Coincidence?

[JeffHamm]

Thanks Jeff, an interesting post.

I believe that Jane Kelly was the name Eddowes used for pawning some boots and gave an address of 6 Dorset Street. So then using Mary Ann Kelly when leaving the police station, is just another coincidence.

Part of my work involves research (medical - though I am not a medic) and I appreciate that patterns sometimes emerge that are just coincidence as well as the temptation to make data fit the pattern once one emerges. I will avoid that temptation. It is difficult to find too many details about the Johnny Gill murder, though a poster here, Dr Strange, did post a great article on another thread. There is a strong suspect for the Johnny Gill murder (non ripper) but not proven. I will carry on trying to find more details, but prima facie the murder seems very similar to ripper murders (maybe a copy cat) even an ear cut off - but the big differences are he was a young lad and it happened in Bradford. I think some primary research is required to better understand the likelihood of his being a ripper victim or not - I have reason to visit Bradford in a few weeks, so that might be timely. It is odd how it fits the timing pattern so precisely - but these types of coincidences do happen.

Ah, the pawning of the boots, is where the "Jane Kelly" name comes from. I haven't noted that before and was wondering where it came from. The thing with the "Mary Ann Kelly" name is, of course, she only used that when leaving the police station, so to make anything of it requires her killer to be one of the police at the station at that time. I think, therefore, there can be no connection with her murder and giving that name, making it an example of a coincidence. To what extent that might impact upon one's thinking about the "Jane Kelly" is left to each of us.

I also do research, and am used to spurious patterns in data, and also spend a lot of time with data and drawing inferences, or avoiding drawing unfounded ones (I hope), which is like anything else we do - a skill that requires practice and training as there are a lot of pitfalls in the reasoning that can take a long time to learn by trial and error (I stand on the shoulders of giants, who have worked out those mistakes and from whom I've benefited as a result - but that's the nature of research, it builds upon our past errors, letting us make new ones instead I suppose ).

Anyway, I hope you find something interesting in your delving into the Johnny Gill case. Even if, in the end, it is unrelated to the Whitechappel crimes (which it probably is, but that doesn't mean it is proven to be as of yet, so who knows until it's tested. Good luck and enjoy your trip to Bradford.

- Jeff

[Sam Flynn]

But Mary Jane Kelly, _6 Dorset Street, found within an anagram of her last 2 aliases in her last 24 hours is really interesting

It's only interesting if we ignore the fact that she used "Ann" as a middle name in one alias and gave Fashion Street as one of her false addresses. For the other false address, she actually said "6 Dorset Street" - a single house that was home to a few people. I doubt that she meant "blank [meaning twenty-] 6 Dorset Street", which was a well-known multi-occupancy dwelling with a number of rooms in a courtyard at the back - a dwelling which was almost invariably known (and sign-posted) as Miller's Court, not 26 Dorset Street. Finally, as others have noted, the names Mary, Jane, and Ann for that matter, were very common indeed, and Eddowes was in a steady relationship with a man named Kelly.

It's almost certainly coincidental that she chose those particular aliases, and it's easy to see why she should have picked them, without looking for any mysterious explanations.

[Sam Flynn]

Ah, the pawning of the boots, is where the "Jane Kelly" name comes from. I haven't noted that before and was wondering where it came from. The thing with the "Mary Ann Kelly" name is, of course, she only used that when leaving the police station, so to make anything of it requires her killer to be one of the police at the station at that time.

The same applies to her giving her name as "Nothing" when she arrived drunk at the police station and the same word turning up in the Goulston Street Graffito. Another pure coincidence, almost certainly.

[JeffHamm]

The same applies to her giving her name as "Nothing" when she arrived drunk at the police station and the same word turning up in the Goulston Street Graffito. Another pure coincidence, almost certainly.

Yes, another good example, particularly if the graffito wasn't written by JtR (which is of course a possibility).

- Jeff

[Herlock Sholmes]

Knight's 'Royal Conspiracy' requires
* A group of semi-homeless alcoholic prostitutes decide to blackmail the British government over something provably false.
* The British government decides this is a serious threat to the monarchy.
* With the full resources of the British government at their disposal, the conspirators put together a kill squad made up of a man who wasn't in England, an elderly stroke victim, and a coachman.
* The men assigned to eliminate the blackmailers decide the best way to do this is to murder them in a way that turns the women from nobodies to household names, implicates the Masons, and undermines public confidence in the authorities.
* The British government agrees this is the best way to quietly and secretly eliminate the blackmailers.
* The victims fail to notice or respond when only members of their blackmail club are being messily butchered by the Ripper.
* Over a year after the doctor has stopped murdering or doing anything to implicates the conspiracy, the conspirators decide that he is a threat.
* Rather than kill the elderly doctor, the British government decides to fake his death and put him in an asylum, even though he was well known in the medical community and his picture had appeared in the newspapers.
* The painter then spends decades hiding a child from the authorities and leaving still more clues that implicate the Masons. The conspirators do not decide he is a threat and do nothing to stop the painter.
* The coachman, even though no one else cares, spends more than a decade repeatedly and ineptly failing to kill the painter and the child.

In short, the Royal Conspiracy requires everyone involved - conspirators, killers, and victims to act in an incredibly stupid manner. It's patent nonsense even before we consider that the original source of the story admitted it was a hoax.

Nicely put Fiver. Welcome to Casebook

[Herlock Sholmes]

The same applies to her giving her name as "Nothing" when she arrived drunk at the police station and the same word turning up in the Goulston Street Graffito. Another pure coincidence, almost certainly.

Has someone actually suggested this link Sam?

[Sam Flynn]

Has someone actually suggested this link Sam?

Yes indeed, Herlock.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Yes indeed, Herlock.

Well bloody hell

[Michael W Richards]

It's only interesting if we ignore the fact that she used "Ann" as a middle name in one alias and gave Fashion Street as one of her false addresses. For the other false address, she actually said "6 Dorset Street" - a single house that was home to a few people. I doubt that she meant "blank [meaning twenty-] 6 Dorset Street", which was a well-known multi-occupancy dwelling with a number of rooms in a courtyard at the back - a dwelling which was almost invariably known (and sign-posted) as Miller's Court, not 26 Dorset Street. Finally, as others have noted, the names Mary, Jane, and Ann for that matter, were very common indeed, and Eddowes was in a steady relationship with a man named Kelly.

It's almost certainly coincidental that she chose those particular aliases, and it's easy to see why she should have picked them, without looking for any mysterious explanations.

When you just brush aside things like this Sam I wonder if its just the poster not the point.

Lets get some context here again....these name choices were made within her last 24 hours of life, a period which is always critically important for forensic investigation of crimes. She did not identify herself as anyone named Kelly in her 2nd last choice, "nothing. I submit she was probably known as Kate Conway more readily than Kate Kelly, and we don't have any evidence she ever adopted Kellys surname informally. So why does she suddenly decide she needs an alias at all, and why doesn't she use her own given name with Kellys surname? Surely that's clandestine enough. Mary Jane was not as common a pair of given names as is being portrayed, and associating with a known bad street isn't likely what anyone would want from an alias. She used that street because she wasn't currently affiliated with it. But someone its likely she knew, was. They pawned the boots Friday night according to the ticket, so why did she leave to stay in a work house? They would have had doss money. Why was she drunk at 8pm Saturday when as far as we know she had no money, and if that's the case, who bought her drinks and why? What was she doing in Mitre Square of all places at 1:30am? Whats with "nothing" as an alias? Why did she turn left instead of right outside Bishopsgate?

As I said, a bread trail is possible, one that would not automatically lead directly to Mary Jane Kelly of Millers Court...(which is a part of 26 Dorset Street. The Millers Court address would not be required to find Mary in the court.) If she disappeared, how would John or anyone find out what happened to her, maybe that bread crumb led to someone who would have that answer. Or, she was hinting she knew where Mary was, if someone she knew was looking for her.

Calling it Coincidence is a lazy way of dismissing what seems to be significant information Sam. From an investigation standpoint.

[FISHY1118]

The bit about Eddowes buying the boots is possibly true, but the bit about Florence Pash's alleged claim that she knew Mary (Jane) Kelly is rather dubious, tied up as it is with the Sickert saga.

I say "possibly true" because, whilst John Kelly/Eddowes bought the boots at Arthur Pash's shop, I don't see how this means that Pash himself, as opposed to a shop assistant, sold the boots to them. Even if they'd dealt with Pash personally, I find it extremely unlikely that he'd tell his (presumably) insider story about the Ripper to a couple of raggedy strangers who'd dropped in to buy a pair of cheap boots. If he told them, then he must have been in the habit of telling many others, yet we only know about (Florence) Pash's alleged insider info from one or two decidedly iffy sources, and then only in connection with various Sickert theories.

Always strikes me how easy people like Florence Pash are quickly dismissed as having any credibility when it comes to the Sickert story. Its been well established that she was indeed a very close associate of Sickerts. She more than likely did know kelly through him, and if people dig a little deeper they will find that Sickert, Eddowes and Kelly also knew each other , and very well .

[Losmandris]

When you just brush aside things like this Sam I wonder if its just the poster not the point.

Lets get some context here again....these name choices were made within her last 24 hours of life, a period which is always critically important for forensic investigation of crimes. She did not identify herself as anyone named Kelly in her 2nd last choice, "nothing. I submit she was probably known as Kate Conway more readily than Kate Kelly, and we don't have any evidence she ever adopted Kellys surname informally. So why does she suddenly decide she needs an alias at all, and why doesn't she use her own given name with Kellys surname? Surely that's clandestine enough. Mary Jane was not as common a pair of given names as is being portrayed, and associating with a known bad street isn't likely what anyone would want from an alias. She used that street because she wasn't currently affiliated with it. But someone its likely she knew, was. They pawned the boots Friday night according to the ticket, so why did she leave to stay in a work house? They would have had doss money. Why was she drunk at 8pm Saturday when as far as we know she had no money, and if that's the case, who bought her drinks and why? What was she doing in Mitre Square of all places at 1:30am? Whats with "nothing" as an alias? Why did she turn left instead of right outside Bishopsgate?

As I said, a bread trail is possible, one that would not automatically lead directly to Mary Jane Kelly of Millers Court...(which is a part of 26 Dorset Street. The Millers Court address would not be required to find Mary in the court.) If she disappeared, how would John or anyone find out what happened to her, maybe that bread crumb led to someone who would have that answer. Or, she was hinting she knew where Mary was, if someone she knew was looking for her.

Calling it Coincidence is a lazy way of dismissing what seems to be significant information Sam. From an investigation standpoint.

Lots of supposition here. Drunk people are rather difficult to predict, they tend to do things that they would not do when sober. Trying to guess at the motives/behaviour of a drunk person 130 odd years after the event is pretty dicey as far as I would be concerned.

Tristan

[Michael W Richards]

Lots of supposition here. Drunk people are rather difficult to predict, they tend to do things that they would not do when sober. Trying to guess at the motives/behaviour of a drunk person 130 odd years after the event is pretty dicey as far as I would be concerned.

Tristan

When Kate used the first alias, there is no evidence she was drunk. When the second one involving Mary Kelly is used, when checking out of Bishopsgate, she was presumably sober enough to be released. So I don't see a a need to suggest she was confused or incoherent. She likely was when she used "nothing" though. As to guessing motives, Im interested in why she did what she did, the motivations possible as catalysts evolve naturally from those facts.

[Harry D]

Calling it Coincidence is a lazy way of dismissing what seems to be significant information Sam. From an investigation standpoint.

Haven't you often argued that MJK's murder suggested a personal connection? MJK's killer was so familiar with her that he mistook his intended target for someone else altogether?

[Michael W Richards]

Haven't you often argued that MJK's murder suggested a personal connection? MJK's killer was so familiar with her that he mistook his intended target for someone else altogether?

I think that's an obvious conclusion there Harry, yes. Someone is in her room, in the middle of the night, while she is in bed undressed, facing the partition wall from the right hand side of the bed, with no evidence of any break in and only "oh-murder" as sounds emanating from that area...(ergo, no physical attack began with that phrase). Maybe the people that may have been looking for her used someone close to her to get her, maybe she had people looking for her AND a pissed off triangle partner, ...a few possibilities there. Kate, in my opinion, was killed to shut her up, not because she wouldn't talk, so any connection she may have had to Mary might be common acquaintances?

My point is that Im not suggesting an answer here, just suggesting there is evidence there that could very well lead down other avenues other than mad drooling serial mutilator/killer. For both Mary and Kate. And most obviously, Liz. No tidbit of information is useless until proven so, and what Im suggesting hasn't been.

[Al Bundy's Eyes]

Lots of supposition here. Drunk people are rather difficult to predict, they tend to do things that they would not do when sober. Trying to guess at the motives/behaviour of a drunk person 130 odd years after the event is pretty dicey as far as I would be concerned.

Tristan

As an experienced drinker of many years standing / stumbling, never mind 130 years, drunk folk do stuff that defies logic at the time. Bless'em.