John McCarthy

[Robert]

McCarthy would have looked a right twit if those dogs had got going.

[Sam Flynn]

It is not a question of 'inventing devices to absent McCarthy from his shop' ... There is much to suggest that Mary Jane Kelly was not.

Whether either is true true or not, Chava, they are necessary conditions in making McCarthy a suspect - and that's before we even begin to talk about his motivation for doing her in.

If she was not, then it's possible she was killed for other reasons.

But she wasn't "killed" - she was torn apart and all her internal organs barring her lungs and brain were cut out. Whether McCarthy's supposed "trigger" was that he was angry over the rent arrears, that he had had a "fling" with Kelly, or that he just didn't appreciate her nocturnal warbling, what he putatively did to her because of it seems extreme to say the least. He must have been one sick bastard to have been able to do that, whatever motive one wishes to ascribe to him for doing so.

[Celesta]

Would an ordinary murderer go to this amount of trouble?

While the arguments for and against Mary being a Ripper victim both contain possibilities, this seems to come back to the old argument of how the Ripper's so-called MO might have changed if he was safely inside a building and had plenty of time. This is something we simply don't know.

Even if this was a murder, intended to look like JtR's work, this slaughter was way over the top. Way overdone. Would an ordinary murderer go to this trouble? No, I think he would do the minimum to make it look like Jack, more on the order of what William Bury did to his wife, then get out of there.

Either it was Jack or someone as crazy or crazier. If it was the latter then you've got two Jacks at work.

[Robert]

Hm. Barnett, Fleming, Hutchinson, McCarthy....was there any man in the east end who wasn't in love with/jilted by MJK? Surely there must have been a gay transvestite socialist bloke somewhere?

[Celesta]

Hm. Barnett, Fleming, Hutchinson, McCarthy....was there any man in the east end who wasn't in love with/jilted by MJK? Surely there must have been a gay transvestite socialist bloke somewhere?

There was Pearly Poll, of whom I've heard interesting tales. Somehow I don't think she was a socialist though.

[Sam Flynn]

Off-topic, but just to clarify...

There was Pearly Poll

Pearly Poll (Mary Ann Connelly/Connolly) was definitely a woman, Celesta. Although she had a gruff voice and was apparently quite masculine in appearance, her huskiness seems to be owing to the fact that she'd suffered more than one respiratory infection that year (as the Whitechapel Infirmary records testify). You must be thinking of the man known as "Mary", the only apparent transvestite prostitute I can think of as having been mentioned in accounts of the Ripper case.

[Chava]

But she wasn't "killed" - she was torn apart and all her internal organs barring her lungs and brain were cut out. Whether McCarthy's supposed "trigger" was that he was angry over the rent arrears, that he had had a "fling" with Kelly, or that he just didn't appreciate her nocturnal warbling, what he putatively did to her because of it seems extreme to say the least. He must have been one sick bastard to have been able to do that, whatever motive one wishes to ascribe to him for doing so.

So what's your point?

Would you like me to innumerate all the other 'sick bastards' who mutilated their victims after death? Dr Crippen didn't just cut his wife into bits and bury her under the concrete, he deboned her first. For reasons which were never made entirely clear but were certainly over and above simply hiding the body. He only killed one person, but he sure enjoyed himself with her body. There are plenty of other examples of domestic abuse that end with horrendous violence to the dead body, and much of that violence is done with intent to conceal what has really happened. Buck Ruxton, for example. cut his dead wife into bits and left her in several suitcases in various railway stations. If someone hated Kelly enough to want to kill her and make it look like she was killed by the Ripper, I could see that mutilation segment of that operation getting out of hand.

Once you are into a mindset of 'John McCarthy was to all intents and purposes normal and could not have submitted the body of Mary Jane Kelly to this kind of violence' you are, I believe, in very dangerous territory. You have assumed something you have no basis to assume. We can all get very purple about what was done to Mary Jane, but we have to remember one very important thing. What was done to that woman was done after she had already died, and she died with a fair amount of despatch. The history of crime is full of 'sick bastards' who torture and then kill their victims. Mary Jane wasn't killed by one of these. It doesn't make her killer any saner, but it does allow us to step back and look at the mutilations without getting into the terrible territory of the victim's pain.

In the case of Kelly, the mutilations are vast, but much more widespread than the others. This may simply be an outcrop of the fact that the killer had privacy and time. But, again, it's dangerous to take that for granted. It's this 'So-And-So couldn't have done it' mindset that sets my teeth so completely on edge. This case is 120 years old. We can't eliminate anyone who doesn't have a cast-iron alibi in the files.

[jmenges]

Dr Crippen didn't just cut his wife into bits and bury her under the concrete, he deboned her first. For reasons which were never made entirely clear but were certainly over and above simply hiding the body.

In all probability this was done with the hopes of forever concealing her identity, her sex, and even her human-beingness. I believe he failed to contemplate that the remains would be discovered in that place as soon as they were. He was concealing a crime.

JM

[Sam Flynn]

This case is 120 years old. We can't eliminate anyone who doesn't have a cast-iron alibi in the files.

I posted a link to the 1891 Census for nearby Fournier Street (then "Church Street") on another thread. I suggest you start there, after you've eliminated the 700 plus people who lived in Dorset Street itself.

[Chava]

He was concealing a crime.

With respect, if Kelly was killed by a copycat, he was also concealing a crime.

I posted a link to the 1891 Census for nearby Fournier Street (then "Church Street") on another thread. I suggest you start there, after you've eliminated the 700 plus people who lived in Dorset Street itself.

That is what we philosophy students call a 'reductio ad absurdam'. I would explain that phrase to you, but I'm not in the mood to patronise a fellow-poster. Suffice it to say, that McCarthy was witnessed on site at around the time of the murder. He may well have had a spare key to the room. And McCarthy had some form of relationship--maybe only landlord and tenant--maybe not--with the victim. Anyone in that position should be looked at carefully.

[Robert]

Reductio ad absurdUM.

[Chava]

Reductio ad absurdUM.

God, you're right! I picked up the first typo on that and didn't notice the second...

Thanks, Robert!

[Pinkerton]

Hi Tom Dooley,
You seem to be misinformed, try to read posts accurately. John McCarthy's daughters did not have theatrical careers, only his son John, who married Musical Hall Star Marie Kendall in 1895, she knew Marie Lloyd,they probably met her after that date. In 1888, John was 14 and Marie Lloyd 18,
Pinkerton,
I remember reading the account of the fixed boxing match, would like to see it again. Not sure if it referred to our McCarthy. I did some research on McCarthy's and there were about forty of them in London, [ the tribes of Kelly's Donovan's and McCarthy's in London at that time would make an army] several Johns,[ A tribe of McCarthy's in Castle Ally] some of whom were involved in criminal activity. It important to make sure its him, at not another John. I don't believe he was a saint, but I don't think he was evil either.
I don't know if McCarthy was in the same lodge as Abbeline, perhaps someone has that information? Cheers Miss Marple

Miss Marple,

Here is one of the four articles I have on this event from the Daily News on March 29, 1882. The other three are almost identical except contain less details than this article. It mentions "John McCarthy", age 27, "shopkeeper", living in "Dorset Street Spitalfields". Someone on these boards also once mentioned that McCarthy had a long history with boxing matches. Not sure where they got this information.

Sorry about the layout. The article snippets go from left to right and then down.

[Pinkerton]

I should also say that first of all, I DON'T believe that McCarthy killed Mary Kelly. HOWEVER, if someone wanted me to point to a list of possible suspects who had the most number of connections to the Ripper murders, McCarthy would be near the top of my list (along with Timothy Donovan).

1--Knows one victim for sure. Could possibly know more victims due to the fact that other victims MAY have once rented from him (Dorset, Flower & Dean, and Thrawl all had a lot of lodging houses which prostitutes frequented).
2--Lived/worked in a geographic hotspot. Lives close to where other victims are KNOWN to have once stayed (Chapman in Crossinghams on Dorset, Stride's boyfriend Kidney lived on Dorset St)
3--Is a well known local who would have been trusted
4--Kate Ronin was ALSO murdered in almost the exact same manner in Millers court 21 years later when McCarthy was still the owner. A "Harold Hall" was convicted of the crime and sentenced to death, but was NOT executed for some unknown reason. I WISH we could get to the bottom of this once and for all...
5--Referred to as a "bully" by Charles Booth (Sam is right that the term "prostitute's bully" was not used) and Arthur Harding claimed McCarthy was a pimp (can someone find this reference please ?).
6--The illegal boxing match I referred to. Character witness by P.C. Thick, indicating he was in good with the police for some reason. Can anyone find the source on Thick's testimony?
7--Miller's court had at least four or five prostitutes living there at one time or another.

All of this as a whole is thin of course, which is why I think it unlikely that McCarthy had anything to do with any of the Ripper murders. However I would point out that this is still more circumstantial evidence than many suspects in the Ripper murders. So I think that people who decry McCarthy's candidacy as "ridiculous" are being a little disingenuous.

[Sam Flynn]

Hello Chava,

That is what we philosophy students call a 'reductio ad absurdam'.

Keeping the few people we've heard of on the list of suspects, when there were tens of thousands of potential murderers within easy walking distance, is enough of a 'reductio' in itself, but to insist that McCarthy may only be removed from that list if, 121 years later, we can establish a cast iron alibi for him sounds like a case of 'urinare in vento' to me. What makes it worse is that we apparently don't even need to establish a cast iron motive for his being the murderer - double whammy! Much as I wouldn't wish to sympathise with an alleged tough-guy and rachmanite, it doesn't seem that he's getting a particularly fair deal here.