What's your profile for Jack?

[lynn cates]

oracle

Hello CD. Thanks.

Yes, you should have.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

silly

Hello (again) CD. Sorry about the silly face. Tried to remove it; don't know whence it came.

Bloody computers.

Cheers.
LC

[Observer]

Hello Michael. Thanks.

Ah, the non-virginal. In that case, had any of the C5 given birth, I should have not looked for a bright star in the east, for I don't think THEY were virgins.

Now, I'm off to seek three wise men posting. (heh-heh)

Well you already got the sheep for the manger.

[Michael W Richards]

Polly Nichols was never seen with a man. Yet she was soliciting. Stride was seen speaking with and approaching numerous men. There's actually more evidence with which to conclude Stride was soliciting than Nichols. As for paying 'particular attention to her appearance', why should it be assumed this was not habitual for her? She was a bit better off than the other women. Nichols obtained a new dress and bonnet in spite of her worse circumstances. She believed this would land her more customers and more money. Make her stand out. Perhaps Stride's 'gussying up' is actually evidence of soliciting instead of evidence to the contrary as you suggest.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

I think that Lynn answered the above Tom already, but as Ive said numerous times, the only 2 Canonicals we know were soliciting were Polly and Annie.....since they both admitted as much to friends the night(s) that they are killed. There is no such confirmation from Stride, there is only what many assume she was doing at that address. There

As I mentioned, the highest incidence of sexually transmitted diseases found in men at the time of the murders, by employment, were Dockworkers. It stands top reason that the women they caught them from was unclean street prostitutes. Liz changed from her day work clothes to go out that night, she had on what is described by another lodginghouse mate "her good evening wear", she requested a lint brush for her skirt, and she had a flower arrangement on her jacket and mints in her hand when she is killed inside the gates at 40 Berner Street.

That seems in keeping with what I suggested, that on that night she paid particular attention to her appearance. You and others may assume it was to pick up dockworkers, I see that preening evidence differently.

Cheers Tom

[Michael W Richards]

I cant believe how many times The Facts need to be mentioned with respect to solicitation and the Canonicals......there is evidence that Polly and Annie were soliciting when they met their killer(s). They both claimed, in the middle of the night, that they needed to earn some doss money. Since neither had regular jobs, and it was the middle of the night, its clear they intended to earn by soliciting. There is not one scintilla of evidence that the same situation applied to Kate, or Liz, or Mary. In fact we know Liz had regular employment leading up to her death, and we know Mary was in her own room and bed when she is attacked.

Of course anyone of them needed money, 4 of the 5 of them were Unfortunates without a guaranteed home each night. Thats not a sound basis for declaring what witnesses saw of Liz, Kate and Mary that night was solicitation. For all any of us know none of those 3 were soliciting on the night they were murdered, and I put forward that as far as Jack the Ripper victims go, soliciting alone at night is a key element to his victim selection.

Cheers

[Michael W Richards]

Theorising that Liz Stride knocked on the door of the IWEC, was received, and then murdered by one it's members, would such theorising constitute leaping ahead of the evidence ?

Thats your theory, not mine. Not a great one either. What the evidence suggests is that Liz Stride was intentionally at that location at that time dressed nicely....when almost all of the "prospective clients" she might encounter left that site an hour before she arrived.

And it is extremely suspicious that Morris Eagle, who passed the spot where Liz is found dead at some time that evening, couldnt remember seeing anyone. If Liz isnt in that passage at that time, then she is out on the street....something Morris would have noticed since the street was all but deserted.

Cheers

[The Good Michael]

Hello Michael. Thanks.

Ah, the non-virginal. In that case, had any of the C5 given birth, I should have not looked for a bright star in the east, for I don't think THEY were virgins.

Now, I'm off to seek three wise men posting. (heh-heh)

You would only irritate them

Mike

[tji]

Hi all

I am sorry, have I missed something while being away?

While I agree no-one has any proof that Liz would likely take up being a prostitute, like prior convictions or anything like that...oh wait......

Also I believe the definition of prostitute today does not cover what was happening in 1888. We have read accounts of married woman having sex for money to feed their children etc, they may not be on the streets every night and it may only be an occasional occurrence, but does this not class her as a prostitute?

We know Liz was not against prostitution, that she had little money, that she was out late at night, I think the logical conclusion would be that she was likely trying to turn a trick, unless I really have missed something?

Tracy

[Patrick S]

Pro or No?

Perhaps it's time to apply a bit of fresh thinking to the idea that ALL of JtR's victims were prostitutes. It may be more accurate to say that his victims were woman who would be on the streets in the early hours (after midnight to dawn, or thereabouts). Clearly, prostitution would put women on the streets at this time. Women of a more 'respectable' character, perhaps, would not be out, alone, at these times. It does seem that most - if not all - of these women were alcoholics (or at least problem drinkers). Perhaps JtR - as a killer of opportunity - presented himself as a customer OR a fellow willing to supply these women with drink, a drinking companion.

[Digalittledeeperwatson]

Some points valid.

Hi all

I am sorry, have I missed something while being away?

While I agree no-one has any proof that Liz would likely take up being a prostitute, like prior convictions or anything like that...oh wait......

Also I believe the definition of prostitute today does not cover what was happening in 1888. We have read accounts of married woman having sex for money to feed their children etc, they may not be on the streets every night and it may only be an occasional occurrence, but does this not class her as a prostitute?

We know Liz was not against prostitution, that she had little money, that she was out late at night, I think the logical conclusion would be that she was likely trying to turn a trick, unless I really have missed something?

Tracy

Not against? Impossible to determine. Being against a thing and forced to be subjected to it at the same time is very possible. Yes it makes logical sense, but logic is just a tool that can be wielded to suit its master. Given her past and at the time current scenario, it is not infeasible she would take such a course of action. It could be argued anyone might. Problem is we have no really good data to suggest she was or had been prostituting herself anytime around that time. Although, it wouldn't have been terribly an unlikely possibility. I wonder if Stride and Eddowes were not dissimilar. Both had "men" in the mix. I wonder at the dynamic their relationships might have taken on given particular circumstances. Kidney gets about hanged by some whilst Kelly seems to go unscathed. I wonder if it might not should be viewed oppositely. Kelly the pimp instead of Kidney. Kelly checked Eddowes close for money. Kidney got drunk and angry and wanted to do something about it. People express grief differently of course. Wow, I meandered toward tangent land. Shutting up now.

[lynn cates]

Destitute prostitute, or merely a substitute?

Hello Tracy. Prior convictions? For D & D, yes. If you have any about soliciting, I'd be delighted to see it. There is a story about one such, but I have yet to see the source.

Occasional prostitution to feed the children? May not apply to Liz.

Out late at night? Many women are. Not sure that makes them prostitutes?

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

fresco

Hello Patrick. Not a bad idea. We could USE some fresh thinking.

What about no JTR? How's that for fresh?

Cheers.
LC

[Digalittledeeperwatson]

Fallacy.

I cant believe how many times The Facts need to be mentioned with respect to solicitation and the Canonicals......there is evidence that Polly and Annie were soliciting when they met their killer(s). They both claimed, in the middle of the night, that they needed to earn some doss money. Since neither had regular jobs, and it was the middle of the night, its clear they intended to earn by soliciting. There is not one scintilla of evidence that the same situation applied to Kate, or Liz, or Mary. In fact we know Liz had regular employment leading up to her death, and we know Mary was in her own room and bed when she is attacked.

Of course anyone of them needed money, 4 of the 5 of them were Unfortunates without a guaranteed home each night. Thats not a sound basis for declaring what witnesses saw of Liz, Kate and Mary that night was solicitation. For all any of us know none of those 3 were soliciting on the night they were murdered, and I put forward that as far as Jack the Ripper victims go, soliciting alone at night is a key element to his victim selection.

Cheers

Availability is the key element more so than prostitutes. My opinion of course, but any woman would've sufficed so long as risk was low.

[lynn cates]

dubito

Hello DLDW.

"Problem is we have no really good data to suggest she was or had been prostituting herself anytime around that time."

Precisely. So why not place the proposition (no pun intended) in brackets?

Cheers.
LC

[Digalittledeeperwatson]

heh heh heh

Hello DLDW.

"Problem is we have no really good data to suggest she was or had been prostituting herself anytime around that time."

Precisely. So why not place the proposition (no pun intended) in brackets?

Cheers.
LC

If it looks like a rose... By no means is it a huge leap to consider the possibility that she was given to those means. The important thing to remember is that it is a leap when postulating. There is evidence to support the fact she had prostituted before. She had, apparently, left Kidney, which she was apt to do on occassion. By his testimony due to drink. It is not an unreasonable assumption that she COULD resort to whatever means needed to survive being on her own. Not sure cleaning alone would be sufficient to support her if she was in the clutches of a binge portion of a cycle. Which might be likely given it has an intimate source, potentially bias, of Kidney. Another thing to consider is the notion of her leaving him in the midst of Ripper activities. Perhaps a unenebriated mind would think better of striking out at that time. Factors to consider. We are not certain of the specifics of anything other than a woman was out late on the street possibly seen with multiple men that evening. If not a rose specifically, then at least a flower. Disregard this incoherent prattling. Need organised brain. Not this mush.