Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Mary Jane Violence

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Errata
    replied
    Originally posted by c.d. View Post

    From the Urban Dictionary Rule 35 -- An addendum of the internet rules stating that if there is no porn of it, it will be made. As opposed to Rule 34 -- Rule 34, for example, refers to the ubiquity of pornography online: “There is porn of it. No exceptions.”

    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • c.d.
    replied
    Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post

    im so lost. what the hell are you guys talking about?!?!?! lol
    From the Urban Dictionary Rule 35 -- An addendum of the internet rules stating that if there is no porn of it, it will be made. As opposed to Rule 34 -- Rule 34, for example, refers to the ubiquity of pornography online: “There is porn of it. No exceptions.”

    c.d.

    Leave a comment:


  • Abby Normal
    replied
    Originally posted by DJA View Post
    It is what basically powers the internet.

    See rule 35.
    im so lost. what the hell are you guys talking about?!?!?! lol

    Leave a comment:


  • Herlock Sholmes
    replied
    Originally posted by c.d. View Post

    Hello Herlock,

    There is also the possibility that he had met her earlier at some point and she gave him an open invitation to come by some time.

    c.d.
    Hello c.d.

    Its certainly a possibility.

    I know that a lot of people think that Jack was likely to have been a local but I’ve never been so sure. Local knowledge would certainly have been an advantage when it came to blending in and knowing the escape routes but I can’t help wondering if those benefits might not have been outweighed by the possibility of being recognised. If someone had said that they saw Fred Smith in the vicinity of Buck’s Row he might have been able to have come up with a plausible reason for being there but if someone had seen him near to Berner Street too then he might have had a hard job convincing the police that it was a coincidence.

    Leave a comment:


  • Errata
    replied
    Originally posted by Al Bundy's Eyes View Post
    Hi C.D, yeah a point well made. It's generally reported that Michael Barnett had echolalia, an odd condition In such a great catch. I've typically been of the belief that Mary was just another unfortunate. Just thinking that maybe there was more than just opportunity?
    Jeepers, if you think echolalia is odd, have I got a universe of wonders for you adjacent to this case...

    Leave a comment:


  • DJA
    replied
    It is what basically powers the internet.

    See rule 35.

    Leave a comment:


  • c.d.
    replied
    Originally posted by DJA View Post
    Google it.
    I did and I'll be damned. Learn something every day. Now I am on the lookout for Fenian porn sites.

    c.d.

    Leave a comment:


  • c.d.
    replied
    Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post
    Hello Al,

    i don't think that there's any way that we can come down on either side with absolute certainty. For me personally though the fact that she had her own room has to be highly suggestive. A killer approaching a random prostitute would have had no way of knowing whether his prospective victim had her own accommodation or not, but faced with one who did and who might have told him “don’t worry I live on my own so we won’t be disturbed” might have felt that all of his Christmas’s had come along at once.
    Hello Herlock,

    There is also the possibility that he had met her earlier at some point and she gave him an open invitation to come by some time.

    c.d.

    Leave a comment:


  • DJA
    replied
    Google it.

    Leave a comment:


  • c.d.
    replied
    Originally posted by Al Bundy's Eyes View Post
    C.D, rule 34
    Say what?

    c.d.

    Leave a comment:


  • c.d.
    replied
    Originally posted by Simon Wood View Post
    Hi Abby,

    So, prove the victim was Mary Kelly.

    All we know is what we've been told.

    Who's to say it's true?

    If it was true, surely Debra Arif would have found her by now.

    Simon
    Hello Simon,

    But can't we use that same line of reasoning regarding basically anything to do with the case? How do we know with absolute certainty that Tumblety was a homosexual or that it was actually Druitt that was pulled out of the Thames? Seems a bit of a slippery slope to me.

    c.d.

    Leave a comment:


  • Al Bundy's Eyes
    replied
    C.D, rule 34

    Leave a comment:


  • Herlock Sholmes
    replied
    Hello Al,

    i don't think that there's any way that we can come down on either side with absolute certainty. For me personally though the fact that she had her own room has to be highly suggestive. A killer approaching a random prostitute would have had no way of knowing whether his prospective victim had her own accommodation or not, but faced with one who did and who might have told him “don’t worry I live on my own so we won’t be disturbed” might have felt that all of his Christmas’s had come along at once.

    Leave a comment:


  • DJA
    replied
    Links?

    Leave a comment:


  • c.d.
    replied
    Well let's assume that the victim found in Millers Court was not actually named Mary Kelly. Does this automatically indicate some sort of conspiracy or involvement by a person or persons unknown or any type of theory no matter how far fetched? How unreasonable is it that "Mary Kelly" chose not to use her real name out of fear of an abusive ex husband or lover tracking her down or simply didn't want her family to know how she made her living.

    I mean look at porn stars. Do they use their real names? Are they all on the run from the Fenians?

    c.d.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X