Bumping Mr Blotchy...

[mpriestnall]

I'm sorry, but what a load of complete and utter rubbish! I don't understand how you dream this stuff up!

No problem. It's just my take on the murders.

I'll be happy to hear yours...

[Aethelwulf]

No problem. It's just my take on the murders.

I'll be happy to hear yours...

It is just that you've cooked up an incredible story with zero supporting evidence and it seems massively unlikely. There aren't many theories that I would totally dismiss out of hand, but the whole Kelly survived/cover up is one of them.

The most radical theory I will give the time of day to is that Kelly took blotchy back - he left; she took Aman back- he left. She may well have gone out again that night and returned safely home to bed. She went out in the morning, talked to Maxwell and picked up her killer 9 to 9.30. Unlikely as it seems, it is still a million times more likely that what you suggest.

Depends on how you see the Farmer attack around the same 9/9.30 time. If that was him, maybe Maxwell was correct. I believe she gave her statement within ours of the crime being discovered. It seems odd that she could be so badly mistaken so close to the event and believed she talked to Kelly and even discussed a nearby puddle of vomit.

[barnflatwyngarde]

I don't believe the core of Barnett's testimony into Kelly's background e.g. I believe she was neither Irish nor Welsh, lost her husband in an explosion or any of her early life history. A fenian related plot is possible but I don't consider it likely.

My take on these murders is this: I believe there was some rather prosaic scandal in Astrakhan's personal life e.g. an affair with another gentlemens wife, that both he and Jack tried to keep quiet or were being blackmailed about. The blackmailers would be Kelly plus one or two of the other canonical victims. I believe they were middle-class gentlemen who just so happened to have the right high-level connections to cover up their crimes. These connections were derived, but not exclusively, through masonic associations. The other personal/professional connections would be something like with the P.O.W. and the P.M.

I believe that Jack was arrested after the double-event. I think the so-called discrediting of Packer, the non-appearance of Schwartz at the inquest, the publishing of the "Dear Boss" letters to lay a false narrative about these crimes are all part ofthe initial cover up. The dubious nature of Kelly's inquest with Barnett providing a false identity and background to Kelly is the final stage of the cover up.

Kelly did not die at Miller's Court.

Wow!

This is going to be a doozy of a book.

[mpriestnall]

It is just that you've cooked up an incredible story with zero supporting evidence and it seems massively unlikely. There aren't many theories that I would totally dismiss out of hand, but the whole Kelly survived/cover up is one of them.

The most radical theory I will give the time of day to is that Kelly took blotchy back - he left; she took Aman back- he left. She may well have gone out again that night and returned safely home to bed. She went out in the morning, talked to Maxwell and picked up her killer 9 to 9.30. Unlikely as it seems, it is still a million times more likely that what you suggest.

Depends on how you see the Farmer attack around the same 9/9.30 time. If that was him, maybe Maxwell was correct. I believe she gave her statement within ours of the crime being discovered. It seems odd that she could be so badly mistaken so close to the event and believed she talked to Kelly and even discussed a nearby puddle of vomit.

Thanks for your response.

At your most radical theorizing acceptable to you, we are not so far apart, as far as the movements of blotchy and Aman. However I would have Kelly place out of the
way at the Victorian Home at some point in the early morning where I believe people can come and go as they pleased if they have prepaid for a cabin (so I have heard on a podcast on here).

I find to believe Maxwell could have mistaken which morning see saw Kelly and I believe her statement about buying milk for her husband was corroborated at the time,
by a newspaper report. Morris Lewis also said he saw "Kelly" alive after her supposed death.

Obliterating the Miller's Court victim's face does support the possibility of allowing a switch of victims. I find it suspicious that Barnett was allowed to identify the victim only by her eyes and ears (or hair). Surely the hands and feet would have more detail and thus allow a firmer identification to be made than eyes/ears on an obliterated face. The Stride inquest provided a precedent for the identity to be made on the victims' leg re the supposed snake bite. So why not the hands and feet with "Kelly"?

As for Farmer, I only focus on the canonical victims, so I don't anything to say about her or any other of the non-canonicals.

As for evidence I am confident in my identifications of Jack, Astrakhan and Kelly and will provide properly sourced evidence in my book so you can judge for yourself if my scenarios are dreamed up out of nowhere or not.

[Abby Normal]

Thanks for your response.

At your most radical theorizing acceptable to you, we are not so far apart, as far as the movements of blotchy and Aman. However I would have Kelly place out of the
way at the Victorian Home at some point in the early morning where I believe people can come and go as they pleased if they have prepaid for a cabin (so I have heard on a podcast on here).

I find to believe Maxwell could have mistaken which morning see saw Kelly and I believe her statement about buying milk for her husband was corroborated at the time,
by a newspaper report. Morris Lewis also said he saw "Kelly" alive after her supposed death.

Obliterating the Miller's Court victim's face does support the possibility of allowing a switch of victims. I find it suspicious that Barnett was allowed to identify the victim only by her eyes and ears (or hair). Surely the hands and feet would have more detail and thus allow a firmer identification to be made than eyes/ears on an obliterated face. The Stride inquest provided a precedent for the identity to be made on the victims' leg re the supposed snake bite. So why not the hands and feet with "Kelly"?

As for Farmer, I only focus on the canonical victims, so I don't anything to say about her or any other of the non-canonicals.

As for evidence I am confident in my identifications of Jack, Astrakhan and Kelly and will provide properly sourced evidence in my book so you can judge for yourself if my scenarios are dreamed up out of nowhere or not.

hey there priest.
the obliteration of her face was simply an escalation from targeting the face of eddowes. and re kelly, once youve been intimately involved with a lover for a period of time you could easily id them by any means... hair, eyes, body etc.
and the maxwell sighting dosnt preclude it was the ripper any way, just changes TOD.

but good luck with your book anyhow.

[mpriestnall]

hey there priest.
the obliteration of her face was simply an escalation from targeting the face of eddowes. and re kelly, once youve been intimately involved with a lover for a period of time you could easily id them by any means... hair, eyes, body etc.
and the maxwell sighting dosnt preclude it was the ripper any way, just changes TOD.

but good luck with your book anyhow.

Thanks Abby.

[Michael W Richards]

I believe anyone who thinks the description of Astrakan isnt... at the very least..... highly embellished, could be persuaded into a tentative acceptance that he did in fact exist and George Hutchinson was there watching Astrakan and Mary out on the street. Fortunately I dont have that problem, so I can see a wild embellishment for what it most probably was....fiction.

[Varqm]

The problem I have with a client or Blotchy killing Kelly, staying in the room all that time was\is he could not position Kelly and kill her in such a way there would have been no noise or cry of Oh Murder? JTR killed Stride and Eddowes quietly, I guess improving his way of killing from Chapman where a No! was heard by Cadosche.

[Damaso Marte]

To me, it has never been an unsolvable or puzzling mystery why Kelly was killed so much more violently or less carefully than the other victims: both can be easily explained by the fact that for the first time the killer was indoors!

[Wickerman]

I believe anyone who thinks the description of Astrakan isnt... at the very least..... highly embellished, could be persuaded into a tentative acceptance that he did in fact exist and George Hutchinson was there watching Astrakan and Mary out on the street. Fortunately I dont have that problem, so I can see a wild embellishment for what it most probably was....fiction.

Just to point out, your "fiction" has a few loose ends.
You forgot to mention Bowyer, who saw a man in the court at 3:00am; Sarah Lewis watching a man & woman enter the court while Hutchinson stood opposite; Mrs McCarthy was told of a "funny" man seen in the court, as well as Hutchinson's rather detailed account.
Embellished or not, the man apparently existed, seen by more than just Hutchinson.
Finally, the police told the press (Nov. 14th) that some residents of Millers Court admitted to seeing Kelly out on the street after 1:00 am.

By far thee simplest solution is to just accept Hutchinson & his story, and move on.

[mpriestnall]

Wow!

This is going to be a doozy of a book.

Sorry I didn't respond earlier. I wasn't subscribed to this thread. Thought one was auto-subscribed to threads one when one posts on it.

Anyway...

I learnt recently from some one who can be considered very knowledgeable about the case. They know the Pauls, the Dons, the Stewarts etc.

They share my belief that Kelly wasn't the Miller's Court victim but he/she keeps this view to themselves to avoid the flak from having this unorthodox view.

It's good to know I'm in good company.

I appreciate that unless I provide supporting evidence (which I need to save for the book), people are going to challenge my take on the case. I can't expect and wouldn't want it any other way.

All the evidence is indirect and ranges from the weak to the very strong. Taken as a whole it's very compelling.

[barnflatwyngarde]

Sorry I didn't respond earlier. I wasn't subscribed to this thread. Thought one was auto-subscribed to threads one when one posts on it.

Anyway...

I learnt recently from some one who can be considered very knowledgeable about the case. They know the Pauls, the Dons, the Stewarts etc.

They share my belief that Kelly wasn't the Miller's Court victim but he/she keeps this view to themselves to avoid the flak from having this unorthodox view.

It's good to know I'm in good company.

I appreciate that unless I provide supporting evidence (which I need to save for the book), people are going to challenge my take on the case. I can't expect and wouldn't want it any other way.

All the evidence is indirect and ranges from the weak to the very strong. Taken as a whole it's very compelling.

Thanks for this MRP.
I took it as read that if you were proposing these particular scenarios, that you would be be able to back them up.

Looking forward to the book.

[jason_c]

The problem I have with a client or Blotchy killing Kelly, staying in the room all that time was\is he could not position Kelly and kill her in such a way there would have been no noise or cry of Oh Murder? JTR killed Stride and Eddowes quietly, I guess improving his way of killing from Chapman where a No! was heard by Cadosche.

I disagree that a client could not position Kelly in a certain way to kill her quietly. Kelly was intoxicated, either a little or a lot. It was also early hours of the morning. To me this gives a high likelihood that Kelly's instinct for self-preservation was potentially diminished through either drunkenness, sleepiness, or a combination of the two.

[Darryl Kenyon]

I disagree that a client could not position Kelly in a certain way to kill her quietly. Kelly was intoxicated, either a little or a lot. It was also early hours of the morning. To me this gives a high likelihood that Kelly's instinct for self-preservation was potentially diminished through either drunkenness, sleepiness, or a combination of the two.

I agree with Jason here. Mary was behind with her rent and we know that she had in the previous weeks other women staying with her [ probably helping pay said rent ]. So I believe it is highly possibly she offered Blotchy a bed for the night for an extra shilling say.
He could have been a previous client , so she may have trusted him a little. Also if Blotchy was the killer he would have been stupid to strike straight after Mary Cox saw him enter the room .
Once Mary was asleep though and a few hours had lapsed he could have taken his opportunity while at the same time having a partial alibi " I left the room around one in the morning "

Regards Darryl

[Chava]

Kelly moved in with Barnett basically the night she met him. She could have been grooming Blotchy to be her next mealticket. She suggests he stays the night. She gets ready for bed--she was found in her nightgown--and she goes to sleep. He then has ample opportunity to kill her.

As for Ol' Japanese Knotweed* there, he comes forward after the inquest. He corroborates Sarah Lewis, she does not corroborate him. There is nothing about his statement that I find credible. And, since he appears to vanish very shortly after his statement was given, I suspect the police came to that conclusion too. No matter what Abberline scrawled in the margin.

*Gets everywhere. Mucks things up. Hard to eradicate.