Evidence towards Joseph Barnett?

[sidbolt123]

Hello everyone!
This is my first post here so forgive me for any mistakes I might make. I've been really interested in the case of JTR after watching a video by LEMMINO on youtube (link attached below) and have since been hooked. I've tried searching the forums for this topic before but couldn't find anything so forgive me if this was already talked about. At 50:20 LEMMINO describes that the supposed motivation for Barnett being JTR is resulting from the guilt of driving MJK back to prostitution and so he goes on a murder spree in an attempt to scare MJK off the streets. Although this is speculation, I was wondering if there was any record of MJK changing jobs? Or at least any record or statement that she may have stopped being a prostitute for some time? My thinking is that if MJK was frightened to continue being a prostitute, and lets say that this period when she was frightened was during October of 1888, could this not add some suspicion to Barnett being JTR? Maybe after a month of no murdering MJK felt safe enough to continue working on the streets and Barnett was upset to the point where he finally murdered MJK in the most brutal fashion. Im new to searching for such statements and all so I ask for your help.

Thanks

Video link:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lADBHDg-JtA&t=1815s&ab_channel=LEMMiNO

[FISHY1118]

Welcome to the Casebook Forum Sidbolt , Im sure you will find most posters here are very accommodating in terms of providing links to such information should it exist.

If indeed Barnett is your suspect of choice for the whitechapel murders, no doubt youll have some support and of course some doubters

GooD luck i hope you enjoy the site

[erobitha]

Hello everyone!
This is my first post here so forgive me for any mistakes I might make. I've been really interested in the case of JTR after watching a video by LEMMINO on youtube (link attached below) and have since been hooked. I've tried searching the forums for this topic before but couldn't find anything so forgive me if this was already talked about. At 50:20 LEMMINO describes that the supposed motivation for Barnett being JTR is resulting from the guilt of driving MJK back to prostitution and so he goes on a murder spree in an attempt to scare MJK off the streets. Although this is speculation, I was wondering if there was any record of MJK changing jobs? Or at least any record or statement that she may have stopped being a prostitute for some time? My thinking is that if MJK was frightened to continue being a prostitute, and lets say that this period when she was frightened was during October of 1888, could this not add some suspicion to Barnett being JTR? Maybe after a month of no murdering MJK felt safe enough to continue working on the streets and Barnett was upset to the point where he finally murdered MJK in the most brutal fashion. Im new to searching for such statements and all so I ask for your help.

Thanks

Video link:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lADB...hannel=LEMMiNO

Welcome.

Barnett does come up a fair bit in what people on here call 'Suspectology'. For the reasons you outlined.

I have watched that video before and I believe the producer of it credits this website as one of his sources, so you are in a good place.

Personally I do not buy it. Psychologically speaking it just does not make any sense. No serial killer I am aware of killed as a warning deterrent to one specific victim and then kills that person anyway. The type off serial killer who has an ultimate target in mind and then kills them, does so because they have a deeper issue with that victim. A mother they despise, a wife who let them down etc - there are significant triggers that leads to the ultimate murder. MJK being on the streets or a general distaste of prostitutes to me is not enough. He most likely already knew what MJK was when he met her and thought he could help her. All signs are that he cared about her.

Barnett identified the remains and withstood a number of hours of questioning. He also provided quite a bit of backstory detail (admittedly none we have been able to 100% confirm as yet) and remained in the area until his own death. He possibly suffered from echolalia, which is linked to neurological issues such autism now. Which does not mean he was a killer, but he may have been different enough to be initially suspected by the police. That suspicion (if any) was short-lived.

Also there is the urban myth of him spitting on Kelly's grave in Leytonstone after the memorial service but that story I believe to be just that. A story.

I hope you find casebook useful.

[sidbolt123]

Hello thank you for the reply, im not sure how to reply directly to you but I hope you find this message if I did it incorrectly.
I see your point with this type of killer having a deeper issue. Couldn't that "deeper issue" be that MJK was disappointing Barnett by continuing to be a prostitute? Records do show he did not approve of her being a prostitute. Couldn't that be disappointing enough for him to go a murder spree to try and change her because he loved her? Makes sense with what you said about him already knowing she was a prostitute and being the one to get her to change. Perhaps he took out the frustrations of MJK not listening to his attempts to get her to stop a being prostitute on the other local prostitutes.

Also, were the reasons you listed above the reasons why Barnett was not suspected? Because he aided in the investigation and went through hours of interrogation?

[Abby Normal]

Hello thank you for the reply, im not sure how to reply directly to you but I hope you find this message if I did it incorrectly.
I see your point with this type of killer having a deeper issue. Couldn't that "deeper issue" be that MJK was disappointing Barnett by continuing to be a prostitute? Records do show he did not approve of her being a prostitute. Couldn't that be disappointing enough for him to go a murder spree to try and change her because he loved her? Makes sense with what you said about him already knowing she was a prostitute and being the one to get her to change. Perhaps he took out the frustrations of MJK not listening to his attempts to get her to stop a being prostitute on the other local prostitutes.

Also, were the reasons you listed above the reasons why Barnett was not suspected? Because he aided in the investigation and went through hours of interrogation?

hi and welcome
to reply directly to someone, hit the quote button at tje bottom of their post.
while i think barnett is a valid suspect, i dont buy that theory. the ripper was a serial killer and there motivation is deep seated fantasies.as exhibited in the extent and uniqueness of the mutilations in the ripper case.
why would barnett go to such weird lengths if the scare mary theory was true?
nay the ripper had a fascination with what his knife could do to the female body. it was obviously a psychological reason, not a practical one.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Hello everyone!
This is my first post here so forgive me for any mistakes I might make. I've been really interested in the case of JTR after watching a video by LEMMINO on youtube (link attached below) and have since been hooked. I've tried searching the forums for this topic before but couldn't find anything so forgive me if this was already talked about. At 50:20 LEMMINO describes that the supposed motivation for Barnett being JTR is resulting from the guilt of driving MJK back to prostitution and so he goes on a murder spree in an attempt to scare MJK off the streets. Although this is speculation, I was wondering if there was any record of MJK changing jobs? Or at least any record or statement that she may have stopped being a prostitute for some time? My thinking is that if MJK was frightened to continue being a prostitute, and lets say that this period when she was frightened was during October of 1888, could this not add some suspicion to Barnett being JTR? Maybe after a month of no murdering MJK felt safe enough to continue working on the streets and Barnett was upset to the point where he finally murdered MJK in the most brutal fashion. Im new to searching for such statements and all so I ask for your help.

Thanks

Video link:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lADB...hannel=LEMMiNO

Hi Sid,

Welcome to Casebook

I don’t know what books you have but one book that I’d definitely recommend (and I’m confident that everyone will agree) is this one.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Ultimate-Ja.../dp/1841194522

Paper or kindle version but obviously the Kindle has the advantage that it can be cut and pasted from.

[Damaso Marte]

As a general rule, if you are looking for "records" about the life of Mary J. Kelly (if that really is her name, which it isn't) you will be sorely disappointed. She is by far the most mysterious Ripper victim.

A thing you will commonly hear asserted on crime forums is the claim that facial mutilations are evidence that the killer knew the victim. Thus, many have asserted that not only Kelly but also Eddowes were killed by somebody who knew them well, presumably Barnett and Kidney. Nobody seems to suspect Kidney of the other murders, but some have extended their suspicion that Barnett killed Kelly to the idea of Barnett killing the others as well. A friend of mine who visited London a few years ago and took a Ripper tour said that her tour guide accused Barnett of being the Ripper at the end of the tour.

I think this is one area where quantitative social science could help shed some light. Do facial mutilations REALLY indicate the killer knowing the victim well? This is a question science could answer.

[sidbolt123]

As a general rule, if you are looking for "records" about the life of Mary J. Kelly (if that really is her name, which it isn't) you will be sorely disappointed. She is by far the most mysterious Ripper victim.

A thing you will commonly hear asserted on crime forums is the claim that facial mutilations are evidence that the killer knew the victim. Thus, many have asserted that not only Kelly but also Eddowes were killed by somebody who knew them well, presumably Barnett and Kidney. Nobody seems to suspect Kidney of the other murders, but some have extended their suspicion that Barnett killed Kelly to the idea of Barnett killing the others as well. A friend of mine who visited London a few years ago and took a Ripper tour said that her tour guide accused Barnett of being the Ripper at the end of the tour.

I think this is one area where quantitative social science could help shed some light. Do facial mutilations REALLY indicate the killer knowing the victim well? This is a question science could answer.

I think alot of things we "know" about serial killers may be flawed. The consensus that JTR either passed, or was sentenced for another crime always interested me because from a psychological stand point it makes sense that a serial killer cannot stop killing once he starts, but then we also have the case of The Golden State Killer who went on a murder spree in the 1970s - 1980s and simply stopped murdering until he was caught in 2018. I think alot of mannerisms we assume serial killers to have may be flawed.

That being said i've also seen arguments towards Barnett for which MJK being the last victim makes sense as his motivations to scare her came to an end with her murder.

[sidbolt123]

Hi Sid,

Welcome to Casebook

I don’t know what books you have but one book that I’d definitely recommend (and I’m confident that everyone will agree) is this one.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Ultimate-Ja.../dp/1841194522

Paper or kindle version but obviously the Kindle has the advantage that it can be cut and pasted from.

Thanks i'll definitely take a read.

[Scott Nelson]

Catch Me When You Can: Jack the Ripper by Leanne Perry (ex-poster on this site)

https://casebook.org/ripper_media/book_reviews/non-fiction/catch-me-when-you-can.html

[Varqm]

To scare Kelly from prostitution ? Barnett had to find a job or two not kill.

[GBinOz]

Hi Sidbolt123,

Welcome to the madhouse...err...Casebook that is. If you have a special interest in Barnett the classic book for a long time was Bruce Paley's "Jack the Ripper The Simple Truth". There is a short review here:

https://www.casebook.org/ripper_media/book_reviews/non-fiction/paleyrv.html

Cheers, George

[Wickerman]

Catch Me When You Can: Jack the Ripper by Leanne Perry (ex-poster on this site)

https://casebook.org/ripper_media/bo...n-you-can.html

If nothing else Leanne was certainly a worker, Bruce Paley's number one fan.
For all her hard work to promote Barnett as the Ripper, I don't recall her convincing many members.
The argument really has little by way of evidence to make Barnett a good suspect, beyond him being the 'significant other', always being the first person the police look for.

[Fleetwood Mac]

Evidence towards Joe Barnett:

There isn't any. Not one shred.

At least other suspects have something going for them: 'the Polish Jew' in the police files, suspects placing themselves at the scene of the crime, suspects at the scene of the crime/discovering the body.

Most do not make a compelling case but at least there is something with a link to the murders.

There's nothing with Barnett. Being a partner/ex-partner doesn't constitute a link for me.

[FISHY1118]

Evidence towards Joe Barnett:

There isn't any. Not one shred.

At least other suspects have something going for them: 'the Polish Jew' in the police files, suspects placing themselves at the scene of the crime, suspects at the scene of the crime/discovering the body.

Most do not make a compelling case but at least there is something with a link to the murders.

There's nothing with Barnett. Being a partner/ex-partner doesn't constitute a link for me.

Curious Mac, who else do you think is in your Barnett boat based 'Nothing'' just 1 or 2 if you like .