Patterns formed by murder locations

[Phil H]

Underpants, knickers, bloomers etc were only just coming into fashion in Victorian Britain. In the first instance, women's underwear was made with separate legs.

I don't recall any description or evidence that the women killed by "Jack" wore knickers or any substitute, or would have known what they were!!!

Phil H

[Phil H]

Mr Holmes (if you must)

1) They were all found in places they had no APPARENT reason to be

in fact they were all in places where there was a reasonable expectation for them to be (or somewhere very similar).

Almost certainly the women took "Jack" to places they knew to be suitable for their assignations. Bucks Row, Hanbury St, Mitre Square (even Dutfield's Yard if you have to include Stride) had wooden gates or fences with "give" against which the woman could lean. thus the women chose the place and to that extent intended to be there and had a reason to be.

MJK was killed in her own room where she surely had an apparent reason to be!!! Whoever killed her, she lived there!

Phil H

[Sherlock Holmes]

Mr Holmes (if you must)

1) They were all found in places they had no APPARENT reason to be

in fact they were all in places where there was a reasonable expectation for them to be (or somewhere very similar).

Almost certainly the women took "Jack" to places they knew to be suitable for their assignations. Bucks Row, Hanbury St, Mitre Square (even Dutfield's Yard if you have to include Stride) had wooden gates or fences with "give" against which the woman could lean. thus the women chose the place and to that extent intended to be there and had a reason to be.

MJK was killed in her own room where she surely had an apparent reason to be!!! Whoever killed her, she lived there!

Phil H

the way you used the word "give" implies the women intended to have sex with him correct me if i'm wrong but is that what your getting at?

Mr Holmes

[RavenDarkendale]

the way you used the word "give" implies the women intended to have sex with him correct me if i'm wrong but is that what your getting at?

Mr Holmes

Mr. Holmes. you might just be the most ineptly named person on the blog. You seem to never take the time to research anything.

For your edification: Give, v
to yield somewhat when subjected to weight, force, pressure, etc.: A horsehair mattress doesn't give much.

Phil means the fences yielded a little to pressure, taking some of the strain of of leaning into them to service their clients.

Lynn does not ask you to check your source without reason. Polly Nichols is reported as having "drawers." Annie Chapman's and Liz Stride's list of clothing does not include underwear of ANY type, Catherine Eddows clothing list states emphatically "no drawers or stays". What was left of the body in Miller's Court wore only her chemise. Just using the C5 we lose 4/5 of the women has (pants? In Victorian England?) drawers round her ankles.

You see, dear fellow, but you do not observe.

RD

[Phil H]

SH

The meaning of "give has been explained by others. I confirm that is my intended use of the word.

But if you are probing the "soliciting" angle - then I believe Martha, Polly, and Annie were all clearly or by implication seeking sex for money when they were killed.

On poor old, sick, dying Annie I do have doubts, she may just have been wandering the streets, and if anything came along she wouldn't turn it away.

I think MJK had probably been soliciting and done business on the night of her death, but I am unsure about some of the descriptions.

Stride I think was waiting for a Jewish "boyfriend" who had gone into the International Club. All the indications are she was on a "date" that night and had not been soliciting. I think Kidney found her there, they argued and on impulse he killed her.

Phil H

[andy1867]

Sherlock my friend...nip onto "D'onston for dummies" and post where I post you don't annoy the natives that way...
I know the subject invites question after question...but a simple search on the forum, or google using a couple of keywords usually directs you to your answer...google usually directs you to a thread on this very site ..and theres your answer...and usually the question you have..has already been asked..its quite remarkable.
Some folk...quite rightly, get exasperated going over the same old ground..and eventually A newbie like yourself gets exasperated by getting the same sarcastic rebuffs...and we all fall out....."D'onson for dummies" is a thread to let that sort of acrimonious steam leave the kettle...the more knowledgeable members can either pop in to have a laugh at us...and perhaps gently point in the right direction... and everybody is happy...on the plus side its where...in time, i'm going to accuse Gilbert and/or Sullivan...but i'm still researching.....
"3 little maids from School"...Really???...

[Phil H]

Gilbert would be the one to suspect - he went for long solitary walks on first nights. Sullivan had an alibi - he was conducting the orchestra!

[andy1867]

Thanks for that Phil....did he conduct with a wooden baton...or something sharper? lol
Regards
Andy

[curious]

On poor old, sick, dying Annie I do have doubts, she may just have been wandering the streets, and if anything came along she wouldn't turn it away.

Phil H

Hi, Phil,
For some time now I have considered that Annie went to 29 Hanbury because she knew the house, having sold crochet work there to Mrs. Richardson and perhaps was aware that people went into the house to sleep.

I think that Annie was too sick and too tired to work and so went somewhere she knew she could sleep.

curious

[Michael W Richards]

Regarding the issue of whether the Canonical Group were all "prostitutes", thats a term that can only be applied if the woman in question did that work by choice, and she did it for a living. Women who engaged in sex for money on the streets, on occasion, as a last resort to get money for food or shelter, were called Unfortunates.

It seems reasonable to place Polly, Annie, Liz and Kate in that category, ..however Mary seems to have done little else but sell herself throughout her short life, so it seems reasonable to categorize her as a prostitute. One footnote on Kate is that she was apparently living in a relationship that had her off the streets and with her mate each night, so its unclear to what extent she may have had to rely on solicitation.

Now...which of them was actually soliciting the night they are murdered? Polly said she was trying to earn her doss, Annie said she was trying to earn her doss, we do not know why Liz Stride was at 40 Berner or if she had made sleeping arrangements, we do not know what Kate intended to do after being released from jail, and Mary did not have to raise any money on the night she was killed to pay for her room and bed.

So 2 of the 5 were known to be actively soliciting the night they are murdered, the same 2 by the way that were almost certainly killed by the same person.

So '"profiling" the Victimology based on solicitation is applicable in 40% of the alleged Ripper murders...hardly a trend.

Cheers

[DVV]

Hi Mike.
Nice example of hyper-criticism, I must say.

[RivkahChaya]

We don't know specifically where Eddowes was going, but she said she'd get a "damn fine hiding when [she] got home," so she's presumed to have some destination that she would refer to as home, where she was meeting someone she knew. Then, we have the word of her long-time companion that she expressly was not a prostitute.

Whether she ever, in her life, fell into "Unfortunate" circumstances, I don't know, but I'm willing to assume she wasn't soliciting when she met her killer.

[DVV]

Hi Rivkah

We don't know specifically where Eddowes was going, but she said she'd get a "damn fine hiding when [she] got home," so she's presumed to have some destination that she would refer to as home, where she was meeting someone she knew. Then, we have the word of her long-time companion that she expressly was not a prostitute.

Whether she ever, in her life, fell into "Unfortunate" circumstances, I don't know, but I'm willing to assume she wasn't soliciting when she met her killer.

So you're suggesting she was the kind of woman that would never have sex for money ?

[RivkahChaya]

So you're suggesting she was the kind of woman that would never have sex for money ?

What? How on earth did you get that out of my post? I even said that it's possible she solicited at one time or another in the 30 some years of her adult life. I'm just thinking it's reasonable to assume she had a destination in mind when she left the police station, and was not actively soliciting.

There's a difference, at any rate, between actively soliciting, and considering an offer when approached, although I don't know how likely it is for someone to approach a woman who isn't actively soliciting.

For what it's worth, I don't know that there's a woman (or kind of woman, whatever that means) who would never, ever have sex for money, given the right circumstances, but for most women, there are a lot of safety nets between their current position, and circumstances that dire. I can tell you that there's probably a sum of money out there at which point I'd relent. It's pretty high-- more money than most people see in a lifetime-- and I'd need to see the negative HIV test, and the condom.

Anyway, Eddowes had grown children. Who knows what her life might have been like when they were little, but she know longer had that worry. She may not have been at the most desperate point in her life when she died, since she at least had no one but herself to look after.

[DVV]

Oh, I've well understood your post. What's the exact value of Kelly's word, in your opinion ?