Who Chose the Murder Sites?

[Fisherman]

Michael W Richards: In the case of Mary Kelly, we have what amounts to be second hand testimony that she was involved in a 3 way triangle with 2 Joes, 1 of which was just ejected from her residence. If either Joe had heard about that, you would have a motive for a crime of passion. Do possible motives not count?

To be fair, I canīt remember claiming the opposite. However, the abdominal flap business places Kelly within the Ripperīs tally, and I would not go looking for any traditional motive in his case. Otherwise, all suggestions must be judged on their own merits, as always.

Does the fact that the vast majority of murders involving facial mutilation are indications that the victim and killer knew each other intimately count?

Take the Texas Eyeball killer again, Michael - thereīs facial mutilation for you! But Albright didnīt have any real relations to the women he killed. He had a thing for eyes, thatīs all.
The point you make counts, of course. But even if we were to think that the facial mutilations were due to a personal relationship with the killer, how do we rule out that this man also killed Chapman?
In this context, I can say that I have a very good explanation to the cut face of Kelly - and it has nothing at all to do with any personal relationship. It is instead every bit as ritual as Albrightīs eye gouging.


Considering the fact that she was killed in the most intimate manner possible, in her own bed, undressed.

Most or all of the victims of Richard Ramirez were too. He did not know a single one of them. And given Kellys profession, would you not say that IF she was going to get herself killed, she stood a very fair chance of being killed while performing her work?

Anyone could have done to Mary Kelly what was done, it was crude and without appreciable skill or knowledge.

Some say the heart was a Virchow job... Anyhow, Yes, it can be said that it was crude - when we look at it out of context. If we add that context, we get a very competent and exact job, answering to the demands of the ritual I mean he worked to.

Now read what the doc said about Annies killer again....skill, knowledge and the ability to accomplish all that he did within a half an hour...which is likely the maximum time he could have had, since Cadosche tells us that a woman and man were on the same spot where Annie died at 5:15ish.

"The" doctor being the important deciding factor. Phillips said this, others disagreed. Myself, I look at what Phillips apparently pointed to - knife skill. And there was a lot of knife work on Kelly too. It would seem that he managed to make her face look like a lawnmower had passed over it - without destroying the eyes. A skilled knifeman. Again.
But not any anatomist or surgeon. The same applies for Chapman. And the 1873 torso. And Jackson. And the Whitehall torso. And ...
This is the binding factor, what the killer is about: Almost a sculptor with the knife.

Mary Kelly died by the hand of someone she knew, that's almost a cert.

No, Michael, it is not almost a cert.

Maybe you should try and link her with Lechmere instead of poo-pooing what others suggest as possible scenarios.

I have done so. Dorset Street was a short cut from the Hanbury Street route to Pickfords. And she may well have died at the time Lechmere would have passed.

You and your pet theory prevent you from assessing these murders as individuals Fisherman, so any pushback from you on any point has to be considered as defensive posturing.

Thatīs oversimplifying. Iīm used to it.

Someone using a fake name and being in the area of a ripper murder....(an area that is less than 1 square mile), is hardly evidence of anything.

How about that someone being actually also found with one of the victims at a remove in time that is consistent with having been the killer? How about that somebody being pointed to by a serving PC as having misinformed the police? What about that somebody having working routes that tally with four of the murders? And how about him having geographical ties to the other two? How about him having stated a time for leaving home that allowed for him to be the killer of Nichols?

Somehow, you managed to forget that?

The flap business ties the Chapman and Kelly murders together. And not only that, there was a THIRD murder, that of Liz Jackson, that involved the exact same very rare detail.
Maybe the torso killer had read about Chapman and Kelly? And wanted to emulate a Ripper murder?
Or maybe itīs just me trying to push Lechmere as the killer again? Yes, that must be it...

Strange, is it not, how my theory about Lechmere has me tampering with the facts and misunderstading everything due to my bias, whereas your assertion that a personal relation with the killer on Kellys account is factually underbuilt and sound reasoning with no underlying bias at all? Ehrm...

[Abby Normal]

After reading the article you referred me to in Ripperologist 146, I've become 50/50 on the Hutchison statement.

Hi Dan
Do you mean on the truthfulness of his story of A-man?

or the possibility that hutch is a viable suspect and/or aussie hutch is a good fit for witness hutch and/or the ripper???

is 50/50 better or worse than you thought before???

[Abby Normal]

Well, to begin with, I think we may need to opt for Whitechapel Road as the more likely place where Nichols was picked up by the killer. Looking for business in Bucks Row seems to have been a forlorn cause, given the fact that the back streets and alleys were deserted in the area.
If this is true, then Nichols could have entered Bucks Row from either the western or the eastern inlet, so itīs hard to say in which direction she and the killer walked. I tend to guess that they came from the west, because I think if they came up Brady Street, there would have been closer venues to do the business than the doorway outside Browns.

Nichols, Stride, Eddowes and MacKenzie were all found near wooden doors/fences, and it has been speculated that prostitutes used them to lean against when performing their services - they supposedly provided a less rough ride during sex. So if Nichols had led the killer to the spot herself, for sex, then he may have taken advantage of the moment she lifted her clothing, and grabbed her by the throat. The bruising - on the lower part of the jaw on the right side of the face and on the left side of the face itself - seems to tally well with her having been gripped by the throat from the front. After that, she will have been lowered to the ground.
The bruise on the lower part of the jaw was, according to Llewellyns suggestion, seemingly that of a thumb. If so, it would indicate the killer using his right hand to throttle Nichols. That in itīs turn indicates right-handedness on his behalf. To me, that is consistent with how Nichols was lowered to the ground with her head facing eastwards - the left arm would have acted as a support while the right hand steered the action, always clenched around the neck.
Once she was on the ground, he will have whipped the knife out and set about cutting her.

Thatīs my best guess anyhow!

Hi Fish
what if he came upon her dozing against the gate?
it would answer any of the (time)problems of having to search for a victim in whitechapel road, a venue seemingly not on his normal route to work?

[Abby Normal]

Thanks for this Christer, it is always nice to bounce an idea off someone.

I note your point about the killer possibly picking Nichols up somewhere and moving into Bucks Row to have sex.

It just doesn't feel right to me.
The venue is far too open for a prostitute to entertain a client there.

I think it possible that she was heading for the Roebuck Pub, to try her luck there, and if unsuccessful, turning right at the top of Bucks Row and heading
along Brady Street and then back down Whitechapel Road to try her luck in the numerous pubs there.

I really think this murder has a lot to tell us, if we could only figure it out.

And to be fair, maybe you've gone some way towards that.
Good luck with the book.

Hi Barn
as I pointed out to Fish, maybe after she went out looking for doss money, not finding any clients, she was sleeping rough in bucks row when lech came upon her . it would answer a lot of questions, especially what she was doing in the long period of time since she was last seen alive nearby and when her body was "discovered".

[Abby Normal]

There has never been a story, article, or just as hearsay by a friend, that Mary Kelly ever took a client into her room in Millers Court, and in fact she was living with a male partner until the end of Oct and a roommate until the Tuesday of her last week.

well I agree with this

[Fisherman]

Hi Fish
what if he came upon her dozing against the gate?
it would answer any of the (time)problems of having to search for a victim in whitechapel road, a venue seemingly not on his normal route to work?

A possibility, I admit that. But it would be a very unsheltered sleeping place. I would have expected her to know better places to sleep.
If she DID sleep rough there (she was intoxicated, as per Emily Holland, and maybe did ot care all that much), she makes for a possible parallel with Tabram, who may well have been sleeping rough in George Yard.

Who knows?

[Fisherman]

well I agree with this

Then again, there is an article saying that the prostitutes of Millers Court were free to entertain clients in their rooms and did so.
Why would Kelly deviate in this respect?

[Abby Normal]

Oh, you know, that murders that vary quite a bit in terms of actions taken by the killer, venues and motivations are connected anyway because someone just guessed they were,.... that "he" forgoes his trademark actions only on some kills,.... that his skill and knowledge using a knife is variable depending on the day,... that he has specific targets, then for no reason, he doesn't,...that having a possible motive for the murder isn't as probable as a murderer without any...those kinds of things.

The entire legend of a Jack the Ripper is based upon speculation, opinion and guesswork Jon, you know it, I know it, and anyone who has put in the time knows it too. Some prefer to propagate that dogma rather than really address the foundations of some of the principle problems within it....the varied methodology, victimology, knowledge, and skill,...as well as the juxtapositioning of other known killers to this same area including terrorists. I believe the big story that Fall was the Parnell Commission, and its been held in the shadow of a very long standing urban myth.

Ok well then how is the commission related to the ripper murders? how does it tie in to your idea that there was more than one killer.

whats your theory?

[Abby Normal]

A possibility, I admit that. But it would be a very unsheltered sleeping place. I would have expected her to know better places to sleep.
If she DID sleep rough there (she was intoxicated, as per Emily Holland, and maybe did ot care all that much), she makes for a possible parallel with Tabram, who may well have been sleeping rough in George Yard.

Who knows?

I agree, and if she was wasted (and tired), she may have just passed out where she was.

[Abby Normal]

Then again, there is an article saying that the prostitutes of Millers Court were free to entertain clients in their rooms and did so.
Why would Kelly deviate in this respect?

I'm just saying all things considered it dosnt appear that mary was in the habit of using her place for business. she may have though.

But I think blotchy was an acquaintance, perhaps she was looking for a new sugar daddy/boyfriend. not strictly a client.

[Abby Normal]

Hi,
I wouldn't trust Hutchinson statement, as it was clearly written for him.
I would also suggest that MJK wasn't murdered by the ripper ( I'm guessing she wasn't murdered at all ) but let's just say 13 Millers court was almost certainly picked out for various reasons by someone/someone's in authority.

Regards

OK, same thing I asked MR-whats your theory?

[Fisherman]

I'm just saying all things considered it dosnt appear that mary was in the habit of using her place for business. she may have though.

But I think blotchy was an acquaintance, perhaps she was looking for a new sugar daddy/boyfriend. not strictly a client.

What speaks against Kelly using her place for business? Isnīt it the same there - we just donīt 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.

[Abby Normal]

What speaks against Kelly using her place for business? Isnīt it the same there - we just donīt 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.

Hi Fish

What speaks against Kelly using her place for business? Isnīt it the same there - we just donīt know?

right we don't know either way. this is why I lean no:

she had recently been living with Barnett there. don't think shes going to bring clients home, or even prostituting, while she was with him.

he said he was upset with her letting her prostitute friends sleep there. NOT that she was bringing clients home.

there is no evidence, witness testimony or otherwise that she did.

the general saying-"don't **** where you eat".

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

not to me.
I think the circumstances lead to her knowing him even if loosely.
Does a prostitute client relationship usually involve, singing, drinking together, hanging out in ones room for a while? maybe grabbing a bite to eat? not to me it dosnt. it seems more like she knew this guy, liked him and possibly looking for a new boyfriend sugar daddy having recently broken up with Barnett.

But I admit she could have used her room for prostitution and blotchy could have been strictly a client, I just lean towrd no. no bigee.

[Pierre]

QUOTE=Fisherman;402729

[/B]
"Maybe you should try and link her with Lechmere instead of poo-pooing what others suggest as possible scenarios."

I have done so. Dorset Street was a short cut from the Hanbury Street route to Pickfords. And she may well have died at the time Lechmere would have passed.

"Hi, there! Just popping in to do some cutting! Iīll soon be off to work!".

No, Fisherman. The murder of Kelly was the most important murder he committed. It was well planned.

[John Wheat]

Who was Jack then Bury?

I'll take that as a yes then. Because there's no other suspect that comes close to Bury.