Chapman and Kelly's Left Arms

[Bridewell]

What Evidence

What evidence? Who is Blotchy and who is A-man? Since we don't know who they are, we can't confidently say they were clients can we?

Cheers
DRoy

Okay. Evidence amounting to the standard of proof required by a criminal court is lacking but we're looking at historical evidence. On the balance of probabilities, it is difficult to argue that they were anything other than clients, but I'm open to suggestions. What do you propose by way of a credible alternative?

[Bridewell]

Because of the requirement to explain the differences in the M.O. as explained by Michael:
-Overkill and non-removal of the uterus.

You could also call it a "Barnett" scenario where he wanted her off the streets, which explains the overkill and M.O. of someone who knew the victim. But I like the idea that there was no attempt to take the uterus because she is, or represents, someone who birthed his offspring, so I call it the Maybrick scenario.
Either way, if you want Mary to be a Ripper victim, there's lots to explain with a requisite scenario.

Thanks for the reply but I still don't understand the argument that a difference in M.O. necessitates 'accepting a Maybrick scenario' by anyone who believes Kelly was a Ripper victim.

[Hunter]

Mary Kelly's uterus was removed

And left behind under her head, with a breast.

Removed with a knife by her killer nonetheless.

[c.d.]

Mary might have not been overly worried about coming up with her rent money but unless she was not planning on living past the day she was killed I would expect her to be in need of money for food and drink.

I am not sure that it is a valid argument to say that Mary never would have brought a client to her room since there is no evidence that she had ever done so in the past. Would it be equally valid to say that she had never engaged in prostitution right up until the time that she did engage in it?

We also have to consider that the reason that she never brought a client to her room was because she was living with Barnett who apparently disapproved of her profession. Once he is removed from the scene I would think that all bets are off.

c.d.

[lynn cates]

folk music

Hello Jon.

"Can you think of a reason why the Coroner never asked Cox, "what do you think the man wanted?"

Anything come to mind?"

I thought the answer obvious. He wished to be regaled with Irish folk music. (heh-heh)

Cheers.
LC

[GUT]

Sometimes it seems like a miracle that anyone was traced.

[DRoy]

Hi Roy

What have you to say regarding the fact that Blotchy Man was never traced.

Regards

Observer

Observer,

There are many who were not traced. A-Man, Pipeman, BS Man, the two soldiers, the list goes on and on.

Cheers
DRoy

[Observer]

GUT,

Not necessarily that she never would or never has taken a client to her room, but we don't know if her killer, Blotchy or A-man were customers.

Cheers
DRoy

Hi Roy

What have you to say regarding the fact that Blotchy Man was never traced.

Regards

Observer

[GUT]

G'Day DRoy

And never will. Just as we will never know if any of the others were killed by customers.

[DRoy]

And she herself said that she worked in a brothel, so why any doubt that she would do such a thing, as take a client to her room.

GUT,

Not necessarily that she never would or never has taken a client to her room, but we don't know if her killer, Blotchy or A-man were customers.

Cheers
DRoy

[Observer]

Its evidence that a witness claimed to see Mary take someone into her room that was assumed to be a client.....since Georges statement isnt a sound foundation to stand upon, thats hardly a confirmation. There is no witness from the court that stated Mary brought clients into her own room, and there is no evidence that Mary needed money for anything after 2am that morning.

Cheers

What bout Mary Ann Cox Mike? What have you to say regarding the fact that the poor woman had "prostitute" written on her death certificate? Labelled even in death. The police knew Mary Kelly to be a prostitute, the press reported as much. The man seen in the company of Mary Kelly on the night of her murder was not traced, no one apparently knew who the Blotchy man was. I'd say he didn't enter her room that night to hear her sing.

What's more, if I had a good old English quid for every unfounded assumption that you have made here in this Forum I'd be a very wealthy man indeed

Regards

Observer

Observer

[GUT]

From whence the argument that MJK wouldn't have taken clients to her room,

Lizzie Albrook says "About the last thing she said to me was 'Whatever you do don't you do wrong and turn out as I did.' She had often spoken to me in this way and warned me against going on the street as she had done. She told me, too, that she was heartily sick of the life she was leading and wished she had money enough to go back to Ireland where her people lived. I do not believe she would have gone out as she did if she had not been obliged to do so to keep herself from starvation."

And she herself said that she worked in a brothel, so why any doubt that she would do such a thing, as take a client to her room.

[Wickerman]

Its evidence that a witness claimed to see Mary take someone into her room that was assumed to be a client.....

All witnesses make claims, that is why they are called to the Inquest. And, this is an Inquest, not a trial.

...since Georges statement isnt a sound foundation to stand upon, thats hardly a confirmation.

Can you think of anyone today who's opinion matters more than that of Abberline?

...There is no witness from the court that stated Mary brought clients into her own room, and there is no evidence that Mary needed money for anything after 2am that morning.

It is true that Cox never said Blotchy had 'client' tattooed across his forehead, so I'll give you that.

Can you think of a reason why the Coroner never asked Cox, "what do you think the man wanted?"

Anything come to mind?

[Michael W Richards]

Mary Ann Cox says she saw Kelly enter the room with Blotchy. George Hutchinson says he saw her enter the room with Astrakhan Man. How much weight you choose to place on that evidence is a matter of individual judgement but this is evidence that she did take clients to her room.

There is, then, evidence (in the form of eye-witness testimony) that Kelly did take clients to her room.

To clarify, I'm not arguing that every client was taken to her room, simply countering the assertion that none of them were.

Its evidence that a witness claimed to see Mary take someone into her room that was assumed to be a client.....since Georges statement isnt a sound foundation to stand upon, thats hardly a confirmation. There is no witness from the court that stated Mary brought clients into her own room, and there is no evidence that Mary needed money for anything after 2am that morning.

Cheers

[Michael W Richards]

Mary Kelly's uterus was removed.

And left behind under her head, with a breast.

Cheers Mike