particular individual except when she rowed with me, but we always came to terms quickly."

    A somewhat contradictory statement, but scarcely indicative of someone in fear for her life.

    the so called ripper knife owned by D.Rummbelow

    As distinguished and gracious a Ripperologist ought have his name spelled right. It is Donald Rumbelow.

    Don.

    Leave a comment:


  • spyglass
    replied
    HI ALL!
    There are plenty of things that dont add up concerning the murder of MJK, most of them having all ready been covered here.

    But let us add a couple more.

    1. Barnett's identification of MJK's body.

    2.She believed that she new who the killer was and was in fear for her life ( acccording to Barnett )

    Also can I just add that the so called ripper knife owned by D.Rummbelow, is just like the ones used in the Pheonix Park Murders.
    I know the provenance of the knife is uncertain and dubious, but it does make you think.

    Leave a comment:


  • ianincleveland
    replied
    I have my doubts MJK was actually killed by JTR,to me that murder was more "personal".Did Fleming,Barnett or hutchinson have proper alibis??? More to the point did McCarthy have an alibi,im still wondering why McCarthy let mary run up the rather large arrears in rent when it was pretty clear shed probably never be able to pay them off.Was he going round there for sexual favours???Was he trying to pimp her??.Im sure he had a key to his own flat,i mean if MJK had just done a bunk he wouldnt have stuck an axe through the door!!!.

    While im first to admit ive nowhere near the level of expertise on JTR as most on these boards,i cant see the Fenians bumping off peniless prostitutes.And if the motives were political would not a single stab do the trick instead of excessive mutilation ie Eddowes??

    Having said that Andersons whole conduct during the time was questionable.First off he has to be recalled from France,then he lets Warren be the fall guy,then he says Mylett wasnt murdered.The guy borders on the inept.

    Leave a comment:


  • Tom_Wescott
    replied
    Originally posted by Hunter
    Too many chiefs and not enough indians.
    Just 'Indian Harry'.

    Originally posted by Hunter
    to breaking in the door when the latch could be reached from the window
    Don Souden wrote an essay called 'Time On My Side' for Ripper Notes a few years back that brought up a very good point. McCarthy would have had a key to Kelly's room, and probably would have known about the latch, since he installed it. However, had he mentioned either to the police he would have become a suspect, so instead he allowed them to obliterate his door.

    Yours truly,

    Tom Wescott

    Leave a comment:


  • Hunter
    replied
    Originally posted by Phil Carter View Post
    Thanks for the reply. In all normal circumstances, I would agree entirely. But that "killing" there, with a Coroner making a real rushed hash of it, has a reason I think.
    My point about the coroner is that he seemed to rush through the inquest because he had a near riot on his hands with the jury and thought he was loosing control over the proceedings, thus, incompetently ending them in one day to quash his little rebellion, at the expense of justice. However, there may have been some reason that Anderson didn't want Baxter to preside over the inquest as Baxter seemed to be professional and thorough. Of course, that's just my speculation.

    As for Anderson and Rose... why he should dismiss those claims so vehemently, is something that only goes against the man and his behaviour.
    I'm not sure if it does go against the man and his behaviour. He starts out at the begining of the murders missing for several weeks, giving it little importance;then tries to play catch up later when the whole series blows up in his face. He never gets a handle on it and uses Warren as a scapegoat; which was convenient for him. At the end he appears dismissive and underplaying the whole thing to the point where he "rationalizes" that Mylett was never murdered.

    The Whitechapel murders appear to be an inconvenient distraction to what he thought his real mission was; going after "subversive elements". In later years he justifies it all by saying "no big deal. We knew who JTR was", while everyone that was on the ground at the time is saying, " No we didn't".

    Leave a comment:


  • curious
    replied
    Originally posted by j.r-ahde View Post
    Hello Phil!



    But had she been an agent gone wrong, she wouldn't have been in the East End even for that long time!

    All the best
    Jukka
    which side are you seeing her on?

    Leave a comment:


  • Phil Carter
    replied
    Hello Hunter,

    Thanks for the reply. In all normal circumstances, I would agree entirely. But that "killing" there, with a Coroner making a real rushed hash of it, has a reason I think.

    As for Anderson and Rose... why he should dismiss those claims so vehemently, is something that only goes against the man and his behaviour.

    best wishes

    Phil

    Leave a comment:


  • Hunter
    replied
    Rose Mylett

    Hi Phil,

    I don't know if you've metioned the Rose Mylett debacle in December when Anderson seemed determined to dismiss any claims that she was murdered, although she was strangled to death and Coroner Baxter and Dr. Phillips concluded it was murder. Anderson got very involved in that case for some reason.

    However, I'm inclined to believe that the Mary Kelly debacle was probably a result of hysteria and confusion; from the time they waited for the hounds that weren't coming; to breaking in the door when the latch could be reached from the window; to an incompetant cororner who fought with his own jurors over jurisdiction. No one seemed to be in charge. Too many chiefs and not enough indians.
    Last edited by Hunter; 02-08-2010, 09:37 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Phil Carter
    replied
    Hello Jukka,

    Thanks for the reply.
    I am not the expert on this, Chris Scott probably is the man to say for sure, but I know one thing. That whole scenario, is wrong. And the "players" don't fit in either.

    best wishes

    Phil

    Leave a comment:


  • DVV
    replied
    Hi Phil,

    Hutch was an unemployed poor guy from the Victoria Home, and that was enough for the police...
    That we cannot find him now (except for the Toppy supporters) is another problem, which, imo, has been solved by Sam Flynn years ago...

    Amitiés,
    David

    Leave a comment:


  • j.r-ahde
    replied
    Hello Phil!

    Well, most of all I was thinking about the MJK lifestory; there seems to be a certain logic in it, but as a whole it doesn't make sense!

    But your point about the backrounds of mr. Hutchinson and mrs. Maxwell are very interesting, thank you!

    There isn't really much about them either!

    All the best
    Jukka

    Leave a comment:


  • Phil Carter
    replied
    Hello Jukka,

    Tell you what amazes me. I find it incredible that we can't find hair nor tail of the victim's past, we can't find hair nor tail of Hutchinson, before or after, we can't find Caroline Maxwell either. Have a look around the rest of the "players" in the Dorset Street business. Try and find THEIR backgrounds and see how many YOU can find.
    Plus the fact that 7 (SEVEN) doctors turned up at 13, Miller's Court. And just about every top Tom, Dick and Harry from the Police Force too.
    There is masses wrong with that "killing". Even the good old Coroner never actually states a time of death, and closes the inquest after a very short time... the most atrocious "murder" the East End has ever seen, and it gets closed in record time. Makes you think.

    best wishes

    Phil

    Leave a comment:


  • j.r-ahde
    replied
    Hello Phil!

    Well, we have only pretty recently known, how healthy President Kennedy really was, haven't we?!

    And now for curious:

    What it comes to any undercover operations, the only victim, who would suit to that, is MJK.

    Why?! If her Told-to-Joe lifestory was a cover-up.

    But had she been an agent gone wrong, she wouldn't have been in the East End even for that long time!

    All the best
    Jukka

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X