New to casebook-My .2

[lynn cates]

thanks

Hello Martin. Thanks for that.

Cheers.
LC

[Simon Wood]

Hi Martin,

Many thanks for your kind words.

Regards,

Simon

[martin wilson]

Acknowledged,and you are both more than welcome.
All the best.

[Riahsha]

I had often thought it strange that all her lovely hair was left there to be identified when nothing else could be. I've watched too many crime shows, I guess.
On one hand, it could be so the wrong body is identified.
On the other hand, it's to make sure they know it is MJK.
Craziness.

[Riahsha]

I am sorry I just stopped replying. Busy life with twin boys.
What I was originally trying to say...
Weren't things pretty much then like they are today? Without all the electronics, of course.
Politics, corruption, violence, etc.
Everywhere? Always?
They were going through a depression.
Hospitals of all kinds full.
There were over a hundred people killed in 1888 by murder or manslaughter in London. This was the time of Amelia Dyer, the baby farmer. She murdered hundreds of children in Britain before she was finished. There were all the Whitechapel murders.
Probably, just as it is now, as long as the dwindling population is among the unfortunates...

[Phil Carter]

Hello Martin,

An interesting observation in the time scale of the gap between the two.murders/the rent arrears. On its own. .mere coincidence. But then..the address and name of Jane Kelly/ MaryKelly/no.6/no.26 combined makes the coincidence more apparent. Same surname I'd thought of..but the (almost) same house number in the same street?
I'd honestly never thought of this.
Additionally..The total difference of witness description of Mary Kelly..from blond to ginger to black hair..Maurice Lewis said he recognised her in daylight remember... makes for a different reading.

May I ask you some things? Thank you.

I hate to assume.. so read the following as a scenario only.
What do you surmise from this? The Kelly of No.6 is the Kelly of No. 26.
In other words. .what happens IF we take each of your coincidences as a truism..not just coincidence? How does it then appear to you? What effect do the said coincidences mean to you IF true?


I would be most interested in your reply. And I will add another comparison.
Both "Kellys" were facially mutilated so as to be awfully near unrecognisable. No other victim was.

Just thoughts from me.
I'm not taking anything as a "given".. I'm just open to ideas.


Phil

[Mayerling]

I am sorry I just stopped replying. Busy life with twin boys.
What I was originally trying to say...
Weren't things pretty much then like they are today? Without all the electronics, of course.
Politics, corruption, violence, etc.
Everywhere? Always?
They were going through a depression.
Hospitals of all kinds full.
There were over a hundred people killed in 1888 by murder or manslaughter in London. This was the time of Amelia Dyer, the baby farmer. She murdered hundreds of children in Britain before she was finished. There were all the Whitechapel murders.
Probably, just as it is now, as long as the dwindling population is among the unfortunates...

Welcome Riahsha,

Interesting set of points up, which I can't quite add any enlightenment to. The bit about the hair I never thought about.

When you brought up Mrs. Dyer, you introduced an aspect to the case that is probably based on Amelia Dyer's operating in the London area and using the Thames to dispose of her little victims' remains (did she think of this by herself or was she influenced by the Thames Torso Murderer's actions? Probably by herself). I began wondering about a side issue (as is my habit): in 1888 how many criminal (read murderer/murderess) figures were in existence in the British Isles that would become better known within the next twenty to twenty five years? Strange I never really considered it. The following would be among those considered:

George Chapman (as Severin Klosowski)
William Bury
Frederick Deeming (maybe - we really can't tell if he was in the British Isles or elsewhere in the "Autumn of Terror")
[Dr. Thomas Neill Cream is in Joliet Prison in the U.S. in this period]
Mrs. Mary Pearcey
Mrs. Amelia Dyer
The Thames Torso Killer

All the above have been suggested for the possibility of being the Ripper - I included Cream as there is an entire theory (a highly improbable one) regarding him and a doppelganger.

Mrs. Florence Maybrick (who is the wife of a suspect/and victim (?) James Maybrick)
James Canham Read (who actually wrote a note to the newspapers denouncing Mrs Maybrick as an evil woman - this was years before he shot Florence Dennis at Prittlewell).
Alfred John Monson (later to be tried in Scotland for the "Ardlamont" Killing of Cecil Hambrough)
John Watson Laurie (tried and convicted for the "Isle of Arran" murder of Edwin Rose in the summer of 1889)
William Turner (child murderer)
Louise Masset (child murderer)
Annie Sachs and Annie Walters (baby farmer murderers like Mrs. Dyer)
Mrs. Chard Williams (another baby farmer murderer)
Walter Horsford (serial poisoner)
Milsom and Fowler (the "Muswell Hill" burglar/murderers of Mr. Smith in 1896)
William Seaman (another burglar/murderer - later hung with Milsom and Fowler)
William Gardiner (later tried twice and not convicted for the "Peasanhall" murder of his lover)
Kitty Byron
George Joseph Smith
Samuel Dougal (I'm not really sure if Dougal was in Britain in 1888-89, he may have been in Canada).
H. H. Holmes (possibly in Britain, but we are not really sure)

These were possibly the best known ones around from April 1888 onward.
All would be arrested and tried, and frequently executed or imprisoned afterwards. Note, Dr. Hawley Crippen would have been residing in the U.S. for a period until the 1890s were partly passed. One pair whose whereabouts are unknown in this period (or after the case linking them) would be Adelaide Bartlett and her lover Rev. Arthur Dyson (she would be tried for the murder of her husband Edwin in 1886 with Dyson as a crown witness against her, but she'd be acquitted). Actually whatever happened to both remains conjectural.

They are (if they were alive through 1888) contemporary to the Whitechapel Murders. Note what I wrote about Read (a fascinating case which is the textbook example of why "planned perfect murders" flop) reacting angrily about the contemporary fascinating with Florence Maybrick - it does illustrate that these people do not live in cocoons but interact with their times. George Joseph Smith actually wrote an angry letter to the newspaper in the middle of his career complaining about juvenile delinquents (I'm not making that up!). I am noting all this because it does make one consider the influence of events in the East End on the Ripper or on copycats as something worthy fuller thought.

Jeff

[packers stem]

Hi Riasha,
Now that I've handed out the bouquets, I can post my observations on the 'coincidences' in the Mary Kelly murder.

The amount of rent owed by Mary to John Mcarthy was 6 weeks, more or less the same period of time since the murder of Catherine Eddowes.
The pawn ticket found on Eddowes was made out to Jane Kelly, 6 Dorsett street, a false address, there was however a Mary Jane Kelly at 26 Dorsett street.
Joseph Barnett stated that Mary used to like listening to him reading out loud the newspaper reports about the murders, the report of Eddowes giving her name as Mary Anne Kelly appeared in the East London Observer 13th October edition.
All the best.

Hi Martin
When you say false address do you mean it was non existent at the time or do you just mean there was no Kelly at that address.
If non existent then that's massive!!
I've been trying to hammer home the same as you for years but people can't see how it all goes well beyond reasonable chances of coincidence.
48 Mary Kellys in London County in 1891 census between 25 and 35 does not a common name make.
The chances of jtr picking out his last two victims by fluke both using the same name on the day of their death would be a fluke of lottery winning proportions . Should not just be ignored

[caz]

Hi Phil and packers stem,

Good luck with getting any answers from Martin. If you notice, his last post on this thread dates from July 2013, and his last activity on the boards was last June.

Love,

Caz
X

[packers stem]

Hi Phil and packers stem,

Good luck with getting any answers from Martin. If you notice, his last post on this thread dates from July 2013, and his last activity on the boards was last June.

Love,

Caz
X

Oops
Thanks Caz

[Phil Carter]

Hi Caz,

Blind faith. Lol

Thank for the heads up. I didn't notice!
He did make a few good observations though.


Phil

[caz]

Hi Caz,

Blind faith. Lol

Thank for the heads up. I didn't notice!
He did make a few good observations though.


Phil

Did he? I didn't notice.

Love,

Caz
X

PS Nice win against the Magpies on Saturday, eh?

[Phil Carter]

Did he? I didn't notice.

Love,

Caz
X

PS Nice win against the Magpies on Saturday, eh?

Stop it Caz

.you are supposed to pass 40 with grace ��


Phil

[woocus]

This is my first post.
It is not a dissertation nor is it meant in any way to be a substantive solution to the case of "Jack The Ripper".
I'm not an expert, but I have a curious interest in the case. I have some questions and also some observations.
Please forgive any mistakes, but don't hesitate to politely correct me about them.

I can't get behind all of those who think of the Whitechapel Murderer as some "phantom being" getting his kicks doing in prostitutes because I have to say that I believe that to be extremely unlikely.
Plenty of killers over the last century have murdered prostitutes and the homeless. Why? Because they were easy pickings. They are not so fearful of strangers and desperation makes them easy to coerce.
A look into murders in the 19th century you will mostly find domestic cases and the unfortunates.

What made this killer so newsworthy? What if the killings had stopped after Chapman and Nichols even though they were so horribly butchered?
Two similar murders within a span of eight days and then nothing for more than two weeks wouldn't seem to cause undue concern.
You would think with people being investigated and some locked up and no further murders that panic would subside.
Then a creepy letter gets sent.

Before I go on and on about things you already know maybe I should just throw this out there. This is purely hypothetical.
What if the elusive Mary Kelly was the key?
All we know about her is hearsay. There is no definitive way of knowing if the body in that room was her. I'm not saying she's a killer, I'm just saying if for some reason she wanted to disappear she had the perfect opportunity.
Sending letters proclaiming to be the killer of some recently murdered prostitutes and promising more puts the heat back on the murderer of the first two women.
Copycat what you know about the first two murders and add in some disfiguration to set the scene for the coup de grace of completely annihilating identity.
Just a thought.

How did the one single killer idea ever start?

What if Mary Kelly WAS the killer. False id of body, taller than all her victims, stout, fits sighting and voice description, Possible lesbian tendencies, new the area better than anyone, I could go on......., what possibilty?

[Pcdunn]

Killer and victim in one?

What if Mary Kelly WAS the killer. False id of body, taller than all her victims, stout, fits sighting and voice description, Possible lesbian tendencies, new the area better than anyone, I could go on......., what possibilty?

Well, that's a new twist on the Jill the Ripper idea.
Anything is possible, I suppose, but... Do you think she worked alone or had an accomplice? (Barnett could be a likely choice) Was there any particular motive for the killings? How did they locate a random woman with the right color of hair to become the unwitting body double when MJK decides to end her murder spree? How many killings would you ascribe to MJK?