the key

[Sally]

Actually..

"An impression has gone abroad that the murderer took away the key of the room. Barnett informs me that it has been missing some time, and since it has been lost they have put their hand through the broken window, and moved back the catch. It is quite easy." (Inspector Frederick G. Abberline at Mary Jane Kelly's inquest)

I believe that the last part of this quotation 'it is quite easy' was only reported in the press, and is not in the inquest testimony. A little embellishment, possibly to suggest the impression that the murderer put his hand through the window himself.

[richardnunweek]

Hi,
The rolled up bedroll, surely is a tip to when the murder was committed, if it was cold enough to light a fire , then it would have been cold enough to warrant the use of blankets..surely?
The bedrolls positioning, has all the hallmarks of the bed having been made for the day thus during daylight, and the positioning of the stocking from the left leg[ if that is the case] suggests that Mary was attacked whilst dressing/ undressing, but if it was, during the early hours of the morning, the bedding would have been laid out... not rolled..
Taking Maxwell's account the most obvious solution is that Kelly was killed after 845am, and that she was either dressing, when attacked ,or undressing awaiting the arrival of someone.
As the velvet jacket and bonnet were according to the police ''bloodstained'', and burnt for that reason?, then that would suggest that they were on the bed itself when she was attacked, giving the impression that she was dressing at the time of her demise.
Why burn those bloody garments?
That would be another thread..
Regards Richard.

[Lechmere]

Yes I can see the logic of Richard's take on it.

Fisherman - he didn't need to carry out a blitz attack as he was for the first time in a relatively secure location.

[Phil H]

The bedrolls positioning, has all the hallmarks of the bed having been made for the day thus during daylight, and the positioning of the stocking from the left leg[ if that is the case] suggests that Mary was attacked whilst dressing/ undressing, but if it was, during the early hours of the morning, the bedding would have been laid out... not rolled..

Thank you, that's a point I had not thought of before and warrants some reflection.

I assume that if the bed had been "made" or was being slept in, it is unlikely that "Jack" would have removed the unwanted bedding so neatly? So I see much logic in your thought process. This might ne a major factor in determining the time of the attack.

As the velvet jacket and bonnet were according to the police ''bloodstained'', and burnt for that reason?, then that would suggest that they were on the bed itself when she was attacked, giving the impression that she was dressing at the time of her demise.

Again, good points to which I shall apply my mind.

Phil

[Fisherman]

Lechmere:

"Fisherman - he didn't need to carry out a blitz attack as he was for the first time in a relatively secure location."

I know that, Lechmere. But that does not change the fact that he seemed totally uninterested in any preludes of any sorts as he killed Nichols, Chapman and Eddowes.

Most people agree that whatever the Ripper was, he was not a sadist. He did not kill in order to inflict pain. Instead, he took every precaution to ensure as swift death and silence as possible, and THEN he set about what he came for. And yes, it can be argued that the surroundings in Miller´s Court meant that he did not need this swiftness, but it can likewise be argued that his agenda could just the same be fulfilled without dragging things out and offering the victims a chance to cry out: boom, swish ... and that was it.

We also need to take a look at what he did to the others, and that is fairly onesided: immediately subdue, cut the throat, open up and get at the innards. Then he took off, and I really don´t think that we ought to anticipate that he did so because he was repeatedly disturbed after having laid his hands on them innards. I think it is much more likely that he CHOSE to leave once he had gotten to that point, and that is why I compare these deeds to smash-and-grab jobs, jobs that in spite of their swiftness apparently satisfied him. And let´s face it - if he really at some stage had felt the need for more time, he chose the worst possible venues in places like Buck´s Row and Mitre Square. There would have been abandoned houses, doorways, hidden away corners, unguarded ships along the docks, unlocked cellars ... you name it, that would have provided very much better possibilities for a prolonged session with his victim at each occasion. But still we have an impression that he did not care about that - it would even seem that he may have let the women make the choice of venue, instead of optimizing it himself. And if this was so, then he just did not care - any place would do, since he knew that what he wanted to do would very soon be over.

This - amongst other things - is why I think we may well be looking at a behaviour on the killers behalf that differs radically from his earlier exploits. And when a behaviour differs radically, it is more often than not because it answers to very different surrounding factors.
You draw the conclusion that these factors were the sudden offering of relatively secluded surroundings and ample time, and that´s just fine - that may have been it.
I don´t agree, though, at least not as long as we work from a premise that Kelly picked him up as a punter and brought him home. He was not after traditional sex, and he was not after snuggling up behind a woman in her bed - he was after evisceration and organprocuring. He was not a sadist, he was very practical and economic with the time.
Yet, in this instance it would seem that he waited several minutes, chatting Kelly up, letting her undress, letting her creep into bed and snuggle up in the far corner, making her a bit tricky to reach for.

That´s just not my Ripper, quite simply, and that´s why I do not concur with you over this. That is not to say that you could not be right. It´s just to say that I don´t think you are.

The best,
Fisherman

[Ben]

Hi Richard,

I really don't see any pictorial evidence of a rolled-up blanket or "bedroll". It appears to have been bunched up, and perhaps partially stuffed down the gap between bed and wall, presumably by the killer to facilitate his grisly activities. I don't see what motivation anyone would have for "rolling" up a blanket CCF-style.

All the best,
Ben

[Heinrich]

.... As to whether anyone would have been aware of this means to gain access, it beggars belief, in my opinion,that just anyone would have been testing doors and windows at random in that tiny court, looking for a woman to disembowel. On the off chance that it was not a self locking bolt, and had to be engaged manually on leaving, I would consider that the killer had to be someone with intimate knowledge of the circumstances surrounding the room and it's occupant, on that particular night, and that Kelly was a selected victim, and not a random pick up.

Quite so, harry. Even the owner of the property was unaware of the ease with which entry could be gained. The simplest explanation is to heed the one person who spoke with authority about the lock and missing key, who is relied upon by the police for this information, who had actually lived there with Mary Kelly, and who admits to have visited her on the night of the murder. Joseph Barnett's involvement is all over this scene like no one else.

[richardnunweek]

Hi Ben,
According to Dew, she [ Kelly] always wore a smart white apron, what we know of Mary she does appear to have done her best to keep herself clean, despite her circumstances, in which case, like most women during the ages, it is not hard to imagine that her bedroll would have been presentable until required once more.
I would say I have suggested some points worth discussing, after all T.O.D is extremely important , and we may have been guilty of just accepting what has been assumed over the years, rather then using own own powers of observation.
Regards Richard.

[Phil H]

One thing is certain - the bedding (i.e what comprised what has been called the bedroll) was not in place when the body was found.

Nevertheless, on reflection, I am puzzled that the sheet is stated to have been cut (isn't it? - hence the discussion about whether the killer covered Mary's face?).

So why was the sheet loose and covering Mary if she had already arranged the bed for the day? (I assume by this is meant that it could be used as a place to sit?)

Phil

[Ben]

Hi Richard,

it is not hard to imagine that her bedroll would have been presentable until required once more.

But people make their beds look presentable by "making" them in the usual way, i.e. by stretching the bedding over the mattress and tucking it in neatly, preparatory to getting into it when required. I've never heard of anyone making their bed by rolling their blankets up as compactly as possible.

All the best,
Ben

[Phil H]

I think I can see the idea - a bedroll placed lengthwise along the wall side of the bed, would create a sort of "ottoman" on which Mary, Joe of their visitors could lounge during the day. Given the sparse furnishings and restricted space, it might have been a practical solution to the seating problem.

Phil

[Abby Normal]

One thing is certain - the bedding (i.e what comprised what has been called the bedroll) was not in place when the body was found.

Nevertheless, on reflection, I am puzzled that the sheet is stated to have been cut (isn't it? - hence the discussion about whether the killer covered Mary's face?).

So why was the sheet loose and covering Mary if she had already arranged the bed for the day? (I assume by this is meant that it could be used as a place to sit?)

Phil

Hi Phil
The cut sheet would IMHO point to MK being asleep/passed out on her bed and the killer cutting through the sheet as it was already covering MK or pulling it over her and then cutting through it (perhaps pulling the sheet over her face and cutting through it because he did not want her to see him because she knew him?)

[Phil H]

Abby

I recognise the conventional view of the sheet.

My last post was really referring to the idea proposed a few posts earlier which suggested the "bedroll" and its position indicated a morning time of death. My confused musings were trying to work out how, if that was the case, the sheet came to be where it was.

Phil

[Rubyretro]

Mary might have had her face cut through the sheet because she pulled it up herself, to 'hide'...

Remember the fab scene in 'Withnail and I', when Withnail and 'I' hide under
a sheet in bed when they are terrified of the gamekeeper roding outside their cottage ? (Johnny Depp played homage to it in Sleepy Hollow)

The best comedy imitates the ridiculous things that we do in life and which people can instantly recognise as 'true'.

I think that after realising that she was being attacked...and calling out...it would have been a tragically comic response to the knife to have sought to protect herself from JTR by hiding her face under the sheet.

Which suggests that Mary was in bed at the time of her murder.

[The Good Michael]

But if the Key...that is what the thread is about, yes? If the key had been lost some time before the murder, and if Barnett Left Kelly because she had been hanging about with ladies of ill-repute (mush as herself), and if she had returned to a life of prostitution (though she probably never left the game), she would have either always left her room unlocked, or reached in the windown and opened the latch as Abberline said was easy to do. If the former, anyone off the street or in the Court could have killed her. If the latter, take your pick. Surely Mccarthy, Bowyer, Julia, Maria Harvey, Barnett, Bloctchy, and a host of other customers would have had the opportunity to see how to undo the latch. In fact, Barnett is no more suspicious than the whole lot of them.

Mike