How did he do it?

[Phil H]

Sally,

You are probably right.

But I don't think we can just write off the later time of death. As far as I know, no one has yet shown conclusively that Mrs Maxwell was mistaken, and until then, we cannot simply disregard her evidence can we? It has to leave open a sliver of doubt, at least.

As you know, I try to have an open mind and keep several scenarios in play at any given time.

I may be quite wrong, and I am happy to countenance an "Oh, Murder!" timing as well.

On one point, I wonder whether a Barnett (either) or a Fleming would have been noticed in daylight? Was Bowyer?

Phil

[Sally]

Sally,

Phil!

You are probably right.

Usually, I find (JOKE!)

But I don't think we can just write off the later time of death. As far as I know, no one has yet shown conclusively that Mrs Maxwell was mistaken, and until then, we cannot simply disregard her evidence can we? It has to leave open a sliver of doubt, at least.

But Phil, how does one show conclusively that Mrs Maxwell was mistaken? Surely that is entirely impossible? Since this is so, I feel we have to take other factors into account when assessing her account, which I try to do.

On one point, I wonder whether a Barnett (either) or a Fleming would have been noticed in daylight? Was Bowyer?

Phil

Well, I don't say that a person entering Kelly's room in the morning would have necessarily attracted particular attention, whoever they were. I do say that once the slaughtering party commenced, such activity would have attracted particular attention, whoever it was.

The noise, the heat, smoke and stench should have been enough to draw attention, I should have thought. In the early hours, when most people were in their beds, not so much.

A pleasure as always, Phil

[Phil H]

Sally,

On Maxwell, short of additional evidence emerging that corroborates or undermines her evidence, I don't think we can be sure, but neither do I feel that is a reason for "rationalising" her out of the frame.

She stuck to her guns under considerable pressure, soIi think we are stuck with the two possible scenarios. Dismiss her - and it could be she was right and other evidence (TOD?) was mistaken - and we would then misinterpret any new evidence that might arise or be recognised.

So I just keep both scenarios in play, as I do with the killer of Stride (JtR or Kidney?) or the inclusion of victims like Tabram or Mckenzie. makes life messy and complicated by hey ho!!

On your last point:

I do say that once the slaughtering party commenced, such activity would have attracted particular attention, whoever it was....The noise, the heat, smoke and stench should have been enough to draw attention, I should have thought.

You may well be right, but consider:

a) no one noticed the stench between say 8.00am and the finding of the body nearer 11.00, did they?

b) Lizzie Prater is often assumed to have heard Kelly's last words, but confessed to hearing no other noises (precisely what do you have in mind - splintering bone? rending flesh? chuckles of sadistic pleasure ?;

c) so far as heat is concerned that assumes the fire was stoked up during the killing - but no one said they saw a glimmer through the poorly covered windows of No 13;

d) it could be argued that a fire, and its "glow" would be less visible after dawn rather than in the dark;

e) the fire - whenever it took place, earlier when kelly was alive, or later during the killing, it was not observed.

Just some thoughts.

Likewise a pleasure as always,

Phil

[Merry_Olde_Mary]

Could he have also observed Kelly open her own door that way, as wasn't her key reported missing? (Maybe I'm mixing this up with the window being reportedly broken.)

Did they have the kind of doors that could lock automatically behind you back then? If so, what I would have done (if I were a drunk with a missing key) would be to let the door automatically lock behind me when I went out pub crawling, then reach in to unlock it upon my returns.

Maybe the Ripper saw her do this...or had been to her room before to buy sex, and noticed the window.

All theoretical....I have no devotion to any theories, as I really only know the barest outlines of the different events.

EDIT: oops, just read more of the previous thread : ( Guess I should do that FIRST, if I don't want to annoy by repeating others' observations!

[Sally]

Sally

Phil?

On Maxwell, short of additional evidence emerging that corroborates or undermines her evidence, I don't think we can be sure, but neither do I feel that is a reason for "rationalising" her out of the frame.

Quite right. I wasn't trying to rationalise her out of the frame, really.

She stuck to her guns under considerable pressure, soIi think we are stuck with the two possible scenarios. Dismiss her - and it could be she was right and other evidence (TOD?) was mistaken - and we would then misinterpret any new evidence that might arise or be recognised.

Ok, well, as far as I see it Phil, Mrs Maxwell was quite genuine - she was honestly convinced that she had seen Kelly. So, either she had not seen Kelly, but thought she had; or she had actually seen Kelly. If the latter, then either a) Kelly was killed subsequent to that encounter, or b) the dead woman in the bed was not Kelly. I've contemplated all those scenarios at some point, and I still haven't made my mind up.

So I just keep both scenarios in play, as I do with the killer of Stride (JtR or Kidney?) or the inclusion of victims like Tabram or Mckenzie. makes life messy and complicated by hey ho!!

Ah, but that's realism for you Phil. Life's like that.

On your last point:

a) no one noticed the stench between say 8.00am and the finding of the body nearer 11.00, did they?

Well, we don't know really, do we? It isn't reported. Perhaps the normal stench of Millers Court was such that nobody would have noticed. A pleasant thought.

b) Lizzie Prater is often assumed to have heard Kelly's last words, but confessed to hearing no other noises (precisely what do you have in mind - splintering bone? rending flesh? chuckles of sadistic pleasure ?;

Hmm. Well, the cry of 'Oh Murder' is controversial in itself, isn't it? And yes, all of the above, especially the last one

c) so far as heat is concerned that assumes the fire was stoked up during the killing - but no one said they saw a glimmer through the poorly covered windows of No 13;

If it happened at night there may have been nobody there to see it, of course. As you say, the fire was not observed.

Perhaps taken individually, these factors are insufficient to substantially weigh against a daytime murder, but I still think that together, they do. You dissect my argument (such as it is) neatly, but in fact what you would have in reality would be an event which incorporated all those elements, and which, I think, would have been highly noticeable were there people around to witness it.

And then there's the risk factor. Daytime carnage would have carried an enormous degree of risk - too much, I contend, for this killer, who evidently didn't fancy being caught.

[Lechmere]

Given that the other four canonical victims, along with Tabram, and possibly McKenzie and Coles were killed at a site where they had (it is presumed) taken their last client, it is a fair guess that the same happened with Kelly and she took her killer back to Miller’s Court with her.

The broken window was out of sight of the road and Kelly could only have been observed opening the door via the broken window by someone actually with her.

[Ben]

The broken window was out of sight of the road and Kelly could only have been observed opening the door via the broken window by someone actually with her.

Or following her closely from behind, as Mary Cox had been at 11:45pm, Lechmere.

I'm not aware of any generally accepted presumption that the prostitutes led the killer to the murder locations, but it's possible. It is indeed a "fair guess" that Kelly brought home her killer who was then posing as a client, but to my mind, it is not the most likely explanation.

All the best,
Ben

[Wickerman]

We don't know that McCarthy wasn't aware that the door could be opened like this ;

Oh yes we do!

We only know that the police, after waiting for bloodhounds that never arrived, broke the door down -but we don't know why.

No they didn't!

Inquest statement of Dr George Baxter Philips;
".....I remained until about 1.30p.m., when the door was broken open by McCarthy, under the direction of Superintendent Arnold."

Regards, Jon S.

[Raoul's Obsession]

for what it's worth (and I'm by no means the first person to say this)...

If Mary Kelly leaves her apartment, there is very little reason to lock it, after all it would simply mean that you would then have to go through the fiddly process of sticking your arm through broken glass to unlock it again on your return. But this doesn't mean she wouldn't lock it immediately upon her return. My guess is that it is her person that she wants to protect from the ripper, not her possessions, which, lets face it, were pretty much nonexistent. Just because she wasn't observed unlocking the door (via the window) upon her return doesn't mean that she habitually kept the door unlocked when she went to sleep. If other people in the same building were scared enough to put furniture in front of their door, it's a fair bet Mary had the same fear.

[Ben]

Hi RO,

There is no indication that "protection from the ripper" was uppermost in Kelly's mind on the night of her death, or else she would hardly have taken men back to her apartment while in a heavily intoxicated condition. Moreover, it was observed by Chief Inspector Moore that East Enders were not generally in the habit of locking their doors. All in all, a pretty compelling case for Kelly absent-mindedly keeping the door "on the latch" that night.

[Wickerman]

..I'm not aware of any generally accepted presumption that the prostitutes led the killer to the murder locations,...

That has been what might be called a 'point of agreement' among principal authors over the years.

Rather than credit the killer with knowing all the individual police beats it was deemed 'most likely' that the prostitute would be the one to be most familiar with the police patrols on her 'beat'. So the conclusion has been that the most likely solution was that the pros' took their clients to a place & time where they could expect the most beneficial 'window of time' without interruption.

But as with everything else in this case, these are just educated guesses. Suffice to say the possibility has been discussed at length over the years, not that it applies in the case of Kelly's murder.

Regards, Jon S.

[Phil H]

I'm not aware of any generally accepted presumption that the prostitutes led the killer to the murder locations, but it's possible.

I agree that many students of these cases do, at least implicitly assume that the women led "Jack" to the murder scene, at least in the cases of Nichols, Chapman and Eddowes.

All were relatively secluded, darkish spots, and all had a gate or wooden fence with some "give" against which the woman could lean.

... It is indeed a "fair guess" that Kelly brought home her killer who was then posing as a client, but to my mind, it is not the most likely explanation.

I disagree - this is entirely subjective (but then most consideration of MJK's death has to be) - for two reasons:

a) the neatly folded clothes. I doubt that MJK would strip off for a client - even in her own room. Too time-consuming, unnecessary and too much effort if she intended to go out again that night. Recall, Victorian women's clothes were not easy to remove and put on again;

b) secondly, I don't think MJK would have fallen asleep in the presence of someone she did not know - and all the evidence I have seen suggests that is what she did.

Phil

[Rubyretro]

Inquest statement of Dr George Baxter Philips;
".....I remained until about 1.30p.m., when the door was broken open by McCarthy, under the direction of Superintendent Arnold."

Regards, Jon S.[/QUOTE]

Wickerman -whether it was a policeman who physically broke the door down, or McCarthy, it is clear that it was done on the orders of the police and was not McCarthy's descision to make.

We know that it was possible to open the door latch via the window, and photos of the outside of the room clearly show the broken window, therefore
we might suppose that the police were not too dim to have spotted that this was a likely way of entry (they would surely have been wondering how the killer had got into the room). However, rhey still decided to break the door down. There might be a good reason for this. There was some suggestion on another thread (and I have to go to work in a min, so no time to dig it out)
that the small table piled with bloody flesh was actually found much nearer the window, thus preventing anyone reaching through the window from doing so without getting their arm in the 'gunk' or knocking it on the floor (and the killer might have placed the table there on purpose). The photographer who took the pictures of the crime scene moved the table to be able to get everything into the photo.

So, we have no way of knowing whether McCarthy knew about Mary
using the window to open the door or not -and it's not really important.

Other people, including the killer, may have seen Mary using this window to open the door on an occasion prior to the murder night. They may have heard about it from one of Kelly's prostitute friends -or the killer may simply have worked it out. The door may have been unlatched (I think that Mary was scared, but maybe Blotchy let himself out, and Mary was too drunk to check the door). We don't know.

I think that the folded clothes indicate that Mary took her clothes off alone
-unless the killer folded them.

[Fisherman]

Ben:

"There is no indication that "protection from the ripper" was uppermost in Kelly's mind on the night of her death, or else she would hardly have taken men back to her apartment while in a heavily intoxicated condition."

But is not a "heavily intoxicated condition" a condition in which we normally DON`T act rationally?

the best,
Fisherman

[Fisherman]

Ruby:

"I think that the folded clothes indicate that Mary took her clothes off alone"

...in a "heavily intoxicated" state? Is that how people who are drunken shitfaced treat their clothes when going to bed?

The best,
Fisherman