Coincidence?

[JeffHamm]

Mary and Kate knowing each other would not be uncommon either. "The Ten Bell was where several of the victims of Jack the Ripper drank most notably Catherine Eddowes and Mary Kelly." (Ghost-story.com). How could they not know each other from there if not from the Thrawl Street Mission especially if Mary was outside under the lamp with first dibs on gentlemen going in. Denial sounds like conspiracyaphobia.

As for the City Missionary who said he knew Mary and one or two others, presumably including Kate, possibly just looking for publicity: If he really wanted publicity he could have mentioned how he "rescued" Millers Court witness Sarah Lewis through marriage, straightening her out so she was saved from being the Ripper's next victim. She was identified as one of the dozens he married off to their partners. He could have mentioned her anonymously. Although I can see how it's not much of a rescue if she walks off, like Mary, so she still could have been killed. Luckily she was staying with friends.

Hi Trapperologist,

I don't think anyone denies there was the opportunity for various victims to have met, the issue is whether or not they did. Nothing we have indicates any of the victims knew the names of any of the prior victims.

- Jeff

[Al Bundy's Eyes]

Hi Trapperologist,

I don't think anyone denies there was the opportunity for various victims to have met, the issue is whether or not they did. Nothing we have indicates any of the victims knew the names of any of the prior victims.

- Jeff

Even if they had met, maybe said hello and exchanged pleasantries, it's a far cry from being in a dangerous blackmail ploy together.

[Enigma]

Even if they had met, maybe said hello and exchanged pleasantries, it's a far cry from being in a dangerous blackmail ploy together.

Agreed, even if they were acquaintances it is a big step to say they conspired in a plot.

[JeffHamm]

Even if they had met, maybe said hello and exchanged pleasantries, it's a far cry from being in a dangerous blackmail ploy together.

Agreed. I just don't see any evidence they were even that. The most I've seen is arguments to suggest they may have had the opportunity to cross paths, but that's a far cry from knowing each other even as acquaintances.

- Jeff

[c.d.]

As a rule of thumb, attempting to blackmail a serial killer is generally considered to be a bad idea.

c.d.

[JeffHamm]

As a rule of thumb, attempting to blackmail a serial killer is generally considered to be a bad idea.

c.d.

I don't know, I can't think of another case where it's been tried before? Maybe it works well but just hasn't caught on?

- Jeff

[Enigma]

I don't know, I can't think of another case where it's been tried before? Maybe it works well but just hasn't caught on?

- Jeff

Possibly blackmailing serial killers is very effective, but we just don't get to hear about it. Neither the serial killer nor the blackmailer are going to tell are they?

[Michael W Richards]

Agreed, even if they were acquaintances it is a big step to say they conspired in a plot.

I for one don't buy into the recent suggestions that all five women conspired to do anything as a group, nor do I believe that they all knew each other. I do suggest Kate may have tried to blackmail the person she threatened to expose, because there are inconsistencies with her supposed patterns and unexplained assistance from some source (getting her drunk), plus the apparent need for aliases that suggest all was not normal in Kates life. I also know that having a robbery going on in that area, on that night, does put criminals in the vicinity, so its not suspicions without merit. There is also a suggestion of police surveillance, the only people near to that square that we can identify are police...3 detectives in a nearby alley, 2 patrolling the square, 1 living in the square and 1 retired policeman, working in a warehouse in the square.

When those kinds of anomalies crop up I take note, and when a review of the aliases reveal almost the complete name and address of the very next woman to be killed by the alleged Ripper,.. its with some validation. Cumulative data suggesting Kate was engaged in some activity that did not involve John, that she was in the immediate area of criminals committing a crime at the time, and that one result of her murder that night was that no-one went to collect any rewards for giving someone's name to the authorities.

[etenguy]

I for one don't buy into the recent suggestions that all five women conspired to do anything as a group, nor do I believe that they all knew each other. I do suggest Kate may have tried to blackmail the person she threatened to expose, because there are inconsistencies with her supposed patterns and unexplained assistance from some source (getting her drunk), plus the apparent need for aliases that suggest all was not normal in Kates life. I also know that having a robbery going on in that area, on that night, does put criminals in the vicinity, so its not suspicions without merit. There is also a suggestion of police surveillance, the only people near to that square that we can identify are police...3 detectives in a nearby alley, 2 patrolling the square, 1 living in the square and 1 retired policeman, working in a warehouse in the square.

When those kinds of anomalies crop up I take note, and when a review of the aliases reveal almost the complete name and address of the very next woman to be killed by the alleged Ripper,.. its with some validation. Cumulative data suggesting Kate was engaged in some activity that did not involve John, that she was in the immediate area of criminals committing a crime at the time, and that one result of her murder that night was that no-one went to collect any rewards for giving someone's name to the authorities.

I can understand why you think these factors combine to suggest something was happening outside of the normal. Do you have any other reason though to suggest Kate was trying to blackmail the killer? It seems a high risk strategy to do that at 1.30am in a secluded spot.

[Michael W Richards]

Well, we know that she was intending to sell information about someone she knew, and we know that privately there was some reward monies available. We know that she said she didn't have any fear doing this. We also know that she was drunk without having any money, by 8pm Saturday night. And we know that she was found in a place that was in the opposite direction of where her "partner" would be...with a bed already secured by said partner. We know that a robbery was taking place that weekend very close to the location where she was found, and that criminals were in that area, at that time. Was she hoping to negotiate a bigger windfall? Did the person/people who bought her drinks reassure her of her safety when they suggested meeting later around Mitre Square?

I think Kate had bigger balls than brains, and she allowed this to happen by using that "high risk" strategy you mentioned. Its more a matter of connecting the known dots than anything, my conclusion is based around those dots.

[Al Bundy's Eyes]

Well, we know that she was intending to sell information about someone she knew, and we know that privately there was some reward monies available. We know that she said she didn't have any fear doing this. We also know that she was drunk without having any money, by 8pm Saturday night. And we know that she was found in a place that was in the opposite direction of where her "partner" would be...with a bed already secured by said partner. We know that a robbery was taking place that weekend very close to the location where she was found, and that criminals were in that area, at that time. Was she hoping to negotiate a bigger windfall? Did the person/people who bought her drinks reassure her of her safety when they suggested meeting later around Mitre Square?

I think Kate had bigger balls than brains, and she allowed this to happen by using that "high risk" strategy you mentioned. Its more a matter of connecting the known dots than anything, my conclusion is based around those dots.

Hi Michael,
You'll know better than me, are there other sources for Kate alluding to knowledge of the killer other than the one newspaper quote? Also, what are the provenance of the sources, in as much as, what makes them more than hearsay?
I'm only familiar with the one source.

[Michael W Richards]

Fair question A.B.E., and no, not to my knowledge. But the source is a superintendent of a casual ward in Shoe Lane that Kate had stayed in, and is therefore someone Kate did know. Not like a Carrie Maxwell, or George Hutchinson kind of claim. In this case we know she knew Kate, and saw Kate shortly before her murder. Interestingly she says she warned Kate about such a venture....something that people here point out all the time, but they forget that Kate answered that herself..."no fear of that".

Coincidental that Kate made that claim, that she was warned about the dangers, and then she ends up murdered?

[Al Bundy's Eyes]

Fair question A.B.E., and no, not to my knowledge. But the source is a superintendent of a casual ward in Shoe Lane that Kate had stayed in, and is therefore someone Kate did know. Not like a Carrie Maxwell, or George Hutchinson kind of claim. In this case we know she knew Kate, and saw Kate shortly before her murder. Interestingly she says she warned Kate about such a venture....something that people here point out all the time, but they forget that Kate answered that herself..."no fear of that".

Coincidental that Kate made that claim, that she was warned about the dangers, and then she ends up murdered?

It's from The East London observer, and is the sole source of this quote, obtained by an inquisitive reporter.
We treat inquest statements with caution, this must surely be treated the same.
Also, this statement implies that Kate's reason for returning to London was to claim this reward, not because the hop picking was unsuccessful.
It's one quote. It's far from concrete. Particularly when there is little else to back it up.
Also, there is nothing in this to suggest a MJK conspiracy?
Unless I've missed something?

[Michael W Richards]

It's from The East London observer, and is the sole source of this quote, obtained by an inquisitive reporter.
We treat inquest statements with caution, this must surely be treated the same.
Also, this statement implies that Kate's reason for returning to London was to claim this reward, not because the hop picking was unsuccessful.
It's one quote. It's far from concrete. Particularly when there is little else to back it up.
Also, there is nothing in this to suggest a MJK conspiracy?
Unless I've missed something?

I am aware of all you posted there, that doesn't negate what I said...we know this person knew Kate, we know Kate saw her shortly before she was murdered, and I don't see, without questioning either the reporters honesty or accuracy, or the character of the superintendent, that it cant be accepted as stated. The only connection to MJK is the fact she is the very next presumed Ripper victim and Kates aliases reveal almost the complete name and address of Mary. That's just coincidental to many, perhaps you too, but not to me. Its part of a puzzle. Kates last 24 hours are mysterious.

[Al Bundy's Eyes]

I am aware of all you posted there, that doesn't negate what I said...we know this person knew Kate, we know Kate saw her shortly before she was murdered, and I don't see, without questioning either the reporters honesty or accuracy, or the character of the superintendent, that it cant be accepted as stated. The only connection to MJK is the fact she is the very next presumed Ripper victim and Kates aliases reveal almost the complete name and address of Mary. That's just coincidental to many, perhaps you too, but not to me. Its part of a puzzle. Kates last 24 hours are mysterious.

A fair point, yet you doubt John Kelly, or at least question his statements, such as to what was meant by 'partner', yet the superintendent "knew Kate". John Kelly knew Kate, and saw her in the 24 hours before her death, yet his statements are suspect, the superintendents are undoubtable?
Really, I'm not trying to be argumentative, but why does one report from someone who "knew Kate" outweigh the others from someone who knew her for years?