John McCarthy

[MrBarnett]

Incidentally, the R. A. Kearsey mentioned was the head of Tingle, Jacobs & Co., Carmen, of Hanbury Street.

I had a great uncle who worked for them.

[MrBarnett]

No I don't but it remains for you to show that the John McCarthy of Dorest Street was in attendance that night.

Does it? You kicked this all off by stating categorically that he wasn’t.

My argument is that one of the most prominent local businessmen and his prominent son are more likely to have attended an event wherein local businessmen made a presentation to Abberline than a low-ranking police officer who had been briefly seconded to H Div some years previously.

Over to you.

[Scott Nelson]

No I don't but it remains for you to show that the John McCarthy of Dorest Street was in attendance that night.

[MrBarnett]

Scott presumably has some secret info up his sleeve.

[MrBarnett]

Just look at the order in which the ELO lists the attendees: tradesmen first, followed by coppers in strict order of seniority.

Their man on the scene obviously got himself in a muddle and included the L Div PS between the tradesmen and the cops.

[MrBarnett]

Esq. -- attorney, solicitor, esteemed gentleman

Slumlord John McCarthy, Esq.

I don't think so. Over half of those in attendance that night were Metropolitan policemen. The tradesmen (butchers, tailors, merchants publicans) were from the immediate vicinity, not Dorset Street.

Esq was a pretty meaningless term of respect for any adult male of substance.

Look at Harry and Charles Muddle for God’s sake. Don’t just parrot some generalisation you’ve read somewhere. They ran pubs in Whitechapel and Spitalfields - and were criminals. And I’m assuming you’ve heard of William Crossingham Esq and John Cooney Esq - both ‘slum landlords’ in your terminology.

The 1886 People’s Palace donations from those people, and from Abberline, Arnold and McCarthy, were co-ordinated by The same J. C. McDonald who was instrumental in the Three Nun’s Presentation from the East End tradesmen to Abberline.

[rjpalmer]

I have respect for all the combatants, so I'll steer clear of the debate, but there were fully 4 men named "John McCarthy" in the Metropolitan Police in February 1892.

Two were PCs, and two were Sergeants. It's kind of like the old joke, "An Irishman, an Englishman, and a Welshman walked into a pub..." because two were Irish, one was a Londoner, and the other was a Welshman.

Two only had daughters in 1892, and the other two had sons, but both were under the age of three.

The PS John McCarthy mentioned in connection with the Whitechapel Murders was in L Division. The 1891 Census, taken a few months before Abberline's retirement, shows his young son John, only a year old, living in Bury St. Edmunds with McCarthy's wife and in-laws, so he may have only seen the lad on his days off.

Although the census taker lists PS McCarthy's wife by her maiden name, 'Folkerd,' I don't think too much can be read into it; the couple can be seen living together in 1901 and 1911.

From my own experience, the difference between a respectable businessman and a 'slum lord,' largely depends on whether or not you're one of his tenants!

It looks different from the 'outside,' if you know what I mean...

[Scott Nelson]

Also, you can't use a donations list from 1886 to say so-and-so was at the retirement dinner because they have "Esq." after their names, except for maybe Abberline and Arnold and J.C. McCarthy.

[Scott Nelson]

Esq was just a courtesy title that any businessman might be given.

W. Cressingham (Crossingham) Esq
John Cooney Esq
John McCarthy Esq

Who do you imagine these people were - members of the aristocracy?

Esq. -- attorney, solicitor, esteemed gentleman

Slumlord John McCarthy, Esq.

I don't think so. Over half of those in attendance that night were Metropolitan policemen. The tradesmen (butchers, tailors, merchants publicans) were from the immediate vicinity, not Dorset Street.

[MrBarnett]

Another brilliant observation Gary


So, are we saying that known criminals and respected policemen were mingling at this event?


It would be remarkable if there was links to dodgy funding and corruption.


There must have been some as we would say in the UK "bent coppers" at the time who were on the payroll of criminal gangs.


Let's take for example William Thick.


A very suspicious officer involved heavily with the Chapman case and Mizen of course, who himself was put forward as being the ripper back in 1889.


And John McCarthy and his associates the Smith Brothers, who either intimidated Thick or paid him off. Either way, Thick was complicit in helping John McCarthy avoid jail.


If the Ripper was a Copper (or Coppers) it would explain why he was never caught, why the Ripper always operated conveniently between Police Beats and why William Thick was accused.


What if the ripper was a copper and McCarthy knew him.

It was all one big criminal enterprise.


Unfortunately i don't really buy too much into that theory. The MO of the ripper suggests he worked alone.


But it doesn't rule out that he was a policeman.



The case continues


TRD

I’ll get my coat.

[MrBarnett]

In the US it seems that Esq. is used for someone who is qualified to practice law. Not in the UK though, as far as I know. I used to get addressed that way on all the correspondence from my bank when I opened my first savings account. I don't recall being a barrister at the age of eight, but it did make me feel vaguely important... ....I miss those days.

Is that what Scott is referring to? How odd.

[The Rookie Detective]

Charlie and Harry Muddle - Esq - were local publicans and criminals.

Another brilliant observation Gary


So, are we saying that known criminals and respected policemen were mingling at this event?


It would be remarkable if there was links to dodgy funding and corruption.


There must have been some as we would say in the UK "bent coppers" at the time who were on the payroll of criminal gangs.


Let's take for example William Thick.


A very suspicious officer involved heavily with the Chapman case and Mizen of course, who himself was put forward as being the ripper back in 1889.


And John McCarthy and his associates the Smith Brothers, who either intimidated Thick or paid him off. Either way, Thick was complicit in helping John McCarthy avoid jail.


If the Ripper was a Copper (or Coppers) it would explain why he was never caught, why the Ripper always operated conveniently between Police Beats and why William Thick was accused.


What if the ripper was a copper and McCarthy knew him.

It was all one big criminal enterprise.


Unfortunately i don't really buy too much into that theory. The MO of the ripper suggests he worked alone.


But it doesn't rule out that he was a policeman.



The case continues


TRD

[MrBarnett]

TRD - what makes you describe McCarthy as a ‘rogue’?

[The Rookie Detective]

To me, McCarthy allowing Kelly to be behind in her rent is a non-starter and most likely has a very reasonable explanation. The pool of people that would have been renting from McCarthy were poor and I would not be surprised if a good percentage of them worked irregularly. Probably spent a lot of money on drink as well. It is quite likely that McCarthy knew that Kelly was good for the money at some point and that she had a habit of paying up even if late. Contrast this with evicting her and renting from the same pool of people and possibly getting someone who got behind and skipped on their rent. Simply a case of better the devil you know.

I also would not be surprised if Kelly at times did "favors" for McCarthy.

This doesn't have to be sinister or complicated.

c.d.

Well seeing as my thread is going sideways, i thought i'd add another viewpoint into the mix...

In my humble opinion, there is only 1 viable reason why a rogue like John McCarthy (and he was a rogue) would have allowed a prostitute like MJK to stay at Millers Court and build up outstanding rent.

We can rule out Blackmail; MJK may have known a secret about McCarthy, called his bluff, threatened him and lost, by him having her murdered... UNLIKELY

We can rule out Sexual Favors; A man like McCarthy may have run a secret brothel from Millers Court and/or used MJK for added extras instead of taking money - UNLIKELY


So, what other reason would a man like McCarthy have to allow a known prostitute to stay in his property and build up owed rent...


Well, let's piece together a little theory....


John allowed MJK to stay because she was pregnant.

Did she manage to appeal to his better nature and convince John McCarthy to stay because she had just found out she was with child?

Barnett knew this...and left...because he wasn't the father.


The question then is...

Would a man like John McCarthy have the compassion to allow her to stay and owe rent because she was with child? Is that enough?

Well, if the father was known to John McCarthy, then maybe that would sway his decision.


Was John the father?

Or maybe one of his sons?


I'm not suggesting that John was the ripper; he would of had to of been the most stupid killer in history to obliterate a prostitute in his own property.

No, but we can't rule out that McCarthy knew who the ripper was...


A client

Someone who knew Kelly


Not necessarily


Let's tie all this into the actual murder itself...


The timing for John asking Thomas Bowyer to collect the rent is either purely coincidental or a potential clue to unlocking the bigger picture...


Did John already know she was dead?


I remember the first time i managed to look properly at the MJK1 photo (without feeling sick)

To me, the seemingly careful placement of the pillow beside her resembles a mother placing a cushion for her child to now fall out of bed.

The bundle of extracted organs placed on the table, looks like they are placed in a fetal position, like a baby would lie.

Her breast underneath the pillow, the very tool to naturally feed a baby

And the organ placed at her feet...like a baby has literally fallen out of her.


The scene; while looking chaotic is actually very methodically staged and the killer wants us to look at his work and what is represents.


Look at the MJK photo again and see the shape on the table and then the pillow beside MJK's right arm.


She was pregnant


The ripper's anger and fury at women who had no respect for themselves by allowing their bodies to be used, was the driving force behind his killings.


He treated his victims like cattle, ripe for the slaughter.

And the reason why he attacked his victims reproductive organs, wasn't for sexual gratification, it was to display his anger and outrage at the fact they had no respect for themselves.

He wasn't attracted to them, he was disgusted by them.

He didn't want sex with them, he wanted to control them and then obliterate them entirely.

They had no respect for life and therefore they had to be exposed for what they really were.


The reason why MJK's wounds appear to be in a completely different league in terms of severity, is because the one thing that angered the ripper more than a prostitute...was a pregnant one.

In his eyes, the ultimate vulgarity.


The question is... did the Ripper know she was with child or did he discover that when he disemboweled her?


Now i know there's no proof that she was pregnant.. and most will say there's no basis for that...but...

it does explain why John McCarthy allowed her to stay,
it explains the real reason why Barnett left
and it also explains why MJK suffered worse than any other victim.



Thoughts please?



TRD

[Joshua Rogan]

In the US it seems that Esq. is used for someone who is qualified to practice law. Not in the UK though, as far as I know. I used to get addressed that way on all the correspondence from my bank when I opened my first savings account. I don't recall being a barrister at the age of eight, but it did make me feel vaguely important... ....I miss those days.