Who was the first clothes-puller?

[Robert]

Hi Fish

Question : do you think he killed Kelly on his way to work?

Re Mrs Cross, OK he has to be wary of her - he cannot go out at the wrong times, or in the wrong clothes, because she'll notice and start asking questions. But she doesn't notice any blood on his clothes?

[Lechmere]

The other thing to bear in mind about Cross giving Cross as his name, is that when he approached Mizen, supposedly he was not sure whether Polly was alive or dead. There also was no Ripper scare at large.
Also we have no record of Cross using Cross as his name at all. He was listed as Cross by his step father in 1861 when he was 12. He never used it again in any census, marriage (including those of his many children), christening (of his children), electoral registration or school record (of his children). There are a wealth of records through which we can trace his life.

The manner in which he approached Paul is that supposedly of someone who had seen a woman lying on the ground from halfway across the road. Not someone who had found a dead body.

[Fisherman]

Harry:

"Perhaps, it not being unusual in those days to pass persons lying out on the streets.and there not being any telltale signs that anything was wrong,Cross did not pay particular attention.Not unusual in London even in these days."

Well, he did say to Mizen that he thought the woman was dead. But just like you say, the streets would probably have had many people lying about, drunkards not least.

"W as his wife illiterate?"

Yes, she was. She did not master the art of writing.

The best,
Fisherman

[Fisherman]

Curious:

"Unless, he could not afford to take much time off from work and dressed for work so that the second he was released from the inquest, he could go finish the day???"

I think Paul stated that he was not very happy about the inquest, since it forced him to take a day off with no wages. The same, I believe, would have applied to Cross.

The best,
Fisherman

[Fisherman]

Robert:

"Question : do you think he killed Kelly on his way to work?"

Can´t say, Robert, but I do see the implications, with all the blood and such. What we CAN tell is that Nichols, Chapman and Kelly all tied in quite well with his way to work, geographically.

"Re Mrs Cross, OK he has to be wary of her - he cannot go out at the wrong times, or in the wrong clothes, because she'll notice and start asking questions. But she doesn't notice any blood on his clothes?"

If it was there, she would probably have noticed. So either it was not, or Cross provided an explanation of some sort. But I think, basically, most people will agree that he may not have had much - if any- blood on his clothes. It´s not as if the killer would have been bathed in it. Presumably, the relative (or total) lack of it would belong to the details that made the Ripper able to sneak away after the killings.

The best,
Fisherman

[lynn cates]

Kate

Hello Christer. Just out of curiosity, why do you think that Kate had her dress torn open and cut through--not lifted up?

Seems so different in her case.

Cheers.
LC

[Fisherman]

Lynn:

"Just out of curiosity, why do you think that Kate had her dress torn open and cut through--not lifted up?

Seems so different in her case."

It does! But if we work from the assumption that the same man killed Nichols, Chapman, Eddowes and Kelly, then two, possibly three suggestions to solutions to the riddle leaps to my mind:

1. As Eddowes went down on the ground, she may have ended up in a position that "locked" her clothing to the ground, making it hard to throw it up over her. You may remember that Robert Paul mentioned that he tried to pull Nichols´clothes further down than to her knees, but he did not manage to do so since the clothing was restrained, probably by Nichols´own weight. Something similar may have applied with Eddowes, especially if her clothes had a more tight fit than the others.

2. It involved some sort of gratification to him, to cut through the clothes. It makes it all a more "crude" deed, and maybe he liked that idea as such. Maybe he was so excited that he could not wait? It would make those who like Stride as an interrupted victim happy, if this was so ...

3. He felt more pressed for time in Mitre Square (maybe the door left ajar in Kearly & Tonge´s warehouse let out the sounds of George Morris doing the rounds?), and thought it would be swifter to cut through the clothes.

[Robert]

Hi Fish

Well, the fly in your ointment is Kelly, because there you have a blood problem, and a time problem. I remember Shannon Christopher arguing that even with Kelly, the whole thing need only have taken 20 minutes or so, and the killer need not have got much blood on him. I find that extremely difficult to believe, but for the sake of argument let's say that Shannon was right in this, but wrong with the time of death (he thought it was a daylight murder). So we would have the Kelly murder occurring around 4 AM. If you move Chapman's death back to around that time, you then have three murders occurring at roughly the same time in the morning. One objection would be that the Kelly murder seems to have been botched in comparison with the others, which tells against the "Cross as super planner" idea. But if you put that down to, say, bad luck, you're left with three murders in close geographical proximity to each other, and at roughly the same time in the morning, with perhaps some flexibility allowed regarding the start of Cross's working day.
But there's still a problem with Stride and Eddowes (or just Eddowes if you like). Even if Cross worked that Sunday, and even if you brought forward his time of starting work to, say, 2 or 2.30, the question is why would he take this roundabout route to work?

[lynn cates]

but also . . .

Hello Christer. Thanks for that.

It seems, however, that if it were very difficult to pull DOWN Polly's skirt, pulling UP should have been difficult as well. Same weight, etc.

In #2, yes, they would, as both seem deus ex machina. And such gratification should have been operative before--with Polly and Annie?

More pressed for time than in an open street or a back yard where many should be about to rise for the day?

Cheers.
LC

[Fisherman]

Lynn:

"It seems, however, that if it were very difficult to pull DOWN Polly's skirt, pulling UP should have been difficult as well. Same weight, etc."

Yes, but not the exact same position nor the exact same tailor - meaning that the fit of the clothes may have played a role - if this was the genuine reason. It is nothing more than a suggestion as it stands, and as they say in the old Western movies: You asked for it!

In #2, yes, they would, as both seem deus ex machina. And such gratification should have been operative before--with Polly and Annie?

Remember that we are perhaps dealing with something as volatile as the human mind and sexuality, Lynn!

"More pressed for time than in an open street or a back yard where many should be about to rise for the day?"

I never said that the reaction was necessarily logical - we are dealing with irrational things when people are spooked. But one may make the assumption, perhaps, that the Hanbury Street backyard MAY have been totally silent, at least before Cadosh got up, whereas the magazine door in Mitre Square may have emitted the sound of Morris´efforts throughout. I don´t know, Lynn, but I DO know that our minds are not always totally rational.

In the end, the cut clothes on Eddowes IS an anomaly - but perhaps with a good explanation.

The best,
Fisherman

[Fisherman]

Robert:

"the fly in your ointment is Kelly, because there you have a blood problem, and a time problem."

We have a potential blood problem and a potential time problem. Dealing with the latter first, I think it is not written in stone that the "Oh, murder!" cry (or cries?) signposted the time of death. I am not even sure that there WAS such an outcry, to begin with.
As for the blood issue, there are all sorts of bids around. Some of them include a scenario where the killer stripped, and therefore piled fuel on the fire. I can´t say how credible such a thing would be, but in essence we have NEITHER a proven blood OR time problem, only good indications that they may have been around.

"there's still a problem with Stride and Eddowes (or just Eddowes if you like). Even if Cross worked that Sunday, and even if you brought forward his time of starting work to, say, 2 or 2.30, the question is why would he take this roundabout route to work?"

It would seem, Robert - and here I rely on Lechmere´s good work and research - that there is good reason to accept that Charles Cross had an aquaintance living at an address that was easily accessible by walking Berner Street down. This of course opens for a scenario where he visits this aquaintance on that Sunday, leaves the place, kills Stride, misses out on the evisceration part and sets out in search of a new victim.

This is one of the reasons why I say that Charles Allen Lechmere has a lot more going for him than most - if not any - suspects. He ties in geographically with the victims in a way that no other suspect comes even close to.

But to get a fuller picture, Lechmere is the specialist out on the boards in this case, by far.

All the best,
Fisherman

[Robert]

Hi Fish

Even without the cry, there are still things about the Kelly murder which don't look to me like "vintage Ripper." But anyway, that's extremely interesting about the acquaintance living near Berner St. I had been toying with the idea that he might have passed that way earlier, in connection with Schwarz's house move, but then, the case is littered with coincidences. If one includes Stride, then something Caz said recently is interesting. She said something like "Why would the anarchists tell lies when they knew that the premises might be under police observation?" You could apply the same reasoning to the murder. Why would Jack kill at the risk of being observed? It would seem to suggest either a killer who was desperate, impulsive or in some sense disorganized, or else a killer who wasn't particularly familiar with the area.

[lynn cates]

But then, again . . .

Hello Christer.

"Remember that we are perhaps dealing with something as volatile as the human mind and sexuality, Lynn!'

Yes, but NOT so volatile from Polly to Annie.

"[O]ne may make the assumption, perhaps, that the Hanbury Street backyard MAY have been totally silent, at least before Cadosh got up"

Perhaps so. But if Mrs. Long got it right and she were a genuine witness, it certainly wasn't silent when the assailant--if such he were--was close to the shutters and talking loudly with Annie.

"In the end, the cut clothes on Eddowes IS an anomaly - but perhaps with a good explanation."

Hmm, well, I can think of an EXCELLENT explanation! (Heh-heh)

Cheers.
LC

[Fisherman]

Robert:

"Why would Jack kill at the risk of being observed? It would seem to suggest either a killer who was desperate, impulsive or in some sense disorganized, or else a killer who wasn't particularly familiar with the area."

Mmmm; been there too! And in a sense, whenever one tries the Ripper shackles on a new suspect, one needs to find a functioning psychology behind it. And I think that Cross/Lechmere has a lot going for him in that department too, but I will not go any further into it, since I have not done the research myself.

The best,
Fisherman

[Fisherman]

Lynn:

"I can think of an EXCELLENT explanation!"

I bet you can, Lynn!

The best,
Fisherman