Did Catherine know who JTR was???

[harry]

When Eddowes walked through the police station doors at 1AM that morning,she found herself on the street.No one knows her intentions.Unlike Nicholls,and I believe Chapman,she did not state her immediate purpose was to go and earn money for a bed.Might be because she had in mind,premises where she could find a place to sleep,premises that were preferable to a cell in a police station.There is no evidence in which direction she was headed when accosting or being accosted by her killer,or from which direction she had approached.She could have been on her way back to Flower and Dean street,she was in reality no more than fifteen minutes walk from that location.Sure there is almost an hour of her time to account for,but nothing to indicate that it was spent soliciting.

[bolo]

Hi tnb,

This is a completely 'gut feeling' opinion, but I can't see why Eddowes, released from Bishopsgate police station at 1am and lodging in Flower and Dean street, would walk - and keep walking -in pretty much completely the opposite direction to 'home' if she did not have some kind of specific purpose in mind.

I agree with that. What she said to PC Hutt when he let her out of the cell at Bishopsgate Street Police Station ("I shall get a damned fine hiding when I get home then") tells me that she felt guilty, either because of her arrest or for waisting the money on drink she may have earned during the blank hours between parting with Kelly and the arrest, or both. That's why she probably tried to remedy the situation by looking for an opportunity to earn a few pennies to avoid coming home empty-handed, and the area around Mitre Square may have been as good a place for that as any.

The idea of a prearranged meeting seems unlikely to me. She could not have foreseen her arrest, after all.

Regards,

Boris

[tnb]

This is a completely 'gut feeling' opinion, but I can't see why Eddowes, released from Bishopsgate police station at 1am and lodging in Flower and Dean street, would walk - and keep walking -in pretty much completely the opposite direction to 'home' if she did not have some kind of specific purpose in mind. The most obvious interpretation for that 'purpose' is fairly obvious, whether it be casual prostitution or a more formal meeting (could that explain her apparent urgency to get out of the cells? after all, her lodgings may not have taken her in at such an hour, and so many in her position may have been grateful for a roof over their head for the night) - and sometimes the simplest explanation is the best, as much as we may wish it otherwise.

The fact that she seemingly didn't take the most direct route to Mitre Square (as she may be expected to were she en route to an alternative address) would seem to back up, to my mind at least, that she went that way with 'business' on her mind.

If that business involved a pre-arranged meeting it may, just, suggest that she knew her killer, but even if she 'knew' him, how much knowledge does that imply? The idea that she may have been in a position to tell the police, the vigilance committee or anyone his name, occupation, address etc or even known enough to have concrete suspicions, is likely vastly overestimating the relationship between prostitutes and their semi-regular 'johns'. Remember how many women knew of 'leather apron' by nickname only?

Alternatively, with her 'meal ticket' for the night plans ruined by her being locked up, she may have been desperate enough to take a chance on a slightly more 'odd' character than usual...

Some things we will never know.

[bolo]

Hi Addy,

Hi Boris,

You are quite right, the offer would not come from the police. However, wouldn't the vigilance committee have awarded the money to the person who gave the police the golden tip?

The committee made it quite clear on their posters that they felt the police were incapable of getting hold of the murderer so your average East Ender (including Kate) probably would have gone to them first to make sure the suspect quickly gets caught and the reward is theirs, even though the actual arrest would have been made by the police.

It could explain why she was going to pubs and ended up drunk: looking for a member of the vigilance committee.

I don't know enough about the organization of the Vigilance Committee to say how "accessible" they were for the people. There's a transcript of one of the posters in The Facts but Begg does not mention if there was a contact address on them and wether it was desired by the Committee to get in direct contact with a possible witness at all.

Still, your assumption sounds interesting, even though the question where she got the money from to buy drinks still remains.

Regards,

Boris

[Monty]

There is no more evidence for Eddowes knowing her killer than there was for any of the other victims. Thats not to say she didnt, nor does it suggest Nichols didnt.

As for prostitution, Eddowes seems to be doing exactly what Stride was earlier. Standing outside a club waiting for trade.

The suggestion heavily weighs with Eddowes prostituting herself. This means regulars and strangers.

Also, Levy was very savvy no? His words leave us with no doubt what he thought of the couple.

Monty

[Addy]

Hi Boris,

You are quite right, the offer would not come from the police. However, wouldn't the vigilance committee have awarded the money to the person who gave the police the golden tip? It could explain why she was going to pubs and ended up drunk: looking for a member of the vigilance committee.

Greetings,

Addy

[bolo]

Hi Harry, all,

Leave sexuallity out of the meeting, and think of alternate reasons why killer and victims might have got together.There must be some.

maybe, but I'm having difficulties finding them. With the possible exception of Polly Nichols, the victims were killed in places prostitutes used to use for their business or at least were good enough for that like the dark corner of Mitre Square where Kate's mutilated body was found by PC Watkins only ten minutes after she was last seen.

Even if Kate and/or the other victims knew their killer either personally or by sight, the question remains why they followed him to these dark places if not for quick sex, so the assumption that most, if not all of the victims were (casual) prostitutes does not seem too far off the mark.

.

Back to the topic at hand.

I think it's possible that Kate had an idea about the identity of the murderer just like many other people in the East End. In Complete History, Sugden mentions an article by the East London Observer from October 13th which claimed that Kate said she knew the murderer and wanted to earn the reward for his arrest.

If the article can be trusted (Sugden rates it as a, quote, 'dishonest reporting drawing upon confused memories of [John] Kelly's various press statements'), Kate probably would have gotten in touch with the Whitechapel Vigilance Committee instead of the Metropolitan police or other official authorities because as far as I know, the latter did not offer an official reward at that time. According to Begg's The Facts, it was Sir James Frasier, commissioner of City of London Police, who offered a reward of £500 but that was after the killing of Eddowes.

I just say this because some members like Addy have said that Kate had plenty of opportunities to inform the police about her suspicion. This is true, however, there would have been no money to be got in this case so IF Kate really was after the reward (which I don't believe), there was no reason for her to reveal her knowledge to a police officer.

Regards,

Boris

[Bob Hinton]

Your blog.

I am very impressed with your blog, very clean and professional looking. The photographs you are posting are also invaluable.

Return to thread now!

Message for TNB

[harry]

In my opinion,determining whether she was engaged in prostitution,is very relevant to the question as to whether she knew her killer(JTR).He was seeking a victim,that appears obvious,so why not approach someone known to him, who, in the circumstances seemed a likely candidate.The approach in that case would need no sexual overtone,just a greeting and chat with an aquaintance, who at that time of morning might well,after what she had experienced, been glad of his company.
Why the insistance by some, that there had to be a sexual content.Leave sexuallity out of the meeting, and think of alternate reasons why killer and victims might have got together.There must be some.

[Phil Carter]

Hello Varqm,

Another coincidence between the two cases..MJK and Eddowes..

The name..Mary Ann Cox.

Mary Ann Cox, 5 Miller's Court estimated age from Court records is 31 in 1888. (b.ca 1857)

Any connection with this Mary Ann Cox perchance?

best wishes

Phil

[Varqm]

Hi,

Wilkinson also fumbled, if I remember right, about his logbook,to the effect that when asked about lodgers coming in at past midnight (?) he said he will consult his logbook. But actually his logbook does not contain time or names , only a mark wheteher a bed was occupied or not. He deals with his logbook everyday and I think he should have known this.
But people do get nervous in court.
I kinda research a bit about 55 flower and dean and Wilkinson was listed as a lodger in 1881,labourer,born in Manchester. In 1886 he was married in christ church (?) to a Mary ann cox, listed his occupation as a butcher. So sometime after that he bacame the deputy. They did not have kids as shown in the1891 census. His wife died in Dec. 1891 I believe and he got married 3 months later.

[curious]

Hi,

I have mentioned many times on Casebook,[ and to my astonishment has never been discussed,] the bruise[ of recent origin[ found on her left hand between thumb,and first finger, described as the size of a sixpence.
Question where did this come from, taking the medical view that it was recent?

Regards Richard.

Chapman was also bruised:
"There was a bruise over the middle part of the bone of the right hand.
"There was a bruise over the right temple. On the upper eyelid there was a bruise, and there were two distinct bruises, each the size of a man's thumb, on the forepart of the top of the chest."

And Stride
in front of the chest there was a bluish discoloration.

But I've also wondered that both Chapman and Eddowes had the marks on their hands.

curious

[Addy]

Hi tnb,

I am relatively new here but I was getting a hunch!

Chava: indeed, the police could have picked her up roughly or supported her roughly when guiding her through the streets. I always assumed they would have picked her up under her arms if she was laying in the street. However your idea could be true too.

Greetings,

Addy

[Chava]

Maggyann, in late Victorian English the usage of the word 'unfortunate' as a noun was a euphemism for 'prostitute'. As in Mary Ann Cox's testimony at the MJK inquest. Some sources have her saying 'I am a widow and an unfortunate'. Others don't use the word unfortunate but say 'I get my living in the streets' which is a more overt way of getting the point over. If any contemporary source mentions that Eddowes was 'unfortunate' or 'an unfortunate', they mean they believe she had resorted to prostitution either regularly or occasionally.

[tnb]

Addy - I am sure you are aware of the unwritten rules of this board by now:

Any thread about Eddowes will end up being about whether she was a prostitute or not.

Any thread about Stride will end up being about whether she was killed by 'Jack the Ripper' or not.

Any thread about Kelly will end up being about Hutchison.

And any thread about Hutchison will end up in a massive argument!

Tis the way of the world.