Was It Personal?

[joelhall]

i have some thoughts on the inclusion of kelly...

ive always puzzled over this 'he had more time with kelly' idea. it doesnt make much sense if youre a devotee of the serial killer theory (who are the ones who push this argument).

its said he was a sexual killer, & from the first four of these killings it would appear his thrill came from the urgency, the adrenalin rush, the risk of getting caught, the quick release of ripping fast and pulling out things to take... quick & ferocious was the style we see

...how then does this fit with a killer who spends time removing breasts, skin, the face, piling bits on a table... theres no quick release, no sudden anger & adrenalin, even the door was locked on the way out apparently. he didnt leave his work for all to see. hes spending more time taking off layers than ripping out.

its as if he were some detached student of murder, who after doing his normal routine, just before he leaves, stops, looks back, then says to himself, 'actually, while im here...'

the scene, the cuts, the destruction of the body as opposed to the slash & gash killings preceding it makes its inclusion dubious.

i dont personally feel they were all done by the same hand. but for a devotee of a serial killer to put this with the others appears illogical. indeed why not kill her on the street? or the others inside where he could engage in his type of butchery. kelly wasnt the only girl whod take blokes inside. why would he have taken so many risks beforehand? this is a very odd change of style for a killer like this.

it seems the four others were hasty & angry. the dorset street killing was a different type of anger, if thats even the word. its almost like a deep loathing for the person, something so intense that his aim was to destroy anything about her.

theres also another doubt eating away at me... her clothing. rather thanhis sudden quick attacks, he either waited for kelly to undress, or undressed her himself. neither seems particularly likely in my mind. hed never removed clothing before, hed simply shifted or cut it. it was again about urgency, or a quick release. from witness statements too it would seem he spent time with her while alive. i cannot see that he would have wanted any type of attachment to them as people, but only as objects to satisfy his lust.

just some thoughts of course.

joel

[DVV]

Who says they did not precede him?

[joelhall]

like i said, i dont think it was down to profession. who says they did follow him? he was about to kill them so i doubt if hed care whether they willingly walked a few yards with him or not.

[DVV]

Hi Monty,
I'm afraid you are using quibbles more than arguments. Should I reply: "how do you know he did?"
...
Yes, Eddowes wasn't a prostitute with a prostitute's past like Kelly or Stride, but....she was in the condition of many a poor woman, at the time, in that town...
This said, I respect your doubts about Kelly, but on the other hand, if we use the discrepancies between the murders, we have five "canonical" killers, I'm afraid... Somehow, Kelly's murder has much in common with Eddowes', while it is not very similar to Nichols'...
Anyway, there is something "special" about Kelly...who makes me a Flemtchinsonian.
Don't blame me!

Amitiés,
David

[Elias]

Some interesting theories suggested but I think the more brutal nature of the MJK murder was simply down to the time he had. There's evidence to suggest he was disturbed during all the other canonical murders, and the cuts to Eddowes' face may have only been the start of what he intended to do had he had more time.

[Monty]

How do you know he didnt?

Theres no documentary or witness evidence stating Eddowes was a prostitute, only circumstantial. Most likely she was but when in Bingley.

Im not pushing for or against her inclusion, I am stating that arguements against are not weak. They are just and reasonable.

Monty

[DVV]

Well, Kelly was a prostitute, killed by knife in Spitalfields in November 1888, the killer took part of the body, the throat was cut to the vertebrae... I admit there are discrepancies with the previous murders, but each murder is somehow different from the other. Has the killer made a vow such as: "I will never kill a young Irish prostitute indoors!"

Amitiés,
David

[Monty]

Different MO, killed indoors, significantly younger victim, uterus not removed from scene, Id say arguements against Kelly are far from weak.

Monty

[DVV]

Thanks for all the replies, has made fascinating reading!!!

How do we know for sure that Barnett had moved out the week before? By this I mean is this his word or did the police manage to corroborate this? Also have been interested in the suggestions about Hutchinson, what do we know about his relationship with Barnett, did they know each other only through MJK etc? Did they know each other at all? From what I gather I would assume that Barnett would have a dislike of Hutchinson if he was abusive.

Very interesting!!

Hi Crave Disorder,
Hutchinson and Barnett didn't know each other - at least, Barnett never said that he knew Hutch, and Hutch never said that he knew Barnett.
Barnett had shifted from Mary's room, there is no mystery here. Don't forget that the police has examined him both as a witness and as a possible suspect. Lying would have been dangerous for him.
In my opinion (and in some others' opinion), Hutch was the killer, and he was Fleming...
But that's another story, another thread...

Amitiés,
David

[DVV]

CD's right Joel, it has to be unaccompanied prostitutes, of course.

[c.d.]

my point was unaccompanied drunk women would be the easiest to overpower.

But overpower where? He needed to get them someplace secluded.

c.d.

[DVV]

Hi Joel,

But I don't think that unaccompanied women could be persuaded to go into deserted alley ways or back yards.

c.d.

...unless the killer was George Clooney or Brad Pitt.
And, anyway, neither my wife nor my mother would have followed them.

Amitiés,
The Latino Macho

[CraveDisorder]

Thanks for all the replies, has made fascinating reading!!!

How do we know for sure that Barnett had moved out the week before? By this I mean is this his word or did the police manage to corroborate this? Also have been interested in the suggestions about Hutchinson, what do we know about his relationship with Barnett, did they know each other only through MJK etc? Did they know each other at all? From what I gather I would assume that Barnett would have a dislike of Hutchinson if he was abusive.

Very interesting!!

[Mitch Rowe]

But as far as the mutilations in general goes, it is quite pointelss to talk of 'similarity in wounds' since Kelly was butchered and stripped all over her face and body. To find any similarity in that mess is to create links that aren't there, although - yes - there are a few similarities. Where one may differ is if those are significant enough. Judging from the state of Kelly's body, it is impossible to talk about the 'character' of the wounds.

Its all in Bonds PM. He seems to have made it possible!

Heres some advice:
Attack Bonds report. Say its a modern fake. Its your only chance.

[joelhall]

my point was unaccompanied drunk women would be the easiest to overpower.