Who Chose the Murder Sites?

[Abby Normal]

Hi Abby,

I know you don't believe Hutch saw Kelly picking up a customer, but you did say there was no evidence or witness testimony for it, and that is what I wanted to correct.

Have a great weekend.

Love,

Caz
X

ahh..Gotcha. you are correct then.
you too!

[barnflatwyngarde]

Hi Michael,

Not this old guff again.

I watched the first part of In Plain Sight the other night on ITV, about one of Scotland's most notorious killers, Peter Manuel aka "The Beast of Birkenshaw". He raped and bludgeoned a 17 year-old girl to death on a golf course, but went on to shoot dead a 45 year-old mother, her 16 year-old daughter and 41 year-old sister in their own home, before serving a sentence for burglary, then stalked, raped and strangled another 17 year-old girl, before finally shooting dead a 45 year-old man, his 42 year-old wife and their 11 year-old son - all in a two-year period.

But something's terribly wrong here, if no one man could vary his act to this degree, so I wonder how he came to be convicted and hanged (after conducting his own defence) and why he confessed. If only he had used your arguments above, he might have demonstrated to the jury that he was a fictional bogeyman - the stuff of legend, an urban myth - and the murders were really committed by an assortment of individuals for domestic or political reasons. In fact, he might still have been with us, a nice old man of about 90, telling us how he was wrongly suspected.

What do you reckon?

Love,

Caz
X

Caz,
Manuel was a man who loved and needed the limelight.
He dropped hints all over Glasgow that he was responsible for various robberies and murders.
It was only a matter of time before the police heard the whispers on the street.

After murdering the Smart family he began throwing cash around in various pubs in Glasgow. The notes were traced back to money stolen from the Smart house.

Manuel had the gift of the gab, and was quite accomplished in conducting his own defence, both in his murder trial and various earlier trials.

The main thing that broke Manuel was when the police arrested his father for being in possession of stolen goods linked to some of the murders.
It was the threat to his father, who had provided him with some ludicrous alibis in relation to the cases that finally made him give a detailed written confession to the murders.

I attach a link which has a recording of Manuel discussing aspects of the Smart murder with a psychiatrist in Barlinnie prison.

Chilling in its banality!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ukokqwdYfcc

[Pierre]

Why were only the poorest female unfortunates singled out, if there was something political behind the murders? Was it to make it look to everyone as though a lone male predator was going round Whitechapel looking to satisfy an urge to murder and mutilate its most vulnerable women?

If so, how did they come up with this truly inspired idea many decades before it became common knowledge that killers of this type have always been around and will go on popping up at all too short intervals?

Love,

Caz
X

Hi Caz,

What did the victims have in common?

Regards, Pierre

[barnflatwyngarde]

Hi Caz,

What did the victims have in common?

Regards, Pierre

Ten toes and a pulse?

[Michael W Richards]

You ARE having us on, aren't you, Michael? The women who were killed were engaged full time in their sickly or alcoholic struggle in a tiny area of the East End where fourpence would help see them through the next 24 hours. They were never going to leave except in a box and they had no expectation of anything better.

Love,

Caz
X

Im not sure you understand what Im suggesting Caz, I believe its possible some victims had personal associations with some Irish freedom fighter types and those FF had connections to both the terrorist factions prominent at the commission hearings, and to HM own fledgling "Secret Services" branches in the form of Anderson, Monroe and others. If an unfortunate or a socialite alike of the period had information that could end politically based careers or expose ongoing plots..(perhaps like the planned Balfour assassination), they could be made silent.

Why Im suspicious about this kind of premise is based on certain details about Kates and possibly Marys connection to men capable of killing to protect their cause, and perhaps windfalls in the form of government counter spy payments. Kates past with Conway would have introduced her to people like that, her prominent tattoo might represent allegiance to more than just the man himself, and I suspect Marys experience as a courtesan in Paris might have had those overtures as well. The fact that senior staffers with HMG met with and surveilled senior Irish self rule individuals in Paris...in those specific years......(I say "Irish self rule" because its hard to be sure at times who was working for what specific arm of that movement). It might be why she decided to come back so quickly, it might have seemed dangerous.. and it might be why Kate may have felt she knew who the killer at large was.

The very coincidental alias choices by Kate I believe are not as easily acceptable as some would have, in fact I believe it is evidence that Kate may have had knowledge of someone who also knew the same criminal fringes that she knew.

Im not looking for conspiracies, Im looking for explanations. I believe the stakes at the Commission hearings were potential life and death situations, figuratively or otherwise, just like the stakes were for women forced to the streets.

I don't think what happened that Fall is just representative of a serial killer rampage, I think it was confluence of evils. Random murders combined with specific removals.

[Michael W Richards]

Oh go on, Michael. Be as sarcastic as you like, though I'm not sure it'll make up for the fact that there is zero evidence to prove several killers were going round offing Spitalfields unfortunates, either for being bad wives or girlfriends, or for "knowing too much", or for practising blackmail.

Love,

Caz
X

Had this idea also had over 125 years of specific analysis and still failed the authentication or validation test Id be concerned about the obvious missing evidence. But as it is only this serial killer premise has had that kind of scrutiny and still failed any provability.

Don't take the position that those who believe the serial killer theories are correct and those who don't are not Caz, clearly that is unproven too.

[The Good Michael]

What speaks against Kelly using her place for business? Isn´t it the same there - we just don´t know? I find that if it was common practice to use the rooms for prostitution, the logical thing to expect would be that Kelly did it too. Not when under the care of Barnett, though.

Blotchy is a client in my eyes. He seems to be a classical punter, picked up in a nearby pub.

These are the most logical conclusions. Prostitutes use rooms if they have them, and almost any man seen in her company late at night, aside from Barnett, has a good chance of being a client.

Mike

[Michael W Richards]

The case of Blotchy isn't as cut and dried for suspect fodder as some would like to believe. I believe a protector might be more of the case here. The serenading isn't conventional prostitute foreplay today, nor was in in 1888. And an hour of it heard seems to dispel the notion of intimacy.

Mary clearly wasn't working that night, based on her condition at 11:45, and the silent and dark room by 1:30.

Blotchy either stayed, or he left, but there is no evidence from any source that suggests the liaison was a for-hire situation.

[Fisherman]

The case of Blotchy isn't as cut and dried for suspect fodder as some would like to believe. I believe a protector might be more of the case here. The serenading isn't conventional prostitute foreplay today, nor was in in 1888. And an hour of it heard seems to dispel the notion of intimacy.

Mary clearly wasn't working that night, based on her condition at 11:45, and the silent and dark room by 1:30.

Blotchy either stayed, or he left, but there is no evidence from any source that suggests the liaison was a for-hire situation.

Michael, what WAS "conventional prostitute foreplay" in 1888? I referred you to the Rabram case before, and on that score, you can read this passage on this very site:
"According to Pearly Poll, she and Martha picked up two guardsmen, a Corporal and a Private in the Two Brewers public house and drank with them in several pubs including the White Swan on Whitechapel High Street."

These prostitutes were therefore pubcrawling together with two guardsmen - thay went from pub to pub, drank and made merry.

Does that count as "conventional prostitute foreplay"?

As I said, prostitution is much about making the client feel at ease. If that is helped by pubcrawling, singing etcetera, then that is what is going to happen. If the client likes the singing, the prostitute can even charge him for it - it´s all part of an affair that will not necessarily look the same from punter to punter.

You say that "Mary clearly wasn't working that night, based on her condition at 11:45, and the silent and dark room by 1:30."

In the first case, are you suggesting that drunk prostitutes will not work?

In the second case, I would have thought that Mary´s work involved seeking actively for punters on the streets, in the pubs, etcetera. And when she left her room to do so, why would it NOT be dark and silent? What if Kelly did "a Tabram", picked up a punter and went pubcrawling with him? Would she have left a candle burning at home in such a situation? Or indeed in any situation at all?
A prostitutes work encompasses BOTH scouting for punters, picking them up, doing the deals, providing entertainment and doing the business. During some of these parts, she will be home and working, during the others she will be out on the streets, and her room will be dark and silent.

[Jon Guy]

Michael, what WAS "conventional prostitute foreplay" in 1888? I referred you to the Rabram case before, and on that score, you can read this passage on this very site:
"According to Pearly Poll, she and Martha picked up two guardsmen, a Corporal and a Private in the Two Brewers public house and drank with them in several pubs including the White Swan on Whitechapel High Street."

These prostitutes were therefore pubcrawling together with two guardsmen - thay went from pub to pub, drank and made merry.

Does that count as "conventional prostitute foreplay"?

As I said, prostitution is much about making the client feel at ease. If that is helped by pubcrawling, singing etcetera, then that is what is going to happen. If the client likes the singing, the prostitute can even charge him for it - it´s all part of an affair that will not necessarily look the same from punter to punter.

You say that "Mary clearly wasn't working that night, based on her condition at 11:45, and the silent and dark room by 1:30."

In the first case, are you suggesting that drunk prostitutes will not work?

In the second case, I would have thought that Mary´s work involved seeking actively for punters on the streets, in the pubs, etcetera. And when she left her room to do so, why would it NOT be dark and silent? What if Kelly did "a Tabram", picked up a punter and went pubcrawling with him? Would she have left a candle burning at home in such a situation? Or indeed in any situation at all?
A prostitutes work encompasses BOTH scouting for punters, picking them up, doing the deals, providing entertainment and doing the business. During some of these parts, she will be home and working, during the others she will be out on the streets, and her room will be dark and silent.

Absolutely, and some would just even sing for a penny (see Singing Lizzie), and it`s not too hard to imagine that for some, just sitting in a chair in front of a fire, would be worth a penny or two.

[The Good Michael]

The serenading isn't conventional prostitute foreplay today, nor was in in 1888. And an hour of it heard seems to dispel the notion of intimacy.


Blotchy either stayed, or he left, but there is no evidence from any source that suggests the liaison was a for-hire situation.

Drunk people often sing. I heard a woman in a room next to mine, sing the same song, a Beatles tune, over and over for 3 hours in the Hebrides. She was drunk when I met her in the commons area, and continued drinking while singing this song from her bedroom.

As far as no source suggesting Blotchy was a client. That statement is really asinine. That he was in her company is the suggestion. It's that simple. The burden of proof that he was a bodyguard and not a punter is on you.

Mike

[Jon Guy]

The case of Blotchy isn't as cut and dried for suspect fodder as some would like to believe. I believe a protector might be more of the case here.

Hi Mike

If a protector, wouldn`t Blotchy be recognised locally ?

[Michael W Richards]

Hi Mike

If a protector, wouldn`t Blotchy be recognised locally ?

Someone recognized him from the description a few days later.

[Michael W Richards]

Drunk people often sing. I heard a woman in a room next to mine, sing the same song, a Beatles tune, over and over for 3 hours in the Hebrides. She was drunk when I met her in the commons area, and continued drinking while singing this song from her bedroom.

As far as no source suggesting Blotchy was a client. That statement is really asinine. That he was in her company is the suggestion. It's that simple. The burden of proof that he was a bodyguard and not a punter is on you.

Mike

I would think since the evidence suggests she entered her room with someone at 11:45 and just sang until after 1am, and the lack of evidence that she ever took any client to that room, added to the fact she was receiving some financial support almost every day excluding the last...save Marias coin toss,.....and since she expressed dread about what was happening to street walkers that Fall, and that she was in arrears....the cumulative data does not support an active prostitute.

[Michael W Richards]

Worth remembering for those that have forgotten, Barnetrt lived with Mary until the end of Oct, Maria lived withm and then with Mary until Tuesday of that last week. Blotchy entered the room with Mary on the Thursday evening. Ergo, the ONLY day Mary had that room all to herself prior to her murder was Wednesday night.