Did Catherine know who JTR was???

[Steven Russell]

Hello, Phil,

How can you say that only Kelly and the lodging house deputy knew where Kate was staying? What about all the other "guests"?

Best wishes,

Steve.

[Phil Carter]

Hello Steve,

I stand corrected, and write...only "known" persons..

best wishes

Phil

[Steven Russell]

curious

Dear curious,

Really, why do you think that Kate may have got herself picked up deliberately? I'm not trying to be confrontational here; I'm just - well - curious.

Best wishes,

Steve.

P.S. Phil: cheers for reply.

[curious]

Dear curious,

Really, why do you think that Kate may have got herself picked up deliberately? I'm not trying to be confrontational here; I'm just - well - curious.

Best wishes,

Steve.

P.S. Phil: cheers for reply.

Steve,

I wasn't taking it for confrontational.

It's just that I'm trying to make sense of things and looking at a lot of different things.

There is one scenario that it would make sense for her to get herself picked up and for John Kelley to know ahead of time that she was going to jail. That is if she had information she needed to report.

So, yes, I do think that's possible.

She apparently sobered up quickly and was let out early . .. . If she were as drunk as it sounds as though she was, it doesn't make sense to me that she was released so early or that she was awake and singing to herself in the cell. SINGING???? does that sound right after being that drunk?

again, I'm curious about a lot of things.

curious

[Steven Russell]

Steve,

I wasn't taking it for confrontational.

It's just that I'm trying to make sense of things and looking at a lot of different things.

There is one scenario that it would make sense for her to get herself picked up and for John Kelley to know ahead of time that she was going to jail. That is if she had information she needed to report.

So, yes, I do think that's possible.

She apparently sobered up quickly and was let out early . .. . If she were as drunk as it sounds as though she was, it doesn't make sense to me that she was released so early or that she was awake and singing to herself in the cell. SINGING???? does that sound right after being that drunk?

again, I'm curious about a lot of things.

curious

Dear curious,

If she had information to report, would it not have been easier to walk into a police station or collar a constable on the street without going through an elaborate masquerade of impersonating a fire engine in order to get "picked up"?

Habitual heavy drinkers have a much higher tolerance to alcohol than others and a four hour kip can just do the trick even after being completely hammered. You wouldn't want anyone to drive you home under these circumstances but they could appear relatively lucid and in control. Also, what policeman would want a drunk cluttering up his cells (I don't know how many cells Bishopsgate Station had) after he had satisfied himself that she was no longer a risk to herself or others and could find her way home. Presumably drunkenness was a regular occurrence.

As for singing - have you ever been drunk? Everyone thinks they're Pavarotti!

Best wishes,

Steve.

[bolo]

Hi curious,

She apparently sobered up quickly and was let out early . .. . If she were as drunk as it sounds as though she was, it doesn't make sense to me that she was released so early or that she was awake and singing to herself in the cell. SINGING???? does that sound right after being that drunk?

To me, four hours seem to be enough to halfway sober up, that is up to a point where the person in question is able to talk coherently and walk by him-/herself. The more someone is used to alcohol, the quicker the process.

Several authors (like Philip Sugden in Complete History, revised paperback 2002, pp. 234-235) mention Kate's drinking problems. Both her sister Emma and boyfriend John Kelly said that she drank heavily at times which brought her into trouble more than once, so I think it's safe to say that she had a high alcohol tolerance.

About the time of release, I'm not 100% familiar with the customs and methods of the police at that time but as far as I know, they used to release drunkards as soon as they were able to walk again and appeared to be no danger to themselves or other people, they didn't let them completely sober up or anything. In Kate's case, they kept her locked up until she a) could walk again and b) the pubs were closed. At least this is how I understand PC Hutt's reply to her wanting to know what time it was: "Too late for you to get any more drink".

This seems to be a practical approach for a police station in an area with lots of drunkards on the streets like Bishopsgate Street P.S.

Boris

[curious]

Hi curious,



To me, four hours seem to be enough to halfway sober up, that is up to a point where the person in question is able to talk coherently and walk by him-/herself. The more someone is used to alcohol, the quicker the process.

Several authors (like Philip Sugden in Complete History, revised paperback 2002, pp. 234-235) mention Kate's drinking problems. Both her sister Emma and boyfriend John Kelly said that she drank heavily at times which brought her into trouble more than once, so I think it's safe to say that she had a high alcohol tolerance.

About the time of release, I'm not 100% familiar with the customs and methods of the police at that time but as far as I know, they used to release drunkards as soon as they were able to walk again and appeared to be no danger to themselves or other people, they didn't let them completely sober up or anything. In Kate's case, they kept her locked up until she a) could walk again and b) the pubs were closed. At least this is how I understand PC Hutt's reply to her wanting to know what time it was: "Too late for you to get any more drink".

This seems to be a practical approach for a police station in an area with lots of drunkards on the streets like Bishopsgate Street P.S.

Boris

Thanks, Boris,

I see the sense in that.

curious

[Iain Wilson]

Where is that known?

From what I recall reading, she was living as a wife with Kelly and a variety of people stated they had never known her to sell herself.

Jack the Ripper: The Facts, Paul Begg, Page 166: "...by 1881 she was there [Whitechapel], sometimes resorting to prostitution..."

Maybe I should have rephrased and said that she was an OCCASIONAL prostitute, but the fact remains that she resorted to it when hard up, and it's well documentated that on the day before her murder both her and Kelly were desperately short of cash.

"Frederick Wilkinson, deputy at Cooney's, says Catherine "was not often in drink and was a very jolly woman, often singing."

Fair enough, but her relationship with Conway disinstegrated due to the fact that she was an alcoholic! Likewise, the reason she ended up in a cell was due to the fact that she was found drunk in the street.

Could it be that Wilkinson didn't want to speak ill of the dead?

See above. I'm pretty much certain that it's mentioned in other books on the subject - Begg's was the first source I picked up.

[Chava]

I'm not taking sides either way on this one. But just out of idle curiosity, if Eddowes did prostitute herself occasionally to support herself and Kelly, and Kelly admitted this, could he have been done for living off the avails of prostitution? Because it does seem to me that Eddowes was constantly short of money and sponged off her daughter to the extent that the daughter changed her address to avoid her mother. I don't think it's a reach to suspect she went on and off the game. But I doubt Kelly would have admitted that because it could lay him open to a charge.

And then of course there's de mortuis nil nisi bonum

[Hunter]

One could add Kidney and Barnett to that list too.

[Addy]

I think you are correct Chava. After all, on the day she was murdered she went to see het daughter or so she said. According to most sources she must have known by then that she had moved away. Was she trying to get money another way? What way was open to her?

The fact that the lodging house deputy said she was not intimate with anyone else than Kelly showes only she didn't bring costumers to the lodging house. What she did on the streets was not known to the deputy.

Greetings,

Addy

[harry]

If those that were close to Eddowes,were ignorant of the fact she prostituted herself,how do those that today write of her as doing so,know of this as fact?Where did the allegation originate.

[Maggyann]

This thing about whether or not they were prostitutes bothers me a bit.

They were known as unfortunates that does not have to mean prostitutes.

Personally I think it is more simple. To bring it into present day I think they would simply be described as promiscuous. We do not use the word prostitute for 'young ladies' who sleep around and possibly benefit from that one way or the other. Having a meal bought for them, drinks or even a bed for the night with the 'lucky' partner. Socialising really by todays standards.

Some of the vicitms may well have hooked up with a bloke for a few gins some fish and chips or a few pennies to get themselves a bed. What is the difference?

1888 an unfortunate is hard up so she picks up a gent to see her through to tomorrow.

2010 a female is bored, skint etc so she goes out and picks up a chap to see her through till next day.

I really think the 'prostitute' thing is unnecessary.

[richardnunweek]

Hi,
I am with Harry on this one.
To assume that Eddowes was a prostitute is going against all the knowledge we have, she liked a drink, and was of a low class, but I personally have been sitting on the fence for years.
Her last sighting by Lawende and Co , at church passage would indicate to some that she was soliciting, but her hand flat against the mans chest could suggest that she was saying 'back of sailor'.
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?
Was it when she was arrested, was she hurled to her feet by a heavy handed police office?
Was she grasped by the left hand, and pulled down church passage by the man Lawende saw?... I would suggest yes...
I have always found it intresting that Church passage and millers court were not only similar, but oral history has Mjk being pulled along the passage on the night of her death with the alleged words 'All right my Luv, dont PULL, me along'
The mutilations may not be the only similarity between these two murders, and I can quite easily see Eddowes man grasping a firm grip on the poor womans hand , and hastily walking to the corner of the square, after Eddowes had been talked into a 'quickie'.
She may have not consented to intercourse, but a few shllings for hand relief, may have been hard to resist.
Regards Richard.

[Iain Wilson]

If those that were close to Eddowes,were ignorant of the fact she prostituted herself,how do those that today write of her as doing so,know of this as fact?Where did the allegation originate.

That's a very good point. From what I've read, the various people (relatives and lodging house keepers) interviewed in the aftermath of Kate's killing were very quick to point out that they were unaware of her having any "immoral habits".

Now, this could simply be as it reads - that they really didn't know of her having resorted to prostitution. Or, they could be trying to deflect away from themselves any shameful revelations that may arise as a result of further police or press investigation. On the other hand, they could simply be trying to spare Kate's blushes post mortem. After all, the poor woman had just been savagely murdered - why make it any worse by admitting that she occasionally resorted to prostitution?

I've taken a quick trawl through various sources and I can't find any primary source that states that she resorted to prostitution - all the accounts come from books written after the fact. However, there is this curious piece of phrasing from The Times on the 3rd of October 1888 - it's from an account by Kelly:

"He and Kate had, he said, gone through many hardships together, but while she was with him he would not let her do anything bad."

(my emphasis)

I'm not sure what this means, but it seems to read to me that he had knowledge of her previous occasional lapses into prostitution and was keen to distance himself from any association with it.

Has anyone else found a primary source reffering to this? I'm sure someone has as people have reffered to it in their books on the subject!