Did the Canonical 5 know each other

[Debra A]

Yes, this might be a fool's errand, and it is almost impossible to prove a negative (that they did not know each other). But, in the absence of a piece of research that has focused on this, it seems worth the effort of looking and seeing what, if anything, is there.

Research into the lodging houses, prisons, workhouses and infirmaries has been ongoing for years and there are certain addresses like 18 and 19 George St that some of the women involved in the case have in common, as I mentioned earlier. It is possible the women knew each other in my opinion but good luck convincing anyone who opposes the idea without that photograph!

[RockySullivan]

Very different times, Rocky. It was a small area with literally hundreds of people living in every small street, many of them occupying different accommodation on different nights. And they weren't all "working girls" in the modern sense of the word, either. They turned to soliciting when they had to, but that didn't necessarily make them regular prostitutes patrolling the same "beats".

How is this any different than parts of NY now? People who are up at night get to know each other. It's busy yes but how many girls are out at night? They all might congregate in a local establishment as well. Annie and Mary Kelly lived on Dorset st I would think they'd know each other.

[Michael W Richards]

I think its quite possible that the victims could have known about each other, perhaps even some knew one another, but I wouldn't think this suggests linkage by killer. The acts and the circumstances vary within the C5 alone, and I think if motives are uncovered, they would address the possibility of them having prior knowledge of one another.

The murders occurred within a square mile. Although the East End was packed with humanity ultimately the area concerned has a finite population.

[Sleuth1888]

I think its quite possible that the victims could have known about each other, perhaps even some knew one another, but I wouldn't think this suggests linkage by killer. The acts and the circumstances vary within the C5 alone, and I think if motives are uncovered, they would address the possibility of them having prior knowledge of one another.

The murders occurred within a square mile. Although the East End was packed with humanity ultimately the area concerned has a finite population.

Interesting statement you made there Michael. Are you saying that if a motive is found for the murders that it would show the victims knew who would be murdered next (which is unusual) or that it would reveal whether the victims knew each other?

Your last statement is interesting and that actually points in favour of the victims knowing each other as one square mile is a very small area.

[Sam Flynn]

Dorset St was much smaller than a square mile, but around 800 people lived in that one street alone, and many of them were by no means permanent residents.

[Sleuth1888]

Dorset St was much smaller than a square mile, but around 800 people lived in that one street alone, and many of them were by no means permanent residents.

Indeed but Annie Chapman and Mary Kelly both lived on Dorset Street and the newspaper source discovered by Jerry Dunlop provided a contemporaneous link between the two victims.

They very possibly may have both drank in the Britannia and seen each other in there.

In fact Polly Nichols' death certificate has her living with Annie Chapman!

[Sam Flynn]

Indeed but Annie Chapman and Mary Kelly both lived on Dorset Street

Quite so, but alongside about 798 other people. Kelly hadn't lived in Miller's Court particularly long - she'd only moved into Spitalfields itself about a year earlier - and was paired up with Joe Barnett for much of that time. She was also significantly younger than Annie Chapman, who didn't live at the same end of Dorset Street in any case. It's possible that they were vaguely known to each other by sight, or course, but any closer acquaintance is rather unlikely I'd suggest.

and the newspaper source discovered by Jerry Dunlop provided a contemporaneous link between the two victims

That same newspaper source provided completely incorrect info about Kelly's having a child in the very next paragraph. Early reports in the press tended to be prone to errors, gossip and misinformation.

They very possibly may have both drank in the Britannia and seen each other in there.

Maybe, but it was a small pub; most of the pubs in that area were. It's not as if a reasonable percentage of the locals could gather regularly in such places for a chat around the fire.

In fact Polly Nichols' death certificate has her living with Annie Chapman!

Indeed, but Polly was a relative newcomer to the East End. From memory, she'd only taken up residence in Whitechapel within a month of her death.

In short, it's not just the addresses we have to consider - many people would have used the same addresses, due to the nature of the accommodation, so the fact that one or more victim pops up at the same address doesn't guarantee any connection. The population density, the amount of time a person spent in a given place, when they were resident there and for how long, the age-gaps... all would have a bearing on how likely it was that the victims were known to one another in any meaningful sense.

[jerryd]

In short, it's not just the addresses we have to consider - many people would have used the same addresses, due to the nature of the accommodation, so the fact that one or more victim pops up at the same address doesn't guarantee any connection.

What if two ex-husbands (live-ins) of two of the C-5 victims lived in the same street in Walworth at the same time in 1888. And it's not a street like Whitechapel Road. It's a rather short street, so they could have lived in the same building.

Thomas Conway (Eddowes husband) and Thomas Drew (Nichols live-in) both lived in York Street, Walworth at the time of Catherine's murder. Polly Nichols had lived at the York Street address up to 1887. Catherine Eddowes was in the Newington Casual Ward in April of 1888. Nichols had also used Newington Casual Ward at times. (see Debs threads on JTRforums) Newington Casual Ward was a few blocks from this York Street address. Catherine's daughter, Annie Phillips, was also living very close to York Street in Queen Street, Bermodsey. York Street is just off Old Kent Road and may have been the route Eddowes and Kelly traveled during their hop-picking adventure. Eddowes on the day of her murder said she was traveling to see her daughter in Bermondsey but couldn't find her. Maybe she was really going to see her ex-husband and two boys?

[Debra A]

What if two ex-husbands (live-ins) of two of the C-5 victims lived in the same street in Walworth at the same time in 1888. And it's not a street like Whitechapel Road. It's a rather short street, so they could have lived in the same building.

Thomas Conway (Eddowes husband) and Thomas Drew (Nichols live-in) both lived in York Street, Walworth at the time of Catherine's murder. Polly Nichols had lived at the York Street address up to 1887. Catherine Eddowes was in the Newington Casual Ward in April of 1888. Nichols had also used Newington Casual Ward at times. (see Debs threads on JTRforums) Newington Casual Ward was a few blocks from this York Street address. Catherine's daughter, Annie Phillips, was also living very close to York Street in Queen Street, Bermodsey. York Street is just off Old Kent Road and may have been the route Eddowes and Kelly traveled during their hop-picking adventure. Eddowes on the day of her murder said she was traveling to see her daughter in Bermondsey but couldn't find her. Maybe she was really going to see her ex-husband and two boys?

Hi Jerry,
I haven't written up any definite research on the subject because it's still a work in progress and I'm still considering if the April 1888 Newington entry is Eddowes. In the 1870's Catherine Eddowes used the Newington Casual ward several times along with her children (including 4th son Frederick Willliam) and so is easily spotted because of the children, her age and occupation. Similarly with the Mint St workhouse and Infirmary and Greenwich Infirmary.

She invariably used the name Conway in the Newington workhouse (she seemed to have a system of keeping different names for different establishments in much the same way that Mylett did.) but to not use the casual ward as Conway for several years and then turn up as Conway again in April 1888 bugs me a little despite the age and occupation charing. It's difficult to prove it is the same woman in the 88 case. There are other women named Catherine Conway of a similar age in London, if not in the right area. You mentioning the Conway family's closeness to the area is very interesting.Thanks.

[Debra A]

In short, it's not just the addresses we have to consider - many people would have used the same addresses, due to the nature of the accommodation, so the fact that one or more victim pops up at the same address doesn't guarantee any connection. The population density, the amount of time a person spent in a given place, when they were resident there and for how long, the age-gaps... all would have a bearing on how likely it was that the victims were known to one another in any meaningful sense.

Hi Gareth, I think most of us are intelligent enough to know this but still consider it worth our time and effort to research any possible connections if a suggestion of one comes up.

[Sam Flynn]

Hi Gareth, I think most of us are intelligent enough to know this but still consider it worth our time and effort to research any possible connections if a suggestion of one comes up.

Of course, Debs. I'm just making sure that those less well acquainted with the demographics aware that the picture is somewhat more complicated than it might first appear.

[RockySullivan]

Of course, Debs. I'm just making sure that those less well acquainted with the demographics aware that the picture is somewhat more complicated than it might first appear.

Sam what was the population density of Whitechapel like compared to areas of Manhattan today?

[Michael W Richards]

Interesting statement you made there Michael. Are you saying that if a motive is found for the murders that it would show the victims knew who would be murdered next (which is unusual) or that it would reveal whether the victims knew each other?

Your last statement is interesting and that actually points in favour of the victims knowing each other as one square mile is a very small area.

Hi Slueth,

Yes to the 2 questions...with reservations. I'm not certain whether a predictable sequence is a realistic possibility,...although Ive always been intrigued by Kates last 2 alias choices, but I really do believe that Motives are the key here, what was done to whom isn't critical beyond the murders that had initially created the panic.

[Michael W Richards]

I believe Debra that she demonstrates a lifelong commitment of sorts with the T.C. tattoo, would it be so odd to find her using that surname again in 88?

[Debra A]

I believe Debra that she demonstrates a lifelong commitment of sorts with the T.C. tattoo, would it be so odd to find her using that surname again in 88?

No, definitely not odd, Michael. It just makes it more difficult to determine if it was her, as Conway is a much more common name than Eddowes.