What 5 Questions Would You Like Answered?

[lynn cates]

Warning: not to be taken internally.

Hello Rivkah. Thanks.

"Washing externally doesn't get rid of internal semen."

Quite. The ladies were checked INTERNALLY (no sign of recent connection) as well as EXTERNALLY (no secretions on thighs).

"I wonder whether the intention of the bonnet wasn't so much to render her irresistible, as noticeable."

Quite. Dostoevski notes that the well dressed Russian prostitute MUST have a parasol.

"I've been thinking about the odd "prostitution was illegal indoors" law.

That does sound silly on the face, but it may have had to do with the realities of enforcement. An "indoor" law effectively bans brothels . . ."

Correct. I think WT Stead led the way on this one, but I may be mistaken.

Cheers.
LC

[DVV]

Hi Lynn
As to prostituting themselves and the question were they or weren't they

The facts speak for themselves as to their actions

Tabram - quiet secluded staircase
Chapman- quiet secluded back yard
Eddowes-quiet darkest part of Square
Kelly- known prositute secluded confines of her room

They all didn't go to these locations with a man to talk about the weather. The facts answer all the questions

Stop using good common-sense Trevor, or you'll get banned.

Annie Chapman went to that back yard to take a nap, and Kate Eddowes was too thirsty to solicit.

Get real.

[Trevor Marriott]

Stop using good common-sense Trevor, or you'll get banned.

Annie Chapman went to that back yard to take a nap, and Kate Eddowes was too thirsty to solicit.

Get real.

The truth is frightening to some !

[DVV]

They only think they post. Actually they babble.
Now it's about JtR having sex with the victims before the murders.

[curious4]

Full monty

Hello Rivkah,

Sorry, but the vision of Polly doing the full monty on the chilly streets of London "gave me real fits" as they say. All for a few pence as well!

Hello Lynn,

Thank you for your kind words.

Hello Trevor,

Still got the feather duster, but can't quite remember what I'm supposed to do with it.

All good wishes,
C4

[Ally]

Hello Rivkah. Thanks.

"Washing externally doesn't get rid of internal semen."

Quite. The ladies were checked INTERNALLY (no sign of recent connection) as well as EXTERNALLY (no secretions on thighs).

LC

However internal extraction can get rid of internal semen to a sufficient degree that, should an examination take place almost 24 hours later, it is possible that no trace will be detected. Especially ones who will be walking around for a while, have no undergarments and don't particularly enjoy the effects of gravity. And Catherine had everything she needed on her person to accomplish this. Most teenagers have figured this out, so I'll leave it to your imagination in figuring out the particulars.

[Trevor Marriott]

Hello Rivkah,

Sorry, but the vision of Polly doing the full monty on the chilly streets of London "gave me real fits" as they say. All for a few pence as well!

Hello Lynn,

Thank you for your kind words.

Hello Trevor,

Still got the feather duster, but can't quite remember what I'm supposed to do with it.

All good wishes,
C4

I am sure you will find a use ! lol

[lynn cates]

passageway

Hello David, Trevor. NO one slept in the back yard at #29.

I said Annie went there to sleep in the passageway. The back yard? That was AFTER the bloke, speaking loudly up against the shutters, asked "Will you?"

Reading CAREFULLY is a good habit to develop.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

cases

Hello Ally. Thanks.

But in EVERY case? I'm more than happy to consider exceptions, but inter-femoral was the norm. The doctors checked for BOTH and found nothing.

I am happy with:

1. Polly succeeded (3 times) and washed.

2. Annie tried but failed.

3. As to Liz and Kate, no evidence.

For the time being, that seems sufficient.

Cheers.
LC

[Ally]

Hello Ally. Thanks.

But in EVERY case? I'm more than happy to consider exceptions, but inter-femoral was the norm. The doctors checked for BOTH and found nothing.

I am happy with:

1. Polly succeeded (3 times) and washed.

2. Annie tried but failed.

3. As to Liz and Kate, no evidence.

For the time being, that seems sufficient.

Cheers.
LC

It's interesting what you consider "evidence". For all you know Polly could have gotten her doss money 3 times by begging. Yet you take her claims to have had her money 3 times to its logical conclusion - that she had earned it through prostitution.

Yet you deny the fact that Kate, having sufficient money to buy herself drink (exactly like Polly) is sufficient evidence.

Just out of curiosity, where do you get the impression that Kate was any less clean that Polly? Just because one person remarked on one victim's cleanliness doesn't automatically presume that anyone who didn't have a direct comment made was any more dirty. You seem to be presuming that because Kate didn't have a specific comment made about her hygiene by the doctor who examined her, she was dirty enough to prove lack of washing. I can find no evidence to actually support this conclusion. I am not saying that it's not there, just I haven't been able to find it. So please can you point me to your source, that indicates that Kate was less clean than Polly so as to make a comparison as to whether she had or had not washed herself?

[lynn cates]

induction

Hello Ally. Thanks.

"For all you know Polly could have gotten her doss money 3 times by begging."

Quite. And some were successful begging. Wonder how many?

"Yet you take her claims to have had her money 3 times to its logical conclusion - that she had earned it through prostitution."

Agreed again. Would you also agree that there may be other pointers?

1. Her choosing a new lodginghouse because they allowed couples to be together at night?

2. In 1882 her allowance was stopped. (Reason?)

3. She ended up on Buck's Row. (Surely not the best place to beg?)

"Yet you deny the fact that Kate, having sufficient money to buy herself drink (exactly like Polly) is sufficient evidence."

But how do we KNOW she had sufficient money--or any at all? All we know is that she was drunk.

"Just out of curiosity, where do you get the impression that Kate was any less clean that Polly?"

Well, I induce that from the dirtiness of her clothing--especially the apron. Of course, this is a rather weak inductive argument--one may be sparkling clean yet wear dirty clothing.

I do recall seeing an item in a news clipping in which her body was referred to as dirty. But, since I cannot find it just now, I won't ask you to trust me.

Cheers.
LC

[DVV]

Hello David, Trevor. NO one slept in the back yard at #29.

I said Annie went there to sleep in the passageway. The back yard? That was AFTER the bloke, speaking loudly up against the shutters, asked "Will you?"

Reading CAREFULLY is a good habit to develop.

Cheers.
LC

Ah, sorry Lynn.
Then she went there to sleep in the passageway.

It's almost worse, you know.

Cheers

[Trevor Marriott]

Hello David, Trevor. NO one slept in the back yard at #29.

I said Annie went there to sleep in the passageway. The back yard? That was AFTER the bloke, speaking loudly up against the shutters, asked "Will you?"

Reading CAREFULLY is a good habit to develop.

Cheers.
LC

So is trying to read into something that isn't there in the first place.

A bad ripperologial trait adopted by many

[lynn cates]

sleep

Hello David. Thanks.

"It's almost worse, you know."

Why worse? I have often asked (well, back in my "soloist" days) how long would Annie solicit before throwing up the sponge? If she had found a client by 4.00, say, fulfilled contract and made it back, would it even be worth it?

I would assume that, by, oh, 3.00-3.30, she's tired and ready to quit. She recalls #29 and goes there for a few minutes sleep.

Is that so bizarre?

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

not there

Hello Trevor. Thanks.

"So is trying to read into something that isn't there in the first place."

Like prostitution for Kate? Agreed.

"A bad ripperological trait adopted by many."

Well, I wasn't going to say anything, but . . .

Cheers.
LC