Escalation: What would Jack do after Mary Kelly?

[Indian Harry]

I have to admit that even though I've read and seen crime scene photos of the victims of mentioned murderers, I've never actually seen anything as disturbing as Mary Jane Kelly case. In her murder mutilation is so horrific, destructive and disgusting that it's really hard to believe that the killer was not mentally ill in some capacity. Her body was almost completely destroyed with fury, lust and morbid curiousity that's unmatched

I totally agree. I've been reading True Crime since I was 12 years old and I had always thought the name Jack the Ripper was quaint and must certainly be an overstatement of some sort....then when I was 27 I started looking into the case and found the Mary Kelly photo. I was absolutely floored. The very thought that someone back in 1888 without any exposure to modern horror movies or media related to 20th century killers could independently, from their own twisted mind, carry out such an atrocious act disturbed me to my core. I had trouble sleeping that night. It was the last time I had that child like fear of the dark that kids get, for instance, after watching a scary movie.

[Lewis C]

Hi Abby,

I find myself at a loss as to how Kelly is rated so highly. He has one kill to his name, but then disappears for decades and finally surrenders himself to an asylum. Can he be shown to have been in Whitechapel at the relevant time? How does he address the theory that serial killers don't just stop. Where are the protests that are seen for the "gap" between Kelly and McKenzie. I'm not trying to be perverse. I just don't understand the popularity of Kelly.

Cheers, George

Hi George,

Some have theorized that Kelly didn't stop, that he may have committed some murders in the US after the Whitechapel murders. That's unproven, but can we really say for sure that that if he was the Ripper, he stopped after the Whitechapel murders?

I don't know what your point is on the gap between Kelly and McKenzie. McKenzie may or not have been a Ripper victim, and if she was a Ripper victim, the question of why there was a gap between her and MJK is there regardless of whom the Ripper was, unless we happen to know for a specific suspect something that would have stopped him during that period. IIRC, Kelly is thought to have left England before the McKenzie murder. If so, he couldn't have been the Ripper if McKenzie was a Ripper victim, but that's also true of Bury, Cohen, Druitt, Hyams, and Tumblety.

[Abby Normal]

Hi Abby,

I find myself at a loss as to how Kelly is rated so highly. He has one kill to his name, but then disappears for decades and finally surrenders himself to an asylum. Can he be shown to have been in Whitechapel at the relevant time? How does he address the theory that serial killers don't just stop. Where are the protests that are seen for the "gap" between Kelly and McKenzie. I'm not trying to be perverse. I just don't understand the popularity of Kelly.

Cheers, George

hi george
hes a murderer, of woman by knife, he was crafty and street smart as tje ripper surely was, he fits the general description, he was a police person of interest, he was local and in the area, and the murders commence with his escape from prison.

amd we know from serial killer history they do sometimes just stop.. rader, gsk, kemper and even turn themselves in.. kemper.

kelly was crazy all right, like a fox. hes just the type i think the ripper would be.

[GBinOz]

There is no evidence he murdered anyone other than his wife, in part the result of a psychotic episode in which he just flipped and had a moment of madness during which he lost control entirely.

Hi RD,

Your research is commendable and shows that a life can be rebuilt after a single moment of madness. However, I can't see that his rebuilding his life offers any suggestion that he may have been a serial killer.

Cheers, George

[The Rookie Detective]

Hi Abby,

I find myself at a loss as to how Kelly is rated so highly. He has one kill to his name, but then disappears for decades and finally surrenders himself to an asylum. Can he be shown to have been in Whitechapel at the relevant time? How does he address the theory that serial killers don't just stop. Where are the protests that are seen for the "gap" between Kelly and McKenzie. I'm not trying to be perverse. I just don't understand the popularity of Kelly.

Cheers, George

You make a good point George.


I think the reasoning behind Kelly having possibly been the Ripper stems from 2 specific things.

Firstly, the manner in which his knife attack was described and the way he tried to dig and root around as he cut into his wife's throat.

Secondly, his enigmatic quality relating to his escape from an asylum by crafting his own key from scrap metal and then disappearing until he then turns up at the asylum to eventually hand himself in.


There is no evidence he murdered anyone other than his wife, in part the result of a psychotic episode in which he just flipped and had a moment of madness during which he lost control entirely.

He was clearly a mentally disturbed individual and his removal to the asylum indicates that he was a danger to the public.

But here's where is gets rather interesting...

Kelly not only had the ingenuity to craft a key and a means of escape from little more than scraps. He had the clarity of mind to think outside the box and found a way to escape confinement.

That denotes intelligence and clarity of mind.

He then dissapears... for a while.

However, I managed to find him living and working under an alias in North London.

He was in full time employment working for an established Undertakers.

His role would have involved coming within close proximity to corpses on a daily basis.

So Kelly also has the clarity of mind to use an alias and get a full time job.

Again, that suggests that; at face value; Kelly appeared "normal" enough to obtain full time employment under a fake name.

That also signals intelligence beyond insanity.

Kelly clearly didn't come across as insane when he secured employment at the undertaker firm.

I therefore believe there's an irony in that it's not the murder of his wife with a knife that is his strongest attribute as a potential Ripper suspect; it's his life AFTER the point he manages to craft a means of escape from the asylum.

The new data I found regarding Kelly i have uploaded over on Forums, and it relates specifically to the 1921 census record.

I am hoping that my findings will be added officially to Kelly's life chronology, because at present it hasn't been updated.

But there's more...

Another researcher added to my findings by informing me that the address listed by Kelly for 1921 is only yards from where a certain Mr Lawrende was also living at the exact same time.

I found that rather astonishing, because the idea that Lawrende and a key Ripper suspect were living within such close proximity in 1921, then opens up a whole new line of thinking.


Another tantalising detail; the Undertakers that Kelly worked for... still exists today.

I have endeavoured to enquire as to whether the company has any archive employee records from 1921.

I have yet to receive a reply.

So, just to confirm that at some point between Kelly escaping from the asylum, to the point he turns up again to hand himself in; he was working at an undertakers.

If the Ripper had a thing for corpses, then perhaps Kelly chose to work with the recently deceased for a reason.

If Kelly was the Ripper, did he feign lunacy, escape from the asylum to work with the dead, and then finally chose to hand himself in so that some of his legacy could at least be remembered?

[GBinOz]

im with john on this one.

I think bury and kelly are two of the best suspects we have for the ripper. eventhough wc was a violent place, murder was relatively rare and these two men showed tje propensity for murder. with knife no less on a woman. and bury did post mortem mutilation to the midsection (very rare)like the ripper, both were in the area, both fit the general profile of the local avg joe, and both were persons of interest by the police. and no, bury was not cleared -unlike how pizer was and ostrog later nor did the police as a whole not think he was the ripper. a couple of police officers and some in the press didnt think he was the ripper. big difference.

and re the press descriptions of bury...sounds like dennis rader, chikatilo, gein, dahmer, willam suff, kemper, the gsk, etc etc.

Hi Abby,

I find myself at a loss as to how Kelly is rated so highly. He has one kill to his name, but then disappears for decades and finally surrenders himself to an asylum. Can he be shown to have been in Whitechapel at the relevant time? How does he address the theory that serial killers don't just stop. Where are the protests that are seen for the "gap" between Kelly and McKenzie. I'm not trying to be perverse. I just don't understand the popularity of Kelly.

Cheers, George

[Abby Normal]

im with john on this one.

I think bury and kelly are two of the best suspects we have for the ripper. eventhough wc was a violent place, murder was relatively rare and these two men showed tje propensity for murder. with knife no less on a woman. and bury did post mortem mutilation to the midsection (very rare)like the ripper, both were in the area, both fit the general profile of the local avg joe, and both were persons of interest by the police. and no, bury was not cleared -unlike how pizer was and ostrog later nor did the police as a whole not think he was the ripper. a couple of police officers and some in the press didnt think he was the ripper. big difference.

and re the press descriptions of bury...sounds like dennis rader, chikatilo, gein, dahmer, willam suff, kemper, the gsk, etc etc.

[John Wheat]

Hi John,

I have observed that you are disparaging of any suspect that is not Bury. I am sorry that you find non acquiescence to your theory to be unpleasant. It was apparent to the police at the time that Bury was not the ripper, and the local press described him as "a tired, inconsequential, weak little man" and "Brainless and heartless". To paraphrase many of your posts, there is no evidence that Bury murdered anyone but his wife.

Cheers, George

Hi George

I'm not disparaging of any suspect that isn't Bury. I find other proven violent murderers to be good suspects such as Kelly. The Police at the time dismissing Bury does not mean he wasn't the Ripper. The Police dismissed Peter Sutcliffe as the Yorkshire Ripper and they had more idea about serial killers than the Police in the late 1800's. Im not sure how you think a tired, inconsequential, weak little man couldn't be the Ripper. That is exactly the type of man the Ripper would be.

Cheers John

[I1ariusz]

"a tired, inconsequential, weak little man" and "Brainless and heartless"...

Hi George, that would actually fit real Ripper preatty well. But I'm also a bit sceptical about Bury. I would rather suspect someone who's far more extensive in his mutilation (his wife's wounds were not really that deep). We don't see that much of anger as in Eddowes and Kelly murders. By killing his wife we should see depersonalization with cutting up face (which was apparent in Eddowes and Kelly murders). Ripper clearly hated and despised his victims - I think that FBI agent suggested that we should see somekind of bragging about his murders when he was cought. If Bury was so volient towards his wife we should see similar hatred and lack of remorse. I remember when Robert Napper made note about one of his potential victim calling her "sodden and filthy bitch". It's that kind of hatred.

Ofc his profile is close to the Ripper profile and he could be researched further. With Ripper we don't really have anything certain. Many things are a matter of speculation.
I am myself more into Kosminsky/Cohen or someone similar category: low-class, mentally disturbed, young and without any real anatomical knowledge, deep hatred and fear of women.

[GBinOz]

Maybe I wouldn't be so disparaging of certain suspects if certain people's attitude was a bit more pleasant. Also it's obvious to me that Bury is the best suspect by some distance even if it's not apparent to you.

Hi John,

I have observed that you are disparaging of any suspect that is not Bury. I am sorry that you find non acquiescence to your theory to be unpleasant. It was apparent to the police at the time that Bury was not the ripper, and the local press described him as "a tired, inconsequential, weak little man" and "Brainless and heartless". To paraphrase many of your posts, there is no evidence that Bury murdered anyone but his wife.

Cheers, George

[John Wheat]

There is no evidence that Bury killed anyone but his wife. There is no need to disparage other's suspects because your own single suspect lacks evidence of guilt. Being a nobody and a loser, not to mention a drunken wife beater, is not a qualification for being a serial killer that evaded all attempts at capture.

Maybe I wouldn't be so disparaging of certain suspects if certain people's attitude was a bit more pleasant. Also it's obvious to me that Bury is the best suspect by some distance even if it's not apparent to you.

[GBinOz]

I know that. Bury may have been Jack the Ripper though unlike your ridiculous surgeon suspect.

There is no evidence that Bury killed anyone but his wife. There is no need to disparage other's suspects because your own single suspect lacks evidence of guilt. Being a nobody and a loser, not to mention a drunken wife beater, is not a qualification for being a serial killer that evaded all attempts at capture.

[John Wheat]

Looks like staying that way!

I know that. Bury may have been Jack the Ripper though unlike your ridiculous surgeon suspect.

[DJA]

Looks like staying that way!

[John Wheat]

Hi John,

There are only a few suspects who murdered anyone that we know about. While we have a list of named suspects, the smart money is on someone who blends into the crowd - unnamed, unknown and chuckling at our efforts.

Cheers, George

But Bury would blend into the crowd. He was a nobody, a loser.