Does The Killer Scope Out Locations Before He Kills?

[caz]

Which is my point. My own personal preference for the killer is Blotchy for reasons I don't need to rehearse again here. But functionally there is no difference between 13 Millers Court and 29 Hanbury Street. If someone comes in on the killer he's just as trapped in both places. And Mary was blind drunk. I don't think she needed anyone to sing to. She just felt like singing. Also we know from his own testimony that Barnett moved in with Mary basically the night they met. Also we know that Mary was a prostitute. She picks up a trick. He says he'd like to stay the night. I'm sure that would be fine with her. Or maybe you're right and she knew the killer. But we don't know which of those is the correct account of events. And we can't assume one is fact over the other.

Spot on, Chava.

I don't see why this is so hard to grasp - unless one actually needs Kelly to have been 'entertaining' someone she knew, to fit some theory or other about the identity of her killer and his motive.

How many women just like Kelly must have chatted up potential paying customers they had never set eyes on before, and invited them back to their place as long as they seemed friendly and were generous with the booze?

If Michael prefers, he can drop the prostitute/customer relationship and just imagine a couple meeting in a pub, getting very friendly very quickly, and ending up having a one-night stand. It happens - all the time - even when there's a killer abroad in the neighbourhood. That is no less likely than Kelly only ever taking a man back to her humble little abode if she knew him well, by name, occupation and inside leg measurement.

Love,

Caz
X

[caz]

I'm sorry Michael but we have no evidence for this. Kelly may have introduced the killer into the room while she was up & dressed. He may just have stuck around and looked like like he wanted to stay the night. Like Barnett did.

I don't think it hurts to keep reminding ourselves just how quickly Kelly shacked up with Barnett after meeting him for the first time. She couldn't have known anything much about him when they first slept together, yet many people suspect he went on to murder her, and was even possibly Jack the Ripper, despite being cleared by the police. If that was the case, how well could Kelly have really known who she was living with, even after all that time?

But the argument that Kelly - a prostitute, who now had the room to herself - most likely knew her killer because she 'had no objection' to entertaining him indoors, now November was here, is not supported by the evidence, which points equally, if not more, to a woman who may have thought she was safer in her room because the Whitechapel Murderer had only killed outdoors.

Love,

Caz
X

[caz]

Hi Caz,

I hope you and your family are all well!

I agree re Kelly and Millers Court. I don't see how we have any grounds to believe that Kelly knew her killer beforehand. She let Barnett move in with her immediately after she met him. And she was nothing if not available. I also agree that it's likely the victims chose the location. But I think that the killer stalked the area and knew all these locations--he may not have known 29 Hanbury St specifically. But that wasn't the only house tarts used to bring their tricks. Women on the stroll know all the places they can take a customer without being bothered or chased away. We can't discount the possibility that--like Peter Sutcliffe and Stephen Wright--the Whitechapel murderer had had normal encounters with a lot of the East End tarts and may well have been known to them. He'd have had a good idea of where he could find the places he was looking for. Because as you know I think the geography of the crime meant a great deal to him. So I do think he had some knowledge of that backyard or backyards similar. Something I haven't seen here--or at least it may have been here but I could have missed it--is that the houses had backyard privies. And if the front doors were permanently open, that's somewhere a passer-by might visit if caught short one day or night. So the backyard of 29 Hanbury Street may well have seen visitors who weren't there with prostitutes. If that's the case he can scope away even in the backyards!

Love,
Chava

Thanks Chava. We are all very well and I hope you and yours are too.

Good point about access to backyard privies. Up to the age of nine, I lived in a terraced house, with an alleyway which ran the length of the terrace at the rear. We had an outside lavatory at the back, which was grim in the winter, but luckily we also had one upstairs, which I much preferred - and always used after one of our neighbours found a dead tramp in their outside lav! I had nightmares about that alleyway until we moved house in the dreadful winter of 62/63, when my Mum and Dad had burst pipes to deal with, while I happily crunched through the deep snow to my primary school, now just a two minute walk away.

Love,

Caz
X

[Joshua Rogan]

It depends which paper you read as to Kozebrodsky's arrival time. The Daily News, for example, reports;
"I was in this club last night. I came in about half-past six in the evening. About twenty minutes to one this morning Mr. Diemschitz called me out to the yard."

The Irish Times has him also explicitly say that he had not left and returned in the meantime;
"I was in the club last night. I came in about 6.30 in the evening and I have not been away from it since. About 20 minutes to 1 this morning Mr Diemshitz called me out into the yard."

[NotBlamedForNothing]

Whether you believe I am incorrect or not, perhaps just review the facts and make up your own mind. Im not here to correct people, I want to discuss with knowledgeable people.

Getting the impression you'd prefer if I left you alone.
However, in case that impression is wrong, let's discuss these points...

Edward Spooner's "25 minutes to one o'clock", requires 'interpretation'.

No, it doesnt.

Through what timespan was Spooner outside the Beehive? If not 12:30-1:00 (as he claimed), why do you suppose he makes mistakes with his times?

What approx time was PC Smith last on Berner St? If about 12:35 as he stated, when did Spooner really arrive?

Why didn't Fanny Mortimer see Spooner arrive with the other men? If it were because she were on her doorstep at later point, how long were non-club members by the body before any constable arrived? Spooner claimed it was 5 minutes, in his case. What time does that bring us to? Before 1am? Did Fanny miss police arrivals too?

Who touched Stride's face, if not Ed Spooner?
Had Spooner been in the yard at least 25 minutes, at that point?

Who says Spooner is the only person who touched her?

Why does Fanny Mortimer see a member of the public touching the deceased, if police were on site? Why did they allow this to occur?

I had been there twenty minutes when a member named Gidleman came upstairs, and said "there is a woman dead in the yard."

You do realize that Ive identified Eagle as a paid attendee, just like Louis, and they both are contradicted by the 3 unpaid attendees and 1 off site witness. Eagle say "I couldnt be sure whether a dead body was there". Look at the physical data, thats just not realistic.

In the current context - determining your 4 witnesses - those points are irrelevant. Where does Gillen say he was by the body, no later than 12:45?

By the way, did Kozebrodsky say he returned at 12:30, or arrived at 12:30?
Kind of late to be arriving, don't you think?

I dont know if this is pedantic, your poor reading or just argumentative, but he states he arrived back at the club.

Evening News, Oct 1:

I came into the club about which you are asking me at half-past twelve o'clock. Shortly after I came in Diemschitz asked me to come out into the yard, as he saw there was something unusual had taken place there.

How do you get 'arrived back' out of 'came into the club'?

Re Louis accompanying Isaac or not, I will tell you about that another time...

Gee, I can hardly wait, but Issac says explicitly that we was sent out alone. Your "illumination" isnt needed here.

Why do you suppose no one agrees with you on this issue? Does everyone else lack your illumination?

[Al Bundy's Eyes]

29 Hanbury St was a shared house - 13 Miller's Court was not.
I'd say that counts as a functional difference.

I'd say that as 29 wasn't Annie's regular address, that's the major difference.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

But functionally there is no difference between 13 Millers Court and 29 Hanbury Street. If someone comes in on the killer he's just as trapped in both places.

29 Hanbury St was a shared house - 13 Miller's Court was not.
I'd say that counts as a functional difference.

[Chava]

Interesting purely speculative opinion, but not founded with what is known. Mary entered her room with someone, presumably someone she knew enough to sing to for over an hour. We dont know when he leaves, but we do know how she was found. In a small courtyard off a mean street, in a room created from a room within #26 Dorset Street, with one exit and almost a 20 ft arched stone tunnel just to get into the court. Almost naked in her own bed. He wasnt there by accident, and wasnt in Marys room while she was undressed by accident. Its either Blotchy, who she apparently knew, or someone after him...which is just guesswork without evidence that can be trusted. In other words, Not Georgies.

Which is my point. My own personal preference for the killer is Blotchy for reasons I don't need to rehearse again here. But functionally there is no difference between 13 Millers Court and 29 Hanbury Street. If someone comes in on the killer he's just as trapped in both places. And Mary was blind drunk. I don't think she needed anyone to sing to. She just felt like singing. Also we know from his own testimony that Barnett moved in with Mary basically the night they met. Also we know that Mary was a prostitute. She picks up a trick. He says he'd like to stay the night. I'm sure that would be fine with her. Or maybe you're right and she knew the killer. But we don't know which of those is the correct account of events. And we can't assume one is fact over the other.

[Michael W Richards]

I'm sorry Michael but we have no evidence for this. Kelly may have introduced the killer into the room while she was up & dressed. He may just have stuck around and looked like like he wanted to stay the night. Like Barnett did.

Interesting purely speculative opinion, but not founded with what is known. Mary entered her room with someone, presumably someone she knew enough to sing to for over an hour. We dont know when he leaves, but we do know how she was found. In a small courtyard off a mean street, in a room created from a room within #26 Dorset Street, with one exit and almost a 20 ft arched stone tunnel just to get into the court. Almost naked in her own bed. He wasnt there by accident, and wasnt in Marys room while she was undressed by accident. Its either Blotchy, who she apparently knew, or someone after him...which is just guesswork without evidence that can be trusted. In other words, Not Georgies.

[Chava]

Ahem....came into a small courtyard...the same guy who prowls streets and lanes?....into a small room, while the victim is dressed for bed, apparently the victim had no objection to any of this...this murder evidence almost screams that victim and killer knew each other.

I'm sorry Michael but we have no evidence for this. Kelly may have introduced the killer into the room while she was up & dressed. He may just have stuck around and looked like like he wanted to stay the night. Like Barnett did.

[Michael W Richards]

Edward Spooner's "25 minutes to one o'clock", requires 'interpretation'.

No, it doesnt.


This is Morris Eagle, in the Tele:

After the discussion, between half-past eleven and a quarter to twelve o'clock, I left the club to take my young lady home, going out through the front door. I returned about twenty minutes to one. I tried the front door, but, finding it closed, I went through the gateway into the yard, reaching the club in that way.

I had been there twenty minutes when a member named Gidleman came upstairs, and said "there is a woman dead in the yard."

You do realize that Ive identified Eagle as a paid attendee, just like Louis, and they both are contradicted by the 3 unpaid attendees and 1 off site witness. Eagle say "I couldnt be sure whether a dead body was there". Look at the physical data, thats just not realistic.

By the way, did Kozebrodsky say he returned at 12:30, or arrived at 12:30?
Kind of late to be arriving, don't you think?

I dont know if this is pedantic, your poor reading or just argumentative, but he states he arrived back at the club.


This is Fanny...

I went to see what was the matter, and was informed that another dreadful murder had been committed in the yard adjoining the club house. On going inside I saw the body of a woman lying huddled up just inside the gates, with her throat cut from ear to ear. A man touched her face, and said it was quite warm, so the deed must have been done while I was standing at the door of my house. There was certainly no noise made, and I did not observe anyone enter the gates. It was just after one o'clock when I went out...

Who touched Stride's face, if not Ed Spooner?
Had Spooner been in the yard at least 25 minutes, at that point?

Who says Spooner is the only person who touched her?

Re Louis accompanying Isaac or not, I will tell you about that another time...

Gee, I can hardly wait, but Issac says explicitly that we was sent out alone. Your "illumination" isnt needed here.

Whether you believe I am incorrect or not, perhaps just review the facts and make up your own mind. Im not here to correct people, I want to discuss with knowledgeable people.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

Edward Spooner, Issac Kozebrodski, club Member named Gillen, Club member named Hoschberg.

Spooner: "Spooner believed that he had first arrived at Dutfield's Yard at "25 minutes to 1"

Edward Spooner's "25 minutes to one o'clock", requires 'interpretation'.

Kozebrodski: "About twenty minutes to one this morning Mr. Diemschitz called me out to the yard."

Okay

Hoshberg: "It was about a quarter to one o'clock, I should think, when I heard a policeman's whistle blown, and came down to see what was the matter."

Okay

Ill find the reference to Gillens statement, which supports the above. Issac K states what time he returned to the club. Half Past. He then says about 10 minutes later he is called by Louis. he gives this statement to the press likely within an hour of the murder discovery. And he clearly used a clock to record his arrival time.

This is Morris Eagle, in the Tele:

After the discussion, between half-past eleven and a quarter to twelve o'clock, I left the club to take my young lady home, going out through the front door. I returned about twenty minutes to one. I tried the front door, but, finding it closed, I went through the gateway into the yard, reaching the club in that way.

I had been there twenty minutes when a member named Gidleman came upstairs, and said "there is a woman dead in the yard."

By the way, did Kozebrodsky say he returned at 12:30, or arrived at 12:30?
Kind of late to be arriving, don't you think?

Then add the fact that Fanny, who at this time...12:50 to 1am...is continuously at her door to the street and sees no-one but the young couple, it seems clear that Louis arrived earlier than he said he did. And if you read all of Issac K's remarks it seems clear he didnt accompany Louis for help. He says he went alone. Was sent.

This is Fanny...

I went to see what was the matter, and was informed that another dreadful murder had been committed in the yard adjoining the club house. On going inside I saw the body of a woman lying huddled up just inside the gates, with her throat cut from ear to ear. A man touched her face, and said it was quite warm, so the deed must have been done while I was standing at the door of my house. There was certainly no noise made, and I did not observe anyone enter the gates. It was just after one o'clock when I went out...

Who touched Stride's face, if not Ed Spooner?
Had Spooner been in the yard at least 25 minutes, at that point?

Re Louis accompanying Isaac or not, I will tell you about that another time...

[Michael W Richards]

Hi Caz,

I hope you and your family are all well!

I agree re Kelly and Millers Court. I don't see how we have any grounds to believe that Kelly knew her killer beforehand. She let Barnett move in with her immediately after she met him. And she was nothing if not available. I also agree that it's likely the victims chose the location. But I think that the killer stalked the area and knew all these locations--he may not have known 29 Hanbury St specifically. But that wasn't the only house tarts used to bring their tricks. Women on the stroll know all the places they can take a customer without being bothered or chased away. We can't discount the possibility that--like Peter Sutcliffe and Stephen Wright--the Whitechapel murderer had had normal encounters with a lot of the East End tarts and may well have been known to them. He'd have had a good idea of where he could find the places he was looking for. Because as you know I think the geography of the crime meant a great deal to him. So I do think he had some knowledge of that backyard or backyards similar. Something I haven't seen here--or at least it may have been here but I could have missed it--is that the houses had backyard privies. And if the front doors were permanently open, that's somewhere a passer-by might visit if caught short one day or night. So the backyard of 29 Hanbury Street may well have seen visitors who weren't there with prostitutes. If that's the case he can scope away even in the backyards!

Love,
Chava

Ahem....came into a small courtyard...the same guy who prowls streets and lanes?....into a small room, while the victim is dressed for bed, apparently the victim had no objection to any of this...this murder evidence almost screams that victim and killer knew each other.

[Michael W Richards]

Edward Spooner, Issac Kozebrodski, club Member named Gillen, Club member named Hoschberg.

Spooner: "Spooner believed that he had first arrived at Dutfield's Yard at "25 minutes to 1"

Kozebrodski: "About twenty minutes to one this morning Mr. Diemschitz called me out to the yard."

Hoshberg: "It was about a quarter to one o'clock, I should think, when I heard a policeman's whistle blown, and came down to see what was the matter."

Ill find the reference to Gillens statement, which supports the above. Issac K states what time he returned to the club. Half Past. He then says about 10 minutes later he is called by Louis. he gives this statement to the press likely within an hour of the murder discovery. And he clearly used a clock to record his arrival time.

Then add the fact that Fanny, who at this time...12:50 to 1am...is continuously at her door to the street and sees no-one but the young couple, it seems clear that Louis arrived earlier than he said he did. And if you read all of Issac K's remarks it seems clear he didnt accompany Louis for help. He says he went alone. Was sent.

[Chava]

I agree with this, Chava, but for me it suggests it was typically the victim who dictated the location of her murder, with her killer simply grabbing the opportunity offered to be alone with her, and striking if he thought the risk was worth taking. I can't really see anyone going, against her instincts, to a location of a stranger's choosing, after the second ghastly murder in August, of a woman in similar circumstances. It's possible that Chapman, for example, chose that back yard in Hanbury Street, for the very reason that she believed it would be safe for her because no killer would take the risk.

I see very little difference between prospective victims who were weakened by poor health and nutrition, exhaustion and/or alcohol, making them vulnerable when open to suggestion - Nichols, Chapman, Eddowes and Kelly - and vulnerable if resisting. I suspect Stride died because she angered her killer by refusing to leave the perceived safety of the club grounds, judging that if he meant her any harm he wouldn't risk it in that location. If so, she was only half right. He couldn't risk staying to mutilate her, but he could cut her throat for defying him, and to stop her voicing any suspicions and describing him, while he was looking for another victim.

I don't see why Kelly's killer had to know her personally, or to know about her room in Miller's Court, when he strolled down Commercial Street that night [if that's what he did] and wondered if opportunity would knock for him. If Kelly was already drunk when they encountered one another, or just looking for someone to ply her with drink, and she was "willing for a shilling" as the saying goes, in case the landlord demanded some back rent in the morning, her killer would have thought all his Christmases had come at once when she took him off laughing, and showed him where they could spend some time alone and undisturbed. And that could have been the case, whether he had ginger whiskers, a blotchy face and a can of ale to share with her, or was Hutchinson's 'Flash Harry', who looked like he was good for a few bob. For both Kelly and Jack, it would have been rude not to.

Love,

Caz
X

Hi Caz,

I hope you and your family are all well!

I agree re Kelly and Millers Court. I don't see how we have any grounds to believe that Kelly knew her killer beforehand. She let Barnett move in with her immediately after she met him. And she was nothing if not available. I also agree that it's likely the victims chose the location. But I think that the killer stalked the area and knew all these locations--he may not have known 29 Hanbury St specifically. But that wasn't the only house tarts used to bring their tricks. Women on the stroll know all the places they can take a customer without being bothered or chased away. We can't discount the possibility that--like Peter Sutcliffe and Stephen Wright--the Whitechapel murderer had had normal encounters with a lot of the East End tarts and may well have been known to them. He'd have had a good idea of where he could find the places he was looking for. Because as you know I think the geography of the crime meant a great deal to him. So I do think he had some knowledge of that backyard or backyards similar. Something I haven't seen here--or at least it may have been here but I could have missed it--is that the houses had backyard privies. And if the front doors were permanently open, that's somewhere a passer-by might visit if caught short one day or night. So the backyard of 29 Hanbury Street may well have seen visitors who weren't there with prostitutes. If that's the case he can scope away even in the backyards!

Love,
Chava