A Theory -The access to Mary Kelly

[Wickerman]

I don't have any difficulty envisaging a killer who has created a purpose-built pocket to accommodate a knife, Alternatively a knife in his boot or strapped to his shin. For rapid access I think I would favour concealment in his left sleeve if right-handed - or vice versa.

Yes, these characters can be quite creative, look at the 'killing kit' used by Sutcliffe, including those custom made leggin's.

With Patricia Atkinson, Sutcliffe picked up a hammer as they both left the car.
In her apartment she started to undress, he took his coat off and hung it on the door, she sat on the bed taking her jeans off.
While she was occupied, he went to his coat and pulled out the hammer and struck her with it.

A hammer is somewhat larger than a knife but she never saw it coming.

A don't know, I'm not seeing Lynn's objection.

Regards, Jon S.

[c.d.]

Hello Jon. Thanks.

"You don't believe he played along until the right moment when her attention turned away from him?"

Can you expand here? What sort of behaviour is taking place here?

"Why would you think he remained dressed, not even removing his coat?"

Well, could be the exposed knife would look threatening.

Cheers.
LC

Hello Lynn,

Maybe we can kill two birds with one stone here (yes, pun intended). He asks Mary to build a fire. While her back is turned, he takes the knife and hides it under the bed. Now we have a solution to why the fire was lit and how he concealed the knife.

c.d.

[Michael W Richards]

As to the knife, I believe its possible that more than one was used, and its possible that in one of the MJK photos showing the viscera on the night table that a table knife is present among the innards. The innards may also be laying on an instrument that would be used to heat food over the fire, take food from the table to the fire, or, with caution, dry some clothing over the fire. Its a type of wire grill with a handle I believe, and the table knife has a bone or ivory carved handle.

Ill look for the photo enhancements, I think I still have them...I believe courtesy of Simon Wood a few years back.

aha....Found one. I thought since knives were being discussed it was worth throwing the possibility into the mix..that one murder weapon was left there....if it is on that table, it also may just have been Marys.

[Michael W Richards]

Hi folks,

For Bridewell, the main problem with your backing the notion that "oh-murder" signified the attack commencement is that there is no sound at all following that cry out, and we have 2 witnesses in different locations who are now listening for a follow up cry. Its why I favor an exclamation of slight annoyance at being woken while sleeping off alcohol, and a quick return to bed. A second large problem is that the murder began, according to the medical data, in the room with Mary on the right hand side of the bed. That does not seem in accord with a call "as if from the court", nor "as if at my door" by a court resident that night. Thats why I suggest that the cry was Mary at her open door, it addresses the known facts.

And for Jon, the only statement made by Barnett regarding Marys occupation while they shared digs was that he objected to her "working the streets". We have the evidence of that lifestyle... if one working woman in the court that night is anything to gauge by. She went out to work, she came in to warm herself and perhaps dry off.

I would think anyone that favors a Jack the Ripper killer of a Canonical Group would be distressed to have to explain this other deviation from pattern...the choice of Street Whores....I believe Lynn said it earlier, but private rooms, brothels and checking into a room for the night were available options from the outset of the killings, it would appear by the choice of public locations in the earlier killings that the killer could not control his drives completely, which suggests someone with some kind of obvious mental illness...which is incompatible with the portrait painted by the Hutchinson suspect.

Best regards all

[Bridewell]

I don't have any difficulty envisaging a killer who has created a purpose-built pocket to accommodate a knife, Alternatively a knife in his boot or strapped to his shin. For rapid access I think I would favour concealment in his left sleeve if right-handed - or vice versa.

[Wickerman]

Not at all. My problem lies with "pull a knife." From whence would he pull it?

From under his coat?
.
.
.
Quite. But, again, whence came it?

Hello Lynn.

Our first problem is, what kind of knife?

A clasp knife would fit in his pocket. The knife identified in earlier murders with a 6-8 inch blade, thereby being in full a length exceeding 10 inches is not likely to fit in a pocket.

Here's what one suspect was found to be carrying in his bag..

"... in it were found two pairs of scissors, a dagger and sheath, and a life preserver."

"... it was found to contain a dagger, a clasp knife, two pairs of scissors, and two life-preservers."

Funny how the contents of the same bag can differ in the press reports nevertheless, this character was carrying an assortment of weapons in his 'little black bag'.

Pick yourself up a knife with a 6-8 inch blade, I think you'd be hard pressed to find a coat with a pocket deep enough to hide such a weapon.

So, this killer choked Mary on the bed, then turned to pull his knife from his coat? draped across the chair, or from out of his bag sitting on the floor, and commenced the mutilations, or something along those lines.
Yet, you tell me this is difficult to envisage?

I'm still wondering, why?

Regards, Jon S.

[lynn cates]

"I've been waiting, . . ."

Hello Damaso. Not a question of impatience. It is a question of "MJK" standing for 3-5 minutes disrobing whilst her assailant stands there, fully clothed with coat, waiting for events to transpire.

She must NOT become suspicious.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

Whence?

Hello Jon. Thanks.

"Aren't you assuming he would pull a knife before she was out cold?"

Not at all. My problem lies with "pull a knife." From whence would he pull it? From under his coat? Very well. But in that case he is standing there with his coat on. Suspicious.

"Can you really imagine any of the victims ever seeing a knife? - wouldn't they have screamed their heads off?"

Indeed. But these ladies were all clothed.

"It was a common mystery in other cases why there was no noise, the killer appears to strike in silence. How is he going to achieve this by brandishing a knife in their face?"

Quite. But, again, whence came it?

Cheers.
LC

[richardnunweek]

Hi Damaso Marte,
I can see your point , however, if we take the disturbance heard in Brady street, [ possible Nichols being assaulted] the apparently sudden movement on Chapman in the backyard of number 29, the vicious attack witnessed on Stride, the quick despatch of Eddowes , and a possible oral history account, of the apparent killers manner, ie,' when walking to Kelly's room, using Mary's,alleged words ,''All right love , don't pull me along''. we could have someone lacking in patience.
Regards Richard.

[Damaso Marte]

Hello Lynn,
If Mary was killed by the Ripper, it goes against the grain to suggest, that he kept his patience long enough for a Victorian woman to disrobe.

Not sure why the Ripper would have to be impatient. If he existed, he waited weeks, months sometimes, between kills. And he may well have gotten a thrill out of pretending to be a regular client for a while before striking - especially indoors where he doesn't have to worry about when the police patrol comes by again.

[Wickerman]

Hello Jon. Thanks. The relevance is that if he is clothed, that is suspicious; if he is unclothed and showing a knife, that is suspicious.

Cheers.
LC

Hello Lynn.

Aren't you assuming he would pull a knife before she was out cold?

The ecchymosis 'may' indicate Mary was choked which would be consistent with some of the previous victims. Can you really imagine any of the victims ever seeing a knife? - wouldn't they have screamed their heads off?

It was a common mystery in other cases why there was no noise, the killer appears to strike in silence. How is he going to achieve this by brandishing a knife in their face?

Regards, Jon S.

[Wickerman]

Hey folks,

Once again its important to use the facts when making any suppositions, and the facts are that Mary Kelly is never accused by anyone, nor does she admit herself, to taking ANY clients into her room in Millers Court.

Whoa, not so fast Michael.

Nowhere do we read Mary entertained on the streets.

We do know (via Prater) what some of those rooms were used for.
We also know the story offered by Barnett, and corroborated by Mrs Carthy, that Mary had led a Gay life in Knightsbridge.
The chemise she wore must be one of the few items of clothing she managed to retain from those high society days, it was perhaps the remnants of her 'tools of the trade'.

Mary Kelly apparently was accustomed to entertaining indoors. In a room for that purpose, like she had done in Knightsbridge.

Mary certainly appears to have tried to leave this life behind when she met Joe Barnett. However, once he left and she had no means of income and an empty room in a cul-de-sac known for use by prostitutes it is a foregone conclusion what resource she could fall back on and where she could ply her trade.

Why on earth would she perform 'quickies', in dark allys, on cold wet nights, when she is a seasoned performer with all the comforts of home nearby.

Really Michael, it doesn't take much thinking about does it.

Regards, Jon S.

[lynn cates]

accoutrement

Hello Greg. Thanks.

"I would imagine a mysterious parcel wouldn't be a welcome accoutrement during the reign of terror"

That's the one!

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

fit

Hello Abby. Thanks.

But I wonder if it would fit? If was rather large.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

column A; column B

Hello Jon. Thanks. The relevance is that if he is clothed, that is suspicious; if he is unclothed and showing a knife, that is suspicious.

Cheers.
LC