Kate's choice of "Mary Ann Kelly"

[perrymason]

the reported conversation as she was leaving the jail:
She leaves the station at 1:00 AM.
"What time is it?" she asks Hutt.
"Too late for you to get anything to drink." he replies.
"I shall get a damn fine hiding when I get home." She tells him.
Hutt replies, " And serve you right, you had no right to get drunk."
Hutt pushes open the swinging door of that station.
"This way missus," he says, "please pull it to."
"All right'" Kate replies, "Goodnight, old ****."


Her "I shall get a damn fine hiding when I get home," suggests she was heading home. Or maybe she was taking the long way home because of the expected hiding. . . .


curious

The part above in bold is quite true, and it means she should have turned right out of that station,.but we know she didnt.

Cheers mate

[DVV]

Hi guys,

Here also, she was pretending. Kelly wasn't a man to "ill-use her", as far as I can picture them. Kelly was worried. Not angry.
This is part of the play, just like "Mary Ann Kelly".
No fine hiding and no real home for her.
But worse.

Amitiés,
David

[Sam Flynn]

Theres a huge elephant thats been in this thread since this post....which in and of itself could illustrate how unlikely it was statistically for her to have chosen the names and addresses she did completely at random

Hmmm.... Dorset Street was only one of the most "famous" streets for dossers in the East End; Number 6 could apply equally to one of four addresses in that street; and - again - Number 6... pick any number at random between 1 and 9. Most people would go for the middle of the range, ergo perm any one of 4, 5 or 6 and - voila - there's no great flouting of insurmountable statistical odds even remotely required.

Why is it that some folk are so desperate to add mysteries and conspiracies into this case, when we can't even make sense of the basic bloody facts?

[curious]

Why is it that some folk are so desperate to add mysteries and conspiracies into this case, when we can't even make sense of the basic bloody facts?

It's because the basic facts aren't basic. They don't add up to be simple. If they did, the case would have been solved long ago.

curious

[Sam Flynn]

It's because the basic facts aren't basic.

Oh, yes they are.

If they did, the case would have been solved long ago.

You might be confusing the simplicity of the facts with the sheer lack of them.

[curious]

there are some roads you can travel down in Ripper research from which you can never return. Set some things in stone or you will end up spinning around in never ending circles.



Whoever this killer was, I think he may well have been looking for Mary Kelly, but I do not think that he knew her.

Very interesting two things here.

1) what do you personally set in stone? (if you don't mind telling us.)

2) Do you think the killer was perhaps looking for Mary Kelly for all the 5 canonicals? What would make you think that?

Again, very interesting. I'd love to hear your thinking on this.

curious

[Supe]

Sam,

Why is it that some folk are so desperate to add mysteries and conspiracies into this case, when we can't even make sense of the basic bloody facts?

Amen to that. Though, I continue to be puzzled at people who keep asking for a statistical analysis of that which doesn't readily--if at all--allow for such analysis. I suppose if one could obtain a list of aliases used by those detained by the police and who used aliases when pawning (and how you would determine they were aliases is beyond me) and then determine how many variations of Kell(e)y were used you might get a vague idea of the popularity of that surname as an alias--but no more than that.

As I said before, people are acting on intuition alone and it constantly surprises such folks how often statistical analyses are counter-intuitive.

As for some points raised by others, well it is entirely possible Catharine Eddowes did NOT think of herself by that name. As Richard pointed out, her partner's name was Kelly and she may have adopted it. Strangely enough, in an era without much need for bureaucratic identity documentation, most people were still loth to supply such an identification--aliases were many and supplied without malice aforethought. As it is, you cannot apply 21stC mores (such as immediately suspecting the worst when someone uses a multiplicity of false names) to those that obtained in the 19thC.

For several very good reasons, Kate telling a lodging deputy she knew the Ripper and came back to earn the reward is almost assuredly a canard.

To go back to Sam's prescient comment, why the compulsion to see conspiracy and mystery to what is already murky enough?

Don.

[curious]

Hi guys,

Here also, she was pretending. Kelly wasn't a man to "ill-use her", as far as I can picture them. Kelly was worried. Not angry.
This is part of the play, just like "Mary Ann Kelly".
No fine hiding and no real home for her.
But worse.

Amitiés,
David

much worse. wonder if the "worse" isn't a direct result of all her pretending or could it simply be the result of no money and no where to go?

In that way, doesn't she match exactly with Nichols and Chapman on their final nights?

curious

[curious]

Oh, yes they are.
You might be confusing the simplicity of the facts with the sheer lack of them.

So, are you saying that because of the sheer lack of facts, no one will ever be able to see the complete picture?

Curious

[DVV]

much worse. wonder if the "worse" isn't a direct result of all her pretending or could it simply be the result of no money and no where to go?

In that way, doesn't she match exactly with Nichols and Chapman on their final nights?

curious

Basically, yes, it's again about money. Maybe she tried to bring "home" the little money she had spent drinking in the afternoon.

Amitiés,
David

[DVV]

Fiat lux!
Just understood what is this thread about.

Kate was Barnett's mistress.
And obsessed by Mary Kelly, whom she called "Mary Ann" when drunk.
On 30 Sept, she had a rendez-vous with Barnett.
She was late, and he was gone.
Fleming was there instead.

Amitiés,
David

[curious]

Fiat lux!
Just understood what is this thread about.

Kate was Barnett's mistress.
And obsessed by Mary Kelly, whom she called "Mary Ann" when drunk.
On 30 Sept, she had a rendez-vous with Barnett.
She was late, and he was gone.
Fleming was there instead.

Amitiés,
David

how funny! Now you're thinking outside the box.

curious

[curious]

Did JtR Wander For Hours Looking For Suitable Subject?

Basically, yes, it's again about money. Maybe she tried to bring "home" the little money she had spent drinking in the afternoon.

Amitiés,
David

so, what are we looking at here?

Nichols and Chapman were wandering around broke and no place to lay their heads much later than Eddowes was.

Was JtR out earlier Sept. 30 than he was with the other two? or did it take him longer to find someone suitable on those other nights? Did he wander around 2 or 3 hours or more looking for a suitable subject?

Wonder why?

Of course, on Timings at Dutfields Yard-From The IWMA thread
PerryMason makes the point that the IWMA meeting broke up earlier than it did most evenings.

If he's right and someone at that meeting killed Stride and was the Ripper --- then he was sent on his way and the club was busy covering up for him to save their club, so JtR would have been free earlier.

Now, does anyone know what nights the IWMA meetings were held on? do meetings there match up with the other murders? Was JtR attending a meeting, then going to kill?

I apologize that this has gotten off topic, but I don't know how to move this and start a new thread.

curious

[lynn cates]

thread

Hello Curious. Just copy and paste and lay out the parameters for the new thread.

The best.
LC

[richardnunweek]

Hi,
I know what happened on the night of the 30th Nov, soon after Eddowes was released, she walked to Mitre square with another woman much younger, and was seen by the killer, however the younger woman said her goodnights, and vanished into a house, leaving Eddowes alone near the murderer.
The Ripper was so frustrated, as he wanted the younger one, that he killed Kate in a bloody frenzy, also he was high on medication, that is why he was not concerned with safety.
Description .
A small man with a black tash, he also has a scar through top and bottom lip.
He intended his next victim to be younger, hense Mjk.
How do I know this.
Simply I read a book...no names.
Regards Richard.