2 Killers Or 1 Killer?????

[Sister Hyde]

Murders committed to cover an intended victim's murder has actually happened. Stella Nichell and Christiana Edmonds are two examples

but if we take the theory that the others were murdered to cover MJK's murder it would have been more logical for the "cover" victims to come after. plus, the area had such strong climate of violence and prostitution, i don't think any "covering" would have really been necessary, or maybe it goes the other way around, maybe MJK's killer copied the ripper's method to cover is own crime without especially being guilty of the others, rather than killing all the others JUST to cover MJK's murder.

[Sally]

1 killer - and not Barnett. There really is nothing to support that notion. I wouldn't discount the idea that Kelly knew her killer though - quite possible.

The thorny question there is whether the greater extent of the mutilations in Kelly's case are a product of the killer having more time and leisure; or whether they reflect a personal interest on his (or her) part.

I think it quite possible that Kelly took her killer back to her room with her - or let him in - because she knew him.

[c.d.]

yes, the murderer got all the time to "knock himself out" on MJK. but it's still looks like she was "comfortable" enough with him to let him go up into her room and take her clothes off indeed. I'm not so sure that was a "usual" thing to do for a prostitute back then in Whitechapel.

Does lifting your skirt in some alley with someone you just met imply a "comfort" level. I don't see the difference.

c.d.

[Rubyretro]

Sister -Jack could have broken into Mary's room, using the broken window pane to open the door, after Mary had already undressed and gone to bed in a drunken stupor. Indeed Blotchy might have let himself out and left the doorunlocked. The killer might have gotten hold of the lost key.
We don't know that Mary let her killer in, and therefore felt comfortable with him.

[c.d.]

But when we say that Kelly "knew" her killer what does that mean? Family member, lover, friend, previous customer or someone she met that day? That's the problem.

c.d.

[Sister Hyde]

Does lifting your skirt in some alley with someone you just met imply a "comfort" level. I don't see the difference.

c.d.

not really an idea of comfort, of course not, but at least you're not taking "someone you just met" at HOME. i dunno but for me, the street and "home" are very different

[c.d.]

But "home" also gave her a reason to charge a customer more money for her services. That doesn't mean that she had to like the idea.

c.d.

[Sister Hyde]

Sister -Jack could have broken into Mary's room, using the broken window pane to open the door, after Mary had already undressed and gone to bed in a drunken stupor. Indeed Blotchy might have let himself out and left the doorunlocked. The killer might have gotten hold of the lost key.
We don't know that Mary let her killer in, and therefore felt comfortable with him.

true, but that would be a huge coincidence I think.

[TomTomKent]

Was Mary Kelly the intended target all along? Probably not.
Was there more than one Killer? If all the murders in the canonical five were in the same series, no, there would have been one killer, most probably. Some witness evidence ( Israel Schwartz testimony) suggests there may have been a look out, but I get the feeling this was probably a misinterpretation, and the killer was a lone prowler.

[Sister Hyde]

But "home" also gave her a reason to charge a customer more money for her services. That doesn't mean that she had to like the idea.

c.d.

yes cd, and i definitely don't say she liked the idea, but women used to the streetlife there knew what kind of nuts were running the streets, I don't think they were neglecting their own safety THAT badly.

[c.d.]

Hi Sister,

If you are in a dark alley alone with a customer and something starts to go amiss, you are pretty much on your own. However, if you are in your home, a yell could hopefully bring your neighbors to your rescue. It is possible that she felt safer at home. That doesn't seem unreasonable.

c.d.

[c.d.]

The other thing is that at home she already has a customer in her bed and good therefore possibly talk him into staying the night and paying for the privilege. A lot easier than roaming the streets.

c.d.

[Sister Hyde]

Hi Sister,

If you are in a dark alley alone with a customer and something starts to go amiss, you are pretty much on your own. However, if you are in your home, a yell could hopefully bring your neighbors to your rescue. It is possible that she felt safer at home. That doesn't seem unreasonable.

c.d.

I dunno c.d., i think I would be more freaked out staying with someone who might do me harms in a closed space where i could be cornered and maybe locked than in an alley close to a street where the people actually might hear me if I scream.

[johns]

Being at home didn't help poor Mary Kelly much.

[Sister Hyde]

The other thing is that at home she already has a customer in her bed and good therefore possibly talk him into staying the night and paying for the privilege. A lot easier than roaming the streets.

c.d.

at the risk of seeing this customer "barge in" after that whenever he feels for it cause he knows her personal adress? then why not going to one of these horrible lodging houses where these practices where tolerated and charge the man for the room instead?