Ripper victims were caught sleeping?

[Mangowe]

On the blurb to her book 'The Five' the author states that none of the victims knew each other. Is this correct? I'm sure I read somewhere that a couple of the canonical 5 were on speaking terms.

"Polly, Annie, Elizabeth, Catherine and Mary-Jane are famous for the same thing, though they never met. "

There is no way that anyone can ascertain that they knew each other well but since both Stride and Eddowes lived on Flower and Dean St and said they worked "for the jews" likely at the Rothchild's buildings which had a large jewish community with women charring for them) and since on Polly Nichols' death certificate it says "35 Dorset Street" which was also Eddowes' address it is not wildly unlikely that they were acquainted.

[Mangowe]

There is no way that anyone can ascertain that they knew each other well but since both Stride and Eddowes lived on Flower and Dean St and said they worked "for the jews" likely at the Rothchild's buildings which had a large jewish community with women charring for them) and since on Polly Nichols' death certificate it says "35 Dorset Street" which was also Eddowes' address it is not wildly unlikely that they were acquainted.

Whoops I meant also Annie Chapman's address, not Eddowes'

[jerryd]

There is no way that anyone can ascertain that they knew each other well but since both Stride and Eddowes lived on Flower and Dean St and said they worked "for the jews" likely at the Rothchild's buildings which had a large jewish community with women charring for them) and since on Polly Nichols' death certificate it says "35 Dorset Street" which was also Eddowes' address it is not wildly unlikely that they were acquainted.

Echo London Middlesex November 9, 1888

[Sam Flynn]

Kelly had only been in Spitalfields for approx 18 months, and in Dorset Street for a much shorter time than that, and had boyfriends and girlfriends of approximately the same vintage as herself. I very much doubt that the 47 year-old, sad, ill and somewhat homely Annie Chapman would have mixed in the same circles as the lively, healthy and pretty Mary Kelly, who was practically half her age.

[Wickerman]

Then its equally extraordinary for her to openly implicate both herself and Lewis in the act of soliciting for the press when it's not necessary. Especially if, as you say, Lewis had taken care to tone down her account in front of the press at the inquest.

No, you have it backwards.
Kennedy spoke days before Lewis appeared at the inquest.

[Semper_Eadem]

I buy that they might of been blitzed but not that they were caught sleeping... These Ladies, when they had to sleep rough were probably better at hiding themselves so they would not be picked up as vagrants by the Police who had a dim view of folks who slept rough.

[Curious Cat]

No, you have it backwards.
Kennedy spoke days before Lewis appeared at the inquest.

It's the same whichever way round. Why would anyone implicate themselves in doing something illegal so openly? The statements either to the press or the inquest can only be made with a mind to being innocent of doing anything illegal. Otherwise they would say nothing at all in order to protect themselves. The only inference that Sarah Lewis and her friend were soliciting comes from interpretation by those who wish to find it.

My original point in all of this, and Sarah Lewis was merely an example, is that there would be a variety of reasons for women to be walking/hanging around London in the early hours that only may have involved either prostitution or sleeping rough. That Rubenhold has dismissed one possibility to just uphold a single other is what pulls down her own theory. It may apply to one or more of the victims - we'll never truly know - but it's difficult to apply to ALL five collectively as each murder has its own identifying circumstances. Rubenhold has given them back their identities and details of their lives before their murders but has chosen to give all of them the same ending.

[Curious Cat]

Rubenhold…?

https://forum.casebook.org/member/9113-madam-detective

[Sam Flynn]

Rubenhold…?

https://forum.casebook.org/member/9113-madam-detective

I wouldn't have thought so. Ms Rubenhold registered in her own name on JTRForums, and I doubt that she'd choose the somewhat cheesy "Madam Detective" if she wanted to use a nickname.

Sincere apologies to "Madam Detective" if he/she is still around

[Sam Flynn]

My original point in all of this... is that there would be a variety of reasons for women to be walking/hanging around London in the early hours that only may have involved either prostitution or sleeping rough. That Rubenhold has dismissed one possibility to just uphold a single other is what pulls down her own theory. It may apply to one or more of the victims - we'll never truly know - but it's difficult to apply to ALL five collectively as each murder has its own identifying circumstances.

Very perceptive points.

[Curious Cat]

I wouldn't have thought so. Ms Rubenhold registered in her own name on JTRForums, and I doubt that she'd choose the somewhat cheesy "Madam Detective" if she wanted to use a nickname.

Sincere apologies to "Madam Detective" if he/she is still around

Their first post from 2016 raised suspicions and then the subsequent posts fishing for particular information raised them even more. I'll remain open-minded, though.

[jmenges]

I’m of the opinion she was Madame Detective, and possibly posted under a different pseudonym a year earlier. There’s no way to prove it though.

JM

[Sam Flynn]

I’m of the opinion she was Madame Detective, and possibly posted under a different pseudonym a year earlier. There’s no way to prove it though.

I thought she hadn't posted anything, but that was before I figured out how to look them up on the new-style Board. Now that I have, I tend to agree with you, Jon. I still think "Madam Detective" is a dodgy nickname, though... perhaps I'm still traumatised by memories of "Amateur Sleuth".

[Wickerman]

It's the same whichever way round. Why would anyone implicate themselves in doing something illegal so openly?

It happens all the time (as, in truth, I'm sure you are well aware).
Street gambling was illegal in the 19th century yet Morris Lewis openly admits to the press he was playing Pitch & Toss in Millers Court.

The only inference that Sarah Lewis and her friend were soliciting comes from interpretation by those who wish to find it.

Be my guest, lets hear a few examples of how a male stranger could refuse to buy a female a drink unless he had been propositioned to do so.

My original point in all of this, and Sarah Lewis was merely an example, is that there would be a variety of reasons for women to be walking/hanging around London in the early hours that only may have involved either prostitution or sleeping rough.

True, and this point has been raised several times in the past. Lewis was just one of many women who could be found on the streets at all hours of the night; shift workers, nurses coming & going from the London Hospital, charwomen, midwives, but also prostitutes. "Laundress" was a common profession claimed by unfortunates of the period. And, in accounts of the time we find it not uncommon for younger prostitutes to go about in pairs.
Given that Millers Court had a reputation for being a haven for prostitutes, the fact those two women were headed for this court is hardly a point in their favor.

[c.d.]

Are there not respected members of this forum who argue that, at the very least, Stride, Eddowes, and Kelly may not have been soliciting at the time of their deaths? Yet none of them then make the leap that they must have been sleeping.

Hello Damaso,

You are right that some members of this forum make that argument but I don't think any of them are respected.

Sorry, couldn't resist that one.

c.d.