Eddowes Pawn Ticket/Finances (moved from another thread)

[Jon Guy]

Hi Curious

I'm being quite slow today. I don't understand this, would you please explain?

Don`t worry, I was been even slower yesterday, as the second option I offered is quite silly.

I was originally thinking that as pawn tickets were sometimes given to other people to redeem (Emily Birrell and possibly Maria Harvey) a different name is used in case the pawn broker recognises the redeemer of the ticket, and the name on the ticket doesn`t match the face. But it has since dawned on me that if Jones the Pawn knew Eddowes he would have noted that the name on the ticket, Jane Kelly wasn`t her name.

Unless, Jones the Pawn knew John Kelly and Kate Eddowes but accepted the fact that Eddowes was actually called Kelly, after her man.

Err.. hope that`s clarified things ...

[curious]

What if the pawnbroker knew you by your name so the pawn ticket could not be passed onto someone else to redeem.

Hi, Jon,
I'm being quite slow today. I don't understand this, would you please explain?

Thank you,

curious

[lynn cates]

oops

Hello Jon. Thanks.

Could be. But would her "plunder" not be recouped?

I notice that we are a bit off topic. Perhaps this could be moved to a new thread?

Cheers.
LC

[Jon Guy]

Hi Lynn

I was wondering whether it was Eddowes herself who may have stolen the boots as she was the one turned out of the Casual Ward (where men`s boots would be removed).

[lynn cates]

keeping up with Jones

Hello Jon. Thanks.

You are correct about stolen goods. And it would make more sense that John had stolen them than to have bought them whilst being broke.

Jones was VERY good about recognising stolen property. He was called on by various courts to testify to same.

Cheers.
LC

[Jon Guy]

Hi Lynn

But why on earth would one wish to give a false name to pawn something?

What if the items to be pawned were stolen.

What if the pawnbroker knew you by your name so the pawn ticket could not be passed onto someone else to redeem.

[lynn cates]

false name

Hello Jon. Thanks.

It would indeed--and for whomever it was.

I have always understood why a poor East Ender would give a false name to a copper or beak. But why on earth would one wish to give a false name to pawn something?

Cheers.
LC

[ChrisGeorge]

What ever name she gave would be on the pawn ticket, yes?

Maybe there was "Nothing" on the pawn ticket.

[Wickerman]

What ever name she gave would be on the pawn ticket, yes?

[lynn cates]

What's in a name?

Hello Barbara. Thanks.

The pawn ticket read Friday. But, if you take John's testimony at inquest and place it in conjunction with his two interviews and construct a time line, BOTH Friday and Saturday pawnings become problematic.

Here's a titbit. Was Kate Eddowes's name on the pawn ticket?

Cheers.
LC

[Beowulf]

Hello Barbara. But if John is truthful, they had spent that money by mid-day Saturday. Kate was then supposedly off to Annie's for more funds.

Cheers.
LC

I guess I got that wrong. I thought they parted with him giving her his boots as she had no money and she was off to a pawn shop without him. I considered that a true Walter Raleighish move on his part.

[Wickerman]

Maybe that would explain why Kate went the wrong way after leaving the police station or why Stride was hanging around waiting for someone?

Kate's reason for walking one way or the other out of Bishopsdate Police Station could be as innocuous as her deciding to walk with her back to the wind instead of against it. We don't know if it was windy but the answer might be quite simple.

Thanks for the GM funnies.

Yes, I can hear the female voice assisted commands now...."do you wish to apply the brakes full, or slowly?"...stomp...stomp....stomp...." please reply, is this an emergency stop?" (smash!).

[Tecs]

On a more serious note than above, jasn't it always been assumed that the victims had earned their money for a bed, sometimes several times over, but spent it on drink instead? Obviously clients are not going to come forward to admit that, yes, I went with Annie, polly etc so we have no way of knowing. But it is interesting to speculate if Jack did spend time with the victims ensuring that they were drunk and vulnerable. Then, to provide some sort of an alibi perhaps, he left but made arrangements to meet later for "more of the same." None of the women could refuse the chance to be plied with drink in return for an encounter so it would be an offer they couldn't refuse.

Maybe that would explain why Kate went the wrong way after leaving the police station or why Stride was hanging around waiting for someone?

Possible?


regards,

[lynn cates]

the finger

Hello Jon. Thanks. Well, I point the finger at his testimony/interviews. His "Echo" interview contradicts a good bit of the standard story.

Cheers.
LC

[Wickerman]

Hello Barbara. But if John is truthful, they had spent that money by mid-day Saturday. Kate was then supposedly off to Annie's for more funds.

Cheers.
LC

But if John is only telling the court what Kate told him, and we do have some indication Kate lied at least about going to her daughters, then why point the finger at John?

Regards, Jon S.
(struggling on my third computer in 6 months, they sure don't make things the way they used to )