Blotchy

[Robert]

I see I accidentally disemvowelled him.

[DVV]

McCarthy hd

High definition ? He deserves it.

[Robert]

It was raining and McCarthy hd closed his free doss shelter a matter of days or weeks before. He may have been trying to get in the back way.

[DVV]

I even believe he killed her as soon as he could. But I'm so biased.

[Sally]

I like the idea of an unknown assailant coming in at 4 but again the question of light is pertinent. If a lamp from outside allowed even the visibility of a murky bed and the crumpled figure of a body that might be enough…

Who needs light? If people needed light to see by in olden times we'd never had had such a good description of Astroman.

I think an assailant might have come in at 4, but it's a bit more difficult to think that he was unknown - how would he know where he was going unless he knew the way? Unless it was a total fluke.

But I don't believe that. I'm inclined to think that Kelly's killer was known to her, maybe or maybe not intimately - maybe closely would be a better word - but to some extent at least.

[DVV]

Hello Caroline

But my suggested scenario here was that her killer may not have intended her to become his next victim initially, if he regularly used prostitutes in the area anyway.

As I said, nothing impossible in that scenario.

Last of the series? I'm not the least bit sure she was.

Neither am I. But from 31 August to 9 November, there is something special. (And I don't believe Nichols was his first victim, far from it.)
I don't accept the C5 concept, but the idea of a canonical period makes some sense.

But if so, there are scores of possible reasons. Why would a copycat take the heart away with him but leave the removed uterus and kidneys behind? Jack may have taken the heart simply because for the first time he could. I imagine he may have had a pretty low boredom threshhold.

Agreed, and I don't believe for a moment in a copy-cat work.

[GregBaron]

How dark is dark?

Ada Wilson: About 30, face sunburnt, fair moustache, 5' 6", dark coat, light trousers, wideawake hat.

Lawende: About 30, 5' 7" or 8", fair complexion, fair moustache, medium build, pepper & salt colour loose jacket, grey cloth cap with peak of same colour, reddish handkerchief tied in a knot round neck. Appearance of a sailor.

Blotchy: 36 years old, 5' 5", fresh complexion, blotches on his face, small side whiskers, thick carroty moustache, shabby dark clothes, dark overcoat, black felt.

Blotchy was older, slightly shorter, had side whiskers & his moustache was a different colour. The sunburnt face reported by Ada might fit with 'blotchy', I guess, but the similarities are not that great.
We'll have to agree to disagree on this one as I think "description tallies" is over-egging the pudding somewhat.

Regards, Bridewell

With all fairness to the above, considering the lighting differences,time of day, different descriptive abilities of people and the fact that people don't always look the same, in fact, growing some side whiskers might throw off the scent, I don't think we can rule out Abby's suggestion Bridewell. But to your point, we can't overly rely on the descriptions anyway. Time has taught us that one...

As to Abby's original proposition. All good points. But I too struggle with the idea of 4 hours of loitering before striking. I suppose they could have passed out together until he awoke at 4 and struck. It all seems so casual though.

I see her waking up and rolling onto her back when she sees the knife, the attacker strikes from above as he grabs her mouth with his left hand and stabs into the right side of her throat with his right. Then the slicing begins.

One wonders when the fire was lit or what Blotchy’s acclimation to the darkness might have been?

I like the idea of an unknown assailant coming in at 4 but again the question of light is pertinent. If a lamp from outside allowed even the visibility of a murky bed and the crumpled figure of a body that might be enough…

I wonder if someone so inclined could set up an experiment of such…….?


Greg

[Bridewell]

His Description

More and more I am of the opinion that Blotchy should be our best candidate for Mary Kelly's murderer and JtR. I think he is overlooked and am rather surprised that he doesn't come up more often in these discussions.

His description tallies with the man who Lawende saw with Eddowes and the man who attacked Ada Wilson.

Ada Wilson: About 30, face sunburnt, fair moustache, 5' 6", dark coat, light trousers, wideawake hat.

Lawende: About 30, 5' 7" or 8", fair complexion, fair moustache, medium build, pepper & salt colour loose jacket, grey cloth cap with peak of same colour, reddish handkerchief tied in a knot round neck. Appearance of a sailor.

Blotchy: 36 years old, 5' 5", fresh complexion, blotches on his face, small side whiskers, thick carroty moustache, shabby dark clothes, dark overcoat, black felt.

Blotchy was older, slightly shorter, had side whiskers & his moustache was a different colour. The sunburnt face reported by Ada might fit with 'blotchy', I guess, but the similarities are not that great.
We'll have to agree to disagree on this one as I think "description tallies" is over-egging the pudding somewhat.

Regards, Bridewell

[Bridewell]

One Possibility

Even if Jack deviated from previous practice by letting a fair amount of time elapse before committing the murder, and even if he enjoyed normal relations with Kelly in the early hours of 9th before something made him flip - my question would still be, why cut the right side of her throat (her right side)?
I am very strongly right-handed myself, and cannot imagine cutting someone's throat "backhand," as it were. Jack had always cut his victims' throats on their left side.

Of course, one could say that this would mean that Kelly wasn't a JTR victim. I think she was, it's just that Jack had to do it on the spur of the moment, because she was crying "Murder." I don't think he knew that she was in the room until she shouted.

I think I'm in a minority of one here, but, as Dennis Weaver used to say, there you go.

"My question would still be, why cut the right side of her throat (her right side)?
I am very strongly right-handed myself, and cannot imagine cutting someone's throat "backhand," as it were. Jack had always cut his victims' throats on their left side."

Just possibly because, whilst his usual practise was to cut the left side of the throat from the right side of the body, he was unable to get there without waking her on this occasion and had to improvise? I think the fact that the bed was against the wall on that side might be a factor.

(I'm not saying that's how it was - just that it is a possible explanation).

Yours aye, Bridewell.

[caz]

Hello Caroline. Your ideas seem pretty consistent here. Particularly, the idea that he had not intended mayhem at the first seems attractive.

Two minor points:

1. I suppose he came in with the knife? (Of course, that does not imply intent to use.)

2. I suppose it would need to be concealed? (I suppose further that such would have necessitated his remaining clothed? Would that, in itself, make MJK suspicious?)

Cheers.
LC

Yes, he came with a knife - his trusted friend? He was a wanted man after all, and if he had bumped into Lawende on his travels for instance, it might have proved handy.

Yes, it wouldn't have done to show his weapon to anyone he was with, prostitute pure and simple or intended victim. But I don't doubt he could have kept it concealed in any clothing he may have taken off. The light would not have been that good and the woman was supposedly very drunk.

Love,

Caz
X

[caz]

Hello Caroline, if Mary was so obviously a random victim, why is it the only murder indoors, why is she the only victim under 30, why is she the last of the series, why did he take the heart instead of the uterus ?
Nothing impossible in your scenario, but there is room for doubt.

Not 'so obviously' random at all. For all I know, Blotchy (or her killer if not Blotchy) could have been a regular of hers, perhaps even a favourite. But my suggested scenario here was that her killer may not have intended her to become his next victim initially, if he regularly used prostitutes in the area anyway. Indoors this time, regardless of who picked up whom, because she happened to have a pad to herself now Joe B had moved out, while the previous victims did not. If Blotchy was a favourite, they'd have both been in high spirits as they entered her room together. Her younger age might simply reflect the age of prostitutes her killer preferred when picking them up for sex without violence. Last of the series? I'm not the least bit sure she was. But if so, there are scores of possible reasons. Why would a copycat take the heart away with him but leave the removed uterus and kidneys behind? Jack may have taken the heart simply because for the first time he could. I imagine he may have had a pretty low boredom threshhold.

Love,

Caz
X

[Abby Normal]

May I take an opposing view? I do not think Blotchy was JTR or MJKs killer, I think he was a guy with a little money to blow- perhaps a laborer who'd just been paid- who went out looking for a good time and found it with Mary Jane. While I do feel that the Ripper was probably fueled by alcohol every time he killed (just as Ted Bundy usually was), and as Caz said he was probably familiar with prostitutes and sometimes hired them for their services, I don't see him as being someone to make a scene with one swinging a pail of beer around in public and then letting her loudly sing to him when he has murder on his mind. I see him as drinking privately at home, or brooding in a corner of the pub by himself until he had a good buzz going, on the nights when he was preparing to go on the hunt.

Blotchy on the other hand was making a spectacle of himself (as did many drunks in the East End), may or may not have been able to successfully complete a sex act with Mary Jane, and may have been drunk enough to not even remember who he'd been with when he woke up late the next day. All that singing- strikes me as two drunk strangers who hooked up and spent some time giddily laughing together and intending to have sex but not having much success. She would have had to have gone out again afterwards, very drunk with her defenses all down, and met the Ripper.

Fleetwood Mac wondered why Mary didn't just take him into an alley for a quick one. Well, she had her own place, which none of the other victims did. It was out of the weather and afforded her comfort, an actual bed, and privacy. Doing business in alleyways, though it may have been the norm- let's face it, it sucked. It was dirty and uncomfortable. If any other option was available, it would have been preferable. And as for being able to service more clients in one night by not bringing them home- let's not forget just how close Miller's Court was to the Ten Bells and "Mary's Corner." I've been there- it's a couple of minutes' walk. Meeting multiple clients in a night either inside or outside the Ten Bells and bringing them back to her room to conduct business would have made little difference in time from having a room right there in the pub.

Hi kensei
Thanks for the response.

Blotchy on the other hand was making a spectacle of himself

The only one making a spectacle of themselves was Mary. Blotchy was quiet and just happened to be seen by one of mary's neighbors at thr last moment.

All that singing- strikes me as two drunk strangers who hooked up and spent some time giddily laughing together and intending to have sex

And thats what Mary probably thought also.

I don't see him as being someone to make a scene with one swinging a pail of beer around in public

The pail of beer may have been part of the reason how Blotchy got mary out of the pub and back to the privacy of her own place. A clever device from the serial killer, who for all we know might have found it harder and harder on the street to get his victims where he wanted them.

[Robert]

Even if Jack deviated from previous practice by letting a fair amount of time elapse before committing the murder, and even if he enjoyed normal relations with Kelly in the early hours of 9th before something made him flip - my question would still be, why cut the right side of her throat (her right side)?
I am very strongly right-handed myself, and cannot imagine cutting someone's throat "backhand," as it were. Jack had always cut his victims' throats on their left side.

Of course, one could say that this would mean that Kelly wasn't a JTR victim. I think she was, it's just that Jack had to do it on the spur of the moment, because she was crying "Murder." I don't think he knew that she was in the room until she shouted.

I think I'm in a minority of one here, but, as Dennis Weaver used to say, there you go.

[lynn cates]

minor points

Hello Caroline. Your ideas seem pretty consistent here. Particularly, the idea that he had not intended mayhem at the first seems attractive.

Two minor points:

1. I suppose he came in with the knife? (Of course, that does not imply intent to use.)

2. I suppose it would need to be concealed? (I suppose further that such would have necessitated his remaining clothed? Would that, in itself, make MJK suspicious?)

Cheers.
LC

[kensei]

May I take an opposing view? I do not think Blotchy was JTR or MJKs killer, I think he was a guy with a little money to blow- perhaps a laborer who'd just been paid- who went out looking for a good time and found it with Mary Jane. While I do feel that the Ripper was probably fueled by alcohol every time he killed (just as Ted Bundy usually was), and as Caz said he was probably familiar with prostitutes and sometimes hired them for their services, I don't see him as being someone to make a scene with one swinging a pail of beer around in public and then letting her loudly sing to him when he has murder on his mind. I see him as drinking privately at home, or brooding in a corner of the pub by himself until he had a good buzz going, on the nights when he was preparing to go on the hunt.

Blotchy on the other hand was making a spectacle of himself (as did many drunks in the East End), may or may not have been able to successfully complete a sex act with Mary Jane, and may have been drunk enough to not even remember who he'd been with when he woke up late the next day. All that singing- strikes me as two drunk strangers who hooked up and spent some time giddily laughing together and intending to have sex but not having much success. She would have had to have gone out again afterwards, very drunk with her defenses all down, and met the Ripper.

Fleetwood Mac wondered why Mary didn't just take him into an alley for a quick one. Well, she had her own place, which none of the other victims did. It was out of the weather and afforded her comfort, an actual bed, and privacy. Doing business in alleyways, though it may have been the norm- let's face it, it sucked. It was dirty and uncomfortable. If any other option was available, it would have been preferable. And as for being able to service more clients in one night by not bringing them home- let's not forget just how close Miller's Court was to the Ten Bells and "Mary's Corner." I've been there- it's a couple of minutes' walk. Meeting multiple clients in a night either inside or outside the Ten Bells and bringing them back to her room to conduct business would have made little difference in time from having a room right there in the pub.