Why not always indoors?

[DVV]

Imo "Why one time indoors?" is a better question.

[PC2267]

Imo "Why one time indoors?" is a better question.

I'd be interested to know, if anyone knows or can hazard, how many of the residents of Whitechapel area, actually owned their own houses or indeed rented a house or room, compared to those who lived in the various doss houses. 29 Hanbury Street for example certainly appears to have had loads of people living in it. I wonder whether for example any of the other address in the street were just occupied by one family. I wonder whether in 1888 house ownership is like that of today whereby no one could really afford to own their own home, or if they did, they had to rent out rooms within their homes? This leads me to my next question how accurate the various censuses are?

[The Good Michael]

Imo "Why one time indoors?" is a better question.

Wouldn't the answer be the same?

Mike

[Rosella]

I do know that in Victorian England people of all classes often leased or rented their homes from a landlord rather than taking out a mortgage and buying outright. There were hundreds of thousands of house built by developers of all sorts in those years and home ownership (and a mortgage) wasn't regarded as really necessary.

People lodged in others' homes, too, either as servants, employees or simple lodgers. The East End as a whole wasn't a wealthy area, and so I'd expect a mix of private homes rented, with or without a lodger or two, lodging houses, (both private and charitable,) like the Victoria Home, and homes for the 'respectable' working poor like the Peabody Buildings, plus a lot of doss houses.

[GUT]

Quite a few too that were privately owned but the owner had to take in few lodgers to make ends meet.

[PC2267]

Quite a few too that were privately owned but the owner had to take in few lodgers to make ends meet.

Similar to today then. To that end I wonder just how accurate the various censuses are, from a research point of view?

[Batman]

The 1891 London census is pretty detailed. There are normal homes not crowded over (even quite a few empty ones) and then suddenly you hit on a Doss house and its like 100 or so people registered and then back to normal figures before rocking upwards again at the other Doss houses.

Whitechapel was overpopulated but the distribution isn't even across the place. For example you can get maps of crime/poverty in the area. You will see a correlated between a rise in crime with areas more densely populated with Doss houses leading to nicknames like the most notorious streets in London (if not the world etc.). However Doss houses are just a part of whitechapel. Some people had their own rooms. Tenants often took up a room for themselves, including those slumming. In Miller's court, Cox had her own room. So did Ada Wilson. The difference between a doss house and a room was likely one of looks. The more attractive looking prostitutes likely obtained more and so could afford better conditions. Remember that prostitution was not a full-time job for the unfortunates. Many only resorted to prostitution sometimes to supplement their income from other work.

If JtR was staying at a doss house or went from doss house to doss house, then his identity is lost within the tens of thousands of people who stayed there in 1888. However I find this unlikely as there was a missing hour between Eddowes and the discovery of the apron. This suggests he may have gone somewhere for awhile before returning home.

[Natasha]

If the killer started to pick victims specifically who had access to single rooms, wouldn't that raise more alert for people to be more vigilant and less likely to invite people back their home? Also it would be easier for the ripper to be caught, people could set up a fake rendezvous and then the ripper would be caught.

I don't think the ripper intended to commit murders indoors, it being very risky because there is only one way out.
This was a change of tactic, because of the familiarity of where the crimes were committed, because of the increase of attention and vigilance committee groups. There was no reason for women to worry if they were at home, because the murders took place outside.

[Michael W Richards]

I see now. You are just putting the first two together because you theorize that they were the only common victims. That's fine, but steps around the question completely, and has nothing to do with my answer. Your agenda really doesn't belong here with the simple question asked. Privacy has more to do with the question than a matter of doss money. Who had private rooms? Only Kelly.

Mike

Just a point here...they were not just common victims, they were women killed in sequence by someone who used the same ploy, the same subdue techniques, the same deep double cut throats and had the same pm focus on the abdomen.

That's why I bundle these women under 1 killer, because the methodology and activities are almost identical.

That's where the repetition in the Canonical Group ends...and the new ever changing killer emerges...who some imagine was the same guy.

Since he obviously did what he did without leaving a single trace in those 2 deaths, I can see no legitimate reason to imagine that he then abandons his successful technique and just slits a throat next outing.

Cheers

[PC2267]

The 1891 London census is pretty detailed. There are normal homes not crowded over (even quite a few empty ones) and then suddenly you hit on a Doss house and its like 100 or so people registered and then back to normal figures before rocking upwards again at the other Doss houses.

Whitechapel was overpopulated but the distribution isn't even across the place. For example you can get maps of crime/poverty in the area. You will see a correlated between a rise in crime with areas more densely populated with Doss houses leading to nicknames like the most notorious streets in London (if not the world etc.). However Doss houses are just a part of whitechapel. Some people had their own rooms. Tenants often took up a room for themselves, including those slumming. In Miller's court, Cox had her own room. So did Ada Wilson. The difference between a doss house and a room was likely one of looks. The more attractive looking prostitutes likely obtained more and so could afford better conditions. Remember that prostitution was not a full-time job for the unfortunates. Many only resorted to prostitution sometimes to supplement their income from other work.

If JtR was staying at a doss house or went from doss house to doss house, then his identity is lost within the tens of thousands of people who stayed there in 1888. However I find this unlikely as there was a missing hour between Eddowes and the discovery of the apron. This suggests he may have gone somewhere for awhile before returning home.

Very interesting reading Batman, thanks for sharing that with us!!!

[PC2267]

Just a point here...they were not just common victims, they were women killed in sequence by someone who used the same ploy, the same subdue techniques, the same deep double cut throats and had the same pm focus on the abdomen.

That's why I bundle these women under 1 killer, because the methodology and activities are almost identical.

That's where the repetition in the Canonical Group ends...and the new ever changing killer emerges...who some imagine was the same guy.

Since he obviously did what he did without leaving a single trace in those 2 deaths, I can see no legitimate reason to imagine that he then abandons his successful technique and just slits a throat next outing.

Cheers

Just when I think the canonical 5 are not linked, I read something like this and I'm undecided again!! Thanks for sharing your thoughts with us Mike.

[Michael W Richards]

Has an intolerance for fantasy.

Believes Stride was a secret agent.

Being the expert on these cases as you are, Im sure the reference to Unfortunates being used as paid informants for the police to spy on anarchists and Fenians didn't escape your view.

Its hardly a fanciful idea when we have evidence that sort of thing occurred...and since we see that Liz isn't there soliciting.

But who am I to correct an expert?

[Harry D]

Being the expert on these cases as you are, Im sure the reference to Unfortunates being used as paid informants for the police to spy on anarchists and Fenians didn't escape your view.

Its hardly a fanciful idea when we have evidence that sort of thing occurred...and since we see that Liz isn't there soliciting.

But who am I to correct an expert?

Lighten up, Michael.

You think a serial killer being on the loose in Whitechapel is in the realm of make-believe, but believe Stride could be a spy, based on no evidence at all. I couldn't help but find the funny side in that.

[RockySullivan]

Torso had a place to dismember but what is it his own apartment or did he use some type of hidden place? It's unlikely he could do so outside in a busy city. The question is how did he get the torsos to whitehall and pinchin st and how did he get the parts into the thames. Also how did he bury the limbs? How did he enter the vault carrying a torso when it was nearly impossible to access except for the workers? If Torso had a spot in whitechapel why wouldn't he bring the ripper victims there for dismemberment and if he did live in whitechapel why bring the torsos to the whitehall and the thames? If Torso was the ripper ( and I believe he was) did he kill his victims outside for thrill? Did he not live alone or have a change in lodgings? Could he not bring the victims back to his place? If torso was carrying the parts around London from where he lived...why are they so spread out? Did he have means of transportation because it's unlikely he could carry the parcels? What's the central location of all the torso dump sites? Did killing victims on the street mean less risk as in he didn't have to dump the parts and risk being caught with the bodies? Didn't have to clean up the mess? Don't **** where you eat?

[Rosella]

Gosh, it would be pretty messy if Torso killer dismembered bodies in his own apartment. Many killers who dismember their victims do so in the bathroom, utilising the bath. Trouble is, in the 1870's-1880's many homes didn't possess a bathroom.

Torso killer may have had access to a property with a lot of isolated outbuildings, of course. However, isn't it more likely that he had access either to some sort of warehouse near the Thames, where he could work in private undisturbed, or to a butchers or horse slaughterers to which he could gain access at night or evenings and where the presence of blood wouldn't be noticeable?

Many butchers had carts and casual bystanders wouldn't take notice if meat wrapped in linen was placed on top of dismembered victims. I do wonder whether Torso killer (whom I don't believe was Jack) had access to a vehicle which wouldn't attract notice when he dumped bodies at night. Something like a night soil man with his cart perhaps, who helped him dump the bodies?