Did Catherine know who JTR was???

[curious]

Curious, Bob, all,

This, I feel, is very important. Someone please correct me if I am wrong...

Frederick William Williamson, Lodging House deputy, said the following at the inquest..

"When Kelly came in on Saturday night between half past 7 and 8 I asked him, 'Where's Kate?' He said, "I have heard she's been locked up'

Phil

At the moment, I tend to believe that Kate got herself picked up on purpose -- and likely her "husband" knew she planned to.

OR someone was simply mistaken about the time. There's been much discussion that people didn't have access to watches and timepieces as we do today.

curious

[curious]

So inside the same hour of the murder, the police walked straight into the correct lodging house, asking the lodging house deputy if he was missing a woman...or....they didn't....it was an hour later....

How, or indeed, did the police know where to go?

best wishes

Phil

It's almost as if they knew her, isn't it?

curious

[Phil Carter]

Hello Curious,

Well....
According to all the witness testimony and inquest statements, and please, again, correct me if I am wrong here, there were only TWO people who KNEW where Catharine Eddowes was staying...at the Lodging House, in Flower and Dean Street.

1) The Lodging house deputy, Frederick William Wilkinson
2) James Kelly, her boyfriend, who also stayed there.

Kelly, according to The Times of Wednesday 3rd October, did not identify Eddowes until between 9pm and 10pm on Tuesday, the 2nd October.

Yet Wilkinson has police coming in his place within an hour?

Umm, Flower and Dean Street is a fair way from Mitre Square or Bishopsgate Police Station....out of all the lodging houses... two detectives turn up at this one. How come?
Because, again, if I am not mistaken, she gave her address as 6, Fashion Street, Spitalfields, to the police station Sergeant, Byfield, when she was discharged. She was unable to give her name and address previously, only saying, "nothing" when asked for her name.

best wishes

Phil

[curious]

Hello all,

addition to the above..

According to Kelly himself at the inquest, he "had heard that she had been locked up on Saturday night at Bishopsgate. He was told by a woman that she had seen the deceased in HOUNDSDITCH with two policemen. He could not say what time it was when he heard that statement..... "

best wishes

Phil

where is Houndsditch? in relationship to, say, Mitre Square, or where she was arrested?

Thanks,

Curious

[curious]

Hello Curious,

Well....
According to all the witness testimony and inquest statements, and please, again, correct me if I am wrong here, there were only TWO people who KNEW where Catharine Eddowes was staying...at the Lodging House, in Flower and Dean Street.

1) The Lodging house deputy, Frederick William Wilkinson
2) James Kelly, her boyfriend, who also stayed there.

Kelly, according to The Times of Wednesday 3rd October, did not identify Eddowes until between 9pm and 10pm on Tuesday, the 2nd October.

Yet Wilkinson has police coming in his place within an hour?

Umm, Flower and Dean Street is a fair way from Mitre Square or Bishopsgate Police Station....out of all the lodging houses... two detectives turn up at this one. How come?


best wishes

Phil

how come indeed?

any thoughts on this?

curious

[Phil Carter]

Curious,

There are a few thoughts... but it goes against just about every known and accepted theory. And no doubt if I aired them, I would, as per usual, get slaughtered unmercifully from certain quarters! There are a few key points in this.
1) The Lodging House Deputy was either mistaken or lying or telling the truth.
2) James Kelly was lying, or not telling the whole truth.
3) The police had information from Kelly BEFORE the 2nd October about Eddowes, which is very possible IF the exact lodging house is visited within an hour and a quarter of the murder....
4) What happened to James Kelly AFTER the funeral? What do we know about this man?
5) Who were the two detectives that visited Wilkinson?
6) Who was the woman who told Kelly that Eddowes was locked up? She must have known both Kelly and Eddowes were "together"...no?

Please also remember that according to the police, when Eddowes was picked up there was a "crowd", but nobody answered when asked if anybody knew Eddowes. But ONE PERSON AT LEAST, must have known her. (The woman who told Kelly, or, if Kelly was lying, Kelly was in the crowd.) Or BOTH were in the crowd.
Or a policeman knew her...

best wishes

Phil

[Supe]

Phil,

James Kelly, her boyfriend, who also stayed there.

Um, maybe we should start by getting our facts straight before embarking on flights of fancy. Kate's common-law husband was JOHN Kelly.

Don.

[Phil Carter]

Hello Don,

I beg your pardon. Thank you for correcting this error. John Kelly. Typing error, as indeed was the Williamson instead of Wilkinson on the first posting I posted. (You missed that one) I am working late at night, poor excuse..but reasonably understandable. And there are many J Kellys knocking around. Including one John Kelly suspected as being a possible suspect. (Sourcebook page 359, referring to A49301D, Charles Warren, letter to Mr Phipps). However, again, I thank you for your correction.

What flights of fancy? I am quoting inquest testimony and signed statements.
And asking straight questions. I invite you and anyone to discuss and or perhaps answer them.

The label "flights of fancy" is unwarranted, in my humble opinion. No offence.
I am merely trying to see other alternatives...instead of sticking to the same old tired and worn out stuff....that after 122 years lead us all nowhere.

best wishes

Phil

[Jon Guy]

Good Morning Phil

The Police were talking to all Spitalfield Lodging House Keepers that morning to see if any suspicious people had recently entered their establishments, and if they had any women out.

[harry]

This'being carried into the square'was something I suggested in a post many years ago,and I believe it a possibility.So she may have been accosted at a place at which she felt reasonably safe,the entrance to the passage,and killed or rendered helpless there after Lawende and companions had passed.Doesn't rule out having a knowledge of who and what he was,just a bad case of careless considerations due to drink.

[Adam Went]

Phil:

I would think that would be something to do with the fact that James Kelly was, and probably still is according to some, a JTR suspect. But John Kelly, Kate's boyfriend, and James Kelly I just mentioned, are 2 entirely different, unrelated people.

So that's just to clear up any confusion there might be there....

Harry:

So you're suggesting that JTR killed Kate elsewhere and then carried her body through a narrow passageway (according to the testimony of where Lawende saw her and the man) and dumped it in a quiet corner of the square. Erm...why?

This doesn't appear to have been the case in any of the other murders and the quiet, deserted corner of Mitre Square was as good a place as any for JTR to strike. Furthermore, I don't recall reading that there was any large pools of fresh blood elsewhere in the vicinity of Mitre Square?

Jeez, I mentioned the policeman living in Mitre Square catching him red handed before in the act of killing her....red handed wouldn't be a good enough description if he was seen carrying her dead body into the square!!

Cheers,
Adam.

[Iain Wilson]

This'being carried into the square'was something I suggested in a post many years ago,and I believe it a possibility.

This seems deeply unlikely. Why would the murderer, upon accosting Kate Eddowes somewhere secluded (as one assumes he wouldn't have rendered her insensible in public!), drag her through the streets of London to another secluded location to carry on his attack?

If the murderer did follow such a course of action we can either assume that he was dragging her to Mitre Square to carry out the mutilations - in which case you have to ask why do this after a trek across the city and not at the site of the original attack - or else he was heading there to dump the body. In this case you have to ask how he managed to do this without spilling any of poor Kate's blood (or other vitals - it was a horrendously savage attack!) as he made his way through the City, as there is certainly no police accounts of blood trails being found in the vicinity at the time.

If he were headed to Mitre Square to finish her off it is possible - with a stretch of the imagination - to say that if he were spotted he could have played the "this is my drunk wife" card, but if he had already carried out his attack even the most inebriated witness might notice something!

In summary, I don't think this theory has much in the way of substance!

[Phil Carter]

Good Morning Phil

The Police were talking to all Spitalfield Lodging House Keepers that morning to see if any suspicious people had recently entered their establishments, and if they had any women out.

Hello Jon,

And a good afternoon to you too

Thats what I thought about...but look at the time... within 1 hour... a place in Flower and Dean Street is entered and questioned.. thats in Met Police territory too..ok, Stride was killed too that night admittedly... but think about the consequences... Wilkinson KNEW Eddowes wasnt there, and knew of her whereabouts earlier that night..because Kelly told him..locked up.

And like I said... only three possibilities re the knowledge of her being locked up.. a woman who must have known Kelly and Eddowes to approach and tell him... or the fact that Kelly saw her being carted off to the station himself..or.. a policeman told him. If it were a policeman, she would be IDENTIFIED to Kelly...so because she gave her name as "nothing", then Mary Ann Kelly... it must have been either Kelly himself or the woman who knew Kelly. So either Kelly is lying about the woman or... who is this woman that KNOWS them both?

Something isn't quite right, in my honest opinion.

Hello Harry,

That possibility is always sitting in the background, yes. Not that I have connected that to this as yet though...

Hello Adam,

Ahh, you mean that James Kelly..., no..I wasnt thinking of him...but again..yes..I am talking about John the boyfriend, or John the International suspect also known as Johann Stammer. Late last night I mistyped the name James instead of John.. at 4 am... bad excuse but true...LOL

best wishes all

Phil

[Hunter]

Man ol' man... does anybody bother to read the evidence before hashing out some theory? All of the medicos agreed that the woman was attacked and killed and mutilated in the same spot.

[Phil Carter]

This seems deeply unlikely. Why would the murderer, upon accosting Kate Eddowes somewhere secluded (as one assumes he wouldn't have rendered her insensible in public!), drag her through the streets of London to another secluded location to carry on his attack?

Hello Iain,

A very fair point, and one that is difficult to counter argue, I agree. The Doctor (Brown) was questioned on that very point, and said "...I do not believe the deceased moved in the slightest way after her throat was cut."

best wishes

Phil