Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Greetings from the past

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

  • Elamarna
    replied
    Originally posted by Joshua Rogan View Post
    I think we should nominate a special day once a year when we could all agree about at least one idea connected to this case. But what are the chances of agreeing on a date?
    Hi Joshua,

    I think the only thing you would get agreement on is the dates of the C5.

    Not seen anyone every try and change those, solid evidence sort of makes it hard to do that I guess.

    regards

    steve

    Leave a comment:


  • curious4
    replied
    Originally posted by Robert St Devil View Post
    Then what was the lure to get them into dark locales in the small hours of the morning if they aren,t prostituting?
    Possibly the prospect of being helped outbof the life they were living?

    Just speculating here.

    Best wishes
    C4

    Leave a comment:


  • curious4
    replied
    Originally posted by Rosella View Post
    Why would Kate have a bed for the night? Kelly only had money to pay for one person's accommodation. It cost eight pence in a lodging house for a couple to sleep together. How would she know if he'd managed to get any work enough to scrape that sum together?

    I don't know about Kate being released 'by her own request'. It was the custom of the City Police, I believe, to release drunks from the cells once they'd sobered up and were able to take care of themselves. Admittedly, she was anxious to go but she probably didn't want to be in a cell any longer than necessary.
    She both asked for the time and when she would be released. She also said that she could take care of herself. Doubtful that she would have been released at that time otherwise. More likely that she would have been released in the morning. Kelly seemed to think that she would be and was not particularly worried about her.

    Best wishes
    C4

    Leave a comment:


  • Geddy2112
    replied
    Originally posted by Pierre View Post

    Was she a "prostitute" in that room - or a woman alone and drunk?
    I'm still a teacher even when I'm not in the classroom.

    Leave a comment:


  • Errata
    replied
    Originally posted by Robert St Devil View Post
    Then what was the lure to get them into dark locales in the small hours of the morning if they aren,t prostituting?
    Puppies? I don't know. And maybe they all were. But it feels wrong to make that decision because "everyone knows" that Jack wanted to kill prostitutes, as opposed to believing that what each woman was doing that night was in fact soliciting. Like we are using the wrong filter on that information.

    Leave a comment:


  • Joshua Rogan
    replied
    Originally posted by Errata View Post
    Sure. But there are theories based around the idea that Jack was actively seeking prostitutes for a variety of reasons. So if he wasn't strict about that, we need to either know why, or accept that there may be a serious flaw in the idea he was hunting prostitutes. Now, I'm fine either way. It just seems a sort of handy thing to all agree on. Sort of how we all generally agree on what a serial killer is.
    I think we should nominate a special day once a year when we could all agree about at least one idea connected to this case. But what are the chances of agreeing on a date?

    Leave a comment:


  • Mayerling
    replied
    Originally posted by Errata View Post
    Not to make a habit of sticking up for him, but Pierre does have a point. Prostitution has degrees, and it surely must have an expiration date. So the idea of "prostitutes" is actually quite a bit more complex.

    If a woman sells herself in the winter but not the other three seasons, is she a prostitute? If she was one five years ago? Ten? If she does not allow penetration?

    I mean there are sociologists who have been studying prostitution for decades who have a really tough time nailing down a definition. And since we are trying to distill all of Jack's victims down into a "type", it makes sense to try and agree on a definition sooner rather than later. Because Nichols and Eddowes might not both fit in every person's definition.
    Well, I guess my comments on "Prostitutes" regarding the ladies could be subject to some consideration about economic desperation. I really feel quite sympathetic for all five ladies (and their fellow victims throughout history) but that last question of the meaning of the term "Prostitutes" just made me see red. My apologies for overdoing it to the rest of the members of this website, with the exception of the person who asked the question.

    Jeff

    Leave a comment:


  • Robert St Devil
    replied
    Originally posted by Pierre View Post
    They were women who were out in the streets at night, alone and drunk. That was what he wanted.

    Regards, Pierre

    Then what was the lure to get them into dark locales in the small hours of the morning if they aren,t prostituting?

    Leave a comment:


  • David Orsam
    replied
    Originally posted by Pierre View Post
    That link does not support the statement that the women were drunk (or even alone or on the streets for that matter, being simply a collection of victim photographs) nor does it support the statement that the killer wanted them in this condition.

    Leave a comment:


  • Errata
    replied
    Originally posted by Joshua Rogan View Post
    Perhaps he was targeting women who looked like they might be prostitutes and wasn't too bothered whether they actually were or not.
    Kate was a woman walking the streets alone after midnight, possibly still a little drunk, and last seen heading in the direction of Houndsditch, on which stands St Botolph's, the prostitutes church. Whether or not she was soliciting, it's easy to see how she might be mistaken for someone who was.
    Sure. But there are theories based around the idea that Jack was actively seeking prostitutes for a variety of reasons. So if he wasn't strict about that, we need to either know why, or accept that there may be a serious flaw in the idea he was hunting prostitutes. Now, I'm fine either way. It just seems a sort of handy thing to all agree on. Sort of how we all generally agree on what a serial killer is.

    Leave a comment:


  • GUT
    replied
    Originally posted by Joshua Rogan View Post
    Mary Kelly was alone when she was killed? Is this another case of self-inflicted wounds?
    Must apply to all of them as the great non historian assures us they were alone and drunk when killed, obviously mass suicide, maybe hypnosis induced.

    Leave a comment:


  • GUT
    replied
    Originally posted by Pierre View Post
    Your source from 1888?

    Leave a comment:


  • Joshua Rogan
    replied
    Originally posted by Pierre View Post
    By ignoring the ideal type we can also hypothesize that the killer was acquainted with Mary Jane Kelly. She was not alone and drunk in the street when she was killed. She was alone and drunk in a room.
    Mary Kelly was alone when she was killed? Is this another case of self-inflicted wounds?

    Leave a comment:


  • Pierre
    replied
    Originally posted by GUT View Post
    And your source for that is???

    Leave a comment:


  • Joshua Rogan
    replied
    Originally posted by Errata View Post
    Well sure. But was Kate soliciting? And if not, how did the Ripper know she ever did? And if he didn't, was he targeting prostitutes? And if he wasn't, does it matter that Polly was likely soliciting?
    Perhaps he was targeting women who looked like they might be prostitutes and wasn't too bothered whether they actually were or not.
    Kate was a woman walking the streets alone after midnight, possibly still a little drunk, and last seen heading in the direction of Houndsditch, on which stands St Botolph's, the prostitutes church. Whether or not she was soliciting, it's easy to see how she might be mistaken for someone who was.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X