Mary Jane Violence

[Michael W Richards]

Hello Michael,

An argument in favor of your theory is fine. Stating it as fact is not.

I know the maintenance people in my apartment building by name. But that is all I know about them. I have no idea where they live or if they are married or if they have kids or what their favorite hobbies are. The point being that simply knowing someone does not automatically mean some sort of close or even intimate relationship with them.

c.d.

Missed the point. Read again the contextual data...where she was, at what time, under what circumstances, ...and then we have someone known to the victim. I don't have a fence sitting mentality unless its unsolvable with what is given, this isn't.

[Michael W Richards]

By far the best point out here as of now.

I should have known youd like that Fisherman, Ill add that none of her limbs, nor her Torso, nor her head was removed and later discarded.

[Fisherman]

... disassembled ...

By far the best point out here as of now.

[Michael W Richards]

Unrecognisable to him...erased...to distance himself from the fact that he killed the woman he loved.

Mary Kellys identity, or whomever lay in that bed's identity, was almost erased...certainly, if she wasn't Mary Jane Kelly. And he took her heart. Left her an empty shell, virtually disassembled and heartless. That's cruelty...which is emotional, which again supports my contention that the signs in this case point to someone who knew the woman in the bed. Likely very well. And I believe he thought he was betrayed in some fashion, hence the anger present.

[Al Bundy's Eyes]

Great point Leanne.

[Leanne]

Hi Simon,if the killer wanted to render the victim unrecognisable would he have done it at their home address?

Unrecognisable to him...erased...to distance himself from the fact that he killed the woman he loved.

[Al Bundy's Eyes]

I'm of the opinion that the killer projected his issues on Mary, combined with the unique opportunity to indulge his fantasies undisturbed led to the extraordinary level of violence displayed. Serial killers tend to murder strangers and prostitutes have always made ready targets. That said, if Mary was turning tricks to make a few Bob, would she have needed to take a stranger into her home? Could she have used dark corner like the others? Or did she trust whoever she brought home?
Also, assuming that the killer knew Mary and had decided in the summer to embark on a killing spree, would he target her earlier if he knew she would be likely to let him into her private space? Why take huge risks killing on the streets and then try and lure Mary?
I suppose if we knew these things we'd have nothing to debate.

[Fisherman]

There are examples of serial killers committing unrestrained acts of violence upon individuals they had no prior relationship with. Therefore the concept that MJK's killer must have been intimate with her is pop psychology imo. It's just as likely that the killer was projecting his issues with women in general or a matriarchal figure on poor old MJK. The situational context of the crime should not be discarded just because it's an oldie. It appears that certain posters are constantly looking to make their mark and reinvent the wheel.

In this context, I would say that as far as I´m concerned, no better explanation for the damage done to Kellys body can be offered than the explanation serial killer Sean Vincent Gillis gave after having slaughtered one of his victims and cut her extensively: "I wanted to see her femure".
Gillis had no prior relationship to the victim he spoke of.
Just like you say, Harry, there are killers out there who actually thrive on inflicting extensive damage on bodies, and they do so predominantly on people they have no prior relationships with. Names like Suff and Cottingham spring to mind. In some cases, an underlying urge to perform specific mutilations on a victim is part of the phantasy behind a killers deeds, like when Albert Fish wanted to cut away a penis after having seen a wax model of a bisection. He went on to fulfill that wish.
I believe that the killer of Mary Kelly entered her room with a fixed agenda and fulfilled his wishes, and basically, I think any such kind of killer is much more likely to use a victim where he had no prior attachments or links than somebody he knew beforehand. It´s very much different from the kind of spouse killings where the killer sets out to annihilate his wife or fiancée. In one case we have uncontrollable frenzy, in the other we have a controlled act of annihilation and/or destruction of the body or parts of it.

[Harry D]

There are examples of serial killers committing unrestrained acts of violence upon individuals they had no prior relationship with. Therefore the concept that MJK's killer must have been intimate with her is pop psychology imo. It's just as likely that the killer was projecting his issues with women in general or a matriarchal figure on poor old MJK. The situational context of the crime should not be discarded just because it's an oldie. It appears that certain posters are constantly looking to make their mark and reinvent the wheel.

[richardnunweek]

Hi
My take on this .
Relying on hearsay , and logic.
Kit Watkins Canadian Journalist interviewed a woman named Lottie around 1891, in Millers court, who was then living in Mary's room [13] she had previously at the time of the murder lived further down the court.
Kit claimed , that Lottie informed her that Kelly mentioned, that she had a nightmare [ shortly before her death] that she was being Murdered , and she was frightened,''Maybe I'll be next''? she said,
If one takes Mrs Praters inquest statement, referring to the scream heard] ''Like awakening from a nightmare'', and also Mrs Maxwell's statement, ''I have had the horrors of drink on me' It is entirely possible that Mary Kelly had a recurrence of that dream when the cry was heard around 4.am and that it was not a physical attack.
It would be fair to speculate , that she would have told Barnett , and others that she had a dream about being murdered.
She would have had that dream 'initially' in bed in room 13,. it is possible that her killer in his twisted way , made that dream come true.?
If she was frightened over that dream , it is very unlikely, that she would have taken a 'stranger ' back to her room , especially one dressed like the Penny Black Bogey man.
Therefore I submit , whoever took Mary's life, knew her.
Regards Richard.

[Sam Flynn]

Curiosity killed your innocent childhood. Or is that the Internet?

Curiosity possibly killed Schrödinger's cat.

[DJA]

im so lost. what the hell are you guys talking about?!?!?! lol

Madeline Brumby in Frankenstein Created Bikers.

[Errata]

Thanks for the heads up, Errata. Of course now, when I try to go to sleep, I will be thinking just what the hell were those images?

c.d.

Curiosity killed your innocent childhood. Or is that the Internet?

[c.d.]

I remember a while ago I wondered just what the dark web was all about. Saw a video of a guy saying trust me you don't want to know. Don't even think about going there.

c.d.

[c.d.]

To prove the rule 35, under no circumstances should you Google images of Scooby Doo without a filter on.

some things you cannot unsee.

Thanks for the heads up, Errata. Of course now, when I try to go to sleep, I will be thinking just what the hell were those images?

c.d.