Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Victimology, MO, signature

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    Eddowes intermittently and interchangeably often used three names, Conway, Eddowes and Kelly. She could have used Kelly on one occasion that day and Conway on another. Nobody knows.

    Plus, sorry, but we don't know that the person who met her and got her drunk also killed her at all. (It may have been more than one person who bought her a drink that evening, or she may have got drunk all by herself after earning a few pennies.)

    Comment


    • #62
      Originally posted by Rosella View Post
      Eddowes intermittently and interchangeably often used three names, Conway, Eddowes and Kelly. She could have used Kelly on one occasion that day and Conway on another. Nobody knows.

      Plus, sorry, but we don't know that the person who met her and got her drunk also killed her at all. (It may have been more than one person who bought her a drink that evening, or she may have got drunk all by herself after earning a few pennies.)
      That's some edgey thinking there, Rosella. I mean her killer getting her fall down drunk & then letting her walk away in that state, after making a future appointment that she would totally not forget in her drunken state, to be possibly picked by police or possibly pass out in an alley somewhere all night, so they could kill her later because they believed she was Mary Kelly is far more likely. I mean otherwise she might have just been a victim of oppurtunity or personally targeted or something else as crazy as that.

      That came off properly sarcastic, right? I've not had any coffee yet this morning and can't tell.
      I’m often irrelevant. It confuses people.

      Comment


      • #63
        Originally posted by Rosella View Post
        Eddowes intermittently and interchangeably often used three names, Conway, Eddowes and Kelly. She could have used Kelly on one occasion that day and Conway on another. Nobody knows.

        Plus, sorry, but we don't know that the person who met her and got her drunk also killed her at all. (It may have been more than one person who bought her a drink that evening, or she may have got drunk all by herself after earning a few pennies.)
        Hi Rosella
        Think we've been round this block a few times but we have evidence that on the day she died she was using the name Kelly.... Not only that but Mary Kelly
        That she may have used Eddowes or Conway in the past has no bearing at all.
        As for your second point I would suggest that something was keeping her awake in the cell.When someone has an important reason to wake up they tend to sleep light, constantly waking as it's on their mind and they are in fear of oversleeping.She was asking the time and asking to leave.... Why?
        Why not just sleep right through till morning in the cell? That would be what would be expected of someone as drunk as she allegedly was,out for the count till woken.She had no money for a room,she walked the wrong way if she wanted to go home.The whole scenario suggests overwhelmingly that she had to meet someone
        It may also suggest that she, although drunk,may not have been quite as drunk as she made herself out to be
        You can lead a horse to water.....

        Comment


        • #64
          Originally posted by Graham View Post
          I don't know whether you guys have clocked this, but as this thread has got more, shall we say, 'technical' and 'involved', Pierre seems to have lost interest in it. Which kind of leads me to suspect that his knowledge of the Case is at best superficial, and at worst based upon what he probably spends time on picking up from these boards as he goes along, so to speak.

          Graham
          Hi Graham

          I have work to do so that's why. I'll get back to this thread.

          Regards Pierre

          Comment


          • #65
            Originally posted by Michael W Richards View Post
            2 Canonicals for sure, and a possible third with Kate, match the above. ONLY 2 victims acknowledged that they were soliciting on the nights they were killed, the rest are often speculated to have been doing so.

            Which brings up the main question for the "Ripper Killer of Five" folks.....why do we need to revise the above parameters? What catalyst, what transformation occurs to alter the behaviors of this killer? What is the evidence that supports the connection with victims who do not fit within the above confines?

            If the man who killed Polly and Annie was a serial mutilator who thrived on killing prostitutes, women who were strangers to him, and then opening them up to excise organs in places where the bodies would be found quickly...then why does he slit one woman once and leave another in a room that is locked?

            Morph the killer profile,...spoil the search I say.
            Hi,

            he planned the double event. I think the reason why he did no mutilations on Stride was that he knew he was going to do another one close by. He could not search for the next victim with blood on him.

            I also believe that he chose to murder Mary Kelly indoors because he wanted this murder to be discovered on Lord Mayor´s Day.

            On the question of soliciting now. I wrote concearning the victimology:

            Poor women often addicted to alcohol selling their bodies cheaply and/or vagabonding in Whitechapel or the City

            Regards Pierre
            Last edited by Pierre; 11-13-2015, 04:06 AM.

            Comment


            • #66
              Hi Pierre

              Originally posted by Pierre View Post
              I also believe that he chose to murder Mary Kelly indoors because he wanted this murder to be discovered on Lord Mayor´s Day.
              Even though there was a chance that Kelly`s body may not have been discovered till late in the afternoon ?

              Comment


              • #67
                Err... Wouldn't anyone murdered after midnight be discovered on the day of the Lord Mayor's Show?

                C4

                Comment


                • #68
                  Hello JON GUY and CURIOuS4.
                  This was a question i asked in the MJK "why Mary Had to Die" thread.
                  If fast discovefy was his MO and he was timing the 12:30 Lord Mayors Show, how could the killer guarantee someone was going to enter her room? Its not a yard or a square or a row or a public walkway. Im certain Joe Barrett would have discovered her body, and other LMS attendees could have "popped in" anytime bUT how would Jack the Ripper know that?
                  there,s nothing new, only the unexplored

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Originally posted by Robert St Devil View Post
                    If fast discovefy was his MO and he was timing the 12:30 Lord Mayors Show, how could the killer guarantee someone was going to enter her room? Its not a yard or a square or a row or a public walkway. Im certain Joe Barrett would have discovered her body, and other LMS attendees could have "popped in" anytime bUT how would Jack the Ripper know that?
                    Maybe there is data that Jack walked into ol' M'carthy's shop, bought a candled and dropped a "What Ho, Gov'na! I saws that Mark Kelly wif a large pile of cashmoney just nows. Wonder 'ow th' lass gots 'er 'ands ons it?"

                    Please try to read that in a Dick Van Dyke Mary Poppins cartoonish lay broad type accent.
                    I’m often irrelevant. It confuses people.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Originally posted by Robert St Devil View Post
                      If fast discovefy was his MO and he was timing the 12:30 Lord Mayors Show, how could the killer guarantee someone was going to enter her room?
                      Pierre`s suspect has to be John McCarthy.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Originally posted by packers stem View Post
                        ...And it should never be forgotten that Kate was going by the name 'mary kelly' that day...
                        So whoever got her drunk believed her to be Mary Kelly
                        And whoever got her drunk almost certainly met her and killed her believing she was in fact...Mary Kelly
                        Ive often though that the fact that Kate used variations of the name in her last 24 hours relevant to what happened to her. On the pawn ticket she used the name Jane Kelly of 6 Dorset Street , and then in Bishopsgate she used the name Mary Ann Kelly of Fashion Street. Using the information from both aliases we have Mary Jane Kelly, 6 Dorset Street. Considering that the next murder within this so called series was a Mary Jane Kelly of 26 Dorset St, one has to wonder about such a coincidence.

                        Cheers
                        Michael Richards

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Originally posted by Michael W Richards View Post
                          Ive often though that the fact that Kate used variations of the name in her last 24 hours relevant to what happened to her. On the pawn ticket she used the name Jane Kelly of 6 Dorset Street , and then in Bishopsgate she used the name Mary Ann Kelly of Fashion Street. Using the information from both aliases we have Mary Jane Kelly, 6 Dorset Street. Considering that the next murder within this so called series was a Mary Jane Kelly of 26 Dorset St, one has to wonder about such a coincidence.

                          Cheers
                          I agree totally Michael
                          The 1891 census shows only 48 Mary Kellys in the whole of London between the ages of 25-35
                          If evenly spread that would give maybe 2,3,4 maybe in spitalfields.Seriously,what's the chances of a 'random' killer picking out his last two victims using the same name on the day they died?
                          We're talking lottery winning odds surely.Some people try to mask this by making out that Mary Kelly was a popular name for prostitutes to choose yet they provide no evidence to back this up...it's a nonsense.I think if that was the case every Mary Kelly who was not a prostitute would go by a different name
                          The killer was looking for Mary Kelly
                          You can lead a horse to water.....

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Originally posted by Michael W Richards View Post
                            Ive often though that the fact that Kate used variations of the name in her last 24 hours relevant to what happened to her. On the pawn ticket she used the name Jane Kelly of 6 Dorset Street , and then in Bishopsgate she used the name Mary Ann Kelly of Fashion Street. Using the information from both aliases we have Mary Jane Kelly, 6 Dorset Street. Considering that the next murder within this so called series was a Mary Jane Kelly of 26 Dorset St, one has to wonder about such a coincidence.

                            Cheers
                            Hi Michael.

                            That scenario carries with it the implication that the killer was looking for a particular name, but didn't know what the person looked like.
                            Catherine Eddowes looked nothing like Mary Kelly.

                            A killer looking for a "name" suggests he has no personal connection with the targeted victim, which implies what, a killer for hire, or a father avenging his son?
                            Isn't this the stuff of fiction?
                            Regards, Jon S.

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              JON GUY.
                              I thought John McCarthy was too specific if we were considering her landlord as the answer to that question. I would have to look at McCarthysCourts as a whole for evidence of involvement. Which means Tom Bowyer, his brother Daniel McCarthy, his son and that other family living with him.
                              there,s nothing new, only the unexplored

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Originally posted by Wickerman View Post
                                Hi Michael.

                                That scenario carries with it the implication that the killer was looking for a particular name, but didn't know what the person looked like.
                                Catherine Eddowes looked nothing like Mary Kelly.

                                A killer looking for a "name" suggests he has no personal connection with the targeted victim, which implies what, a killer for hire, or a father avenging his son?
                                Isn't this the stuff of fiction?
                                Hi Wickerman
                                Do you believe contract killings to be fictional only?
                                You can lead a horse to water.....

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X