Was Barnett guilty after all?

[Herlock Sholmes]

or a love octagon comprising Kelly, Barnett, Fleming, Morganstone, the other Joe, hutch, Aman and Blotchy.

I can only imagine that a 'love octagon' must have been extremely tiring Abby

[Sam Flynn]

I thought a polygon was a dead parrot.

He's not dead, just resting

[John G]

There's polygamy, then there's polygony

I thought a polygon was a dead parrot.

[Sam Flynn]

or a love octagon comprising Kelly, Barnett, Fleming, Morganstone, the other Joe, hutch, Aman and Blotchy.

There's polygamy, then there's polygony

[Abby Normal]

Presumably, a triangle comprising Kelly, Barnett and Fleming?

or a love octagon comprising Kelly, Barnett, Fleming, Morganstone, the other Joe, hutch, Aman and Blotchy.

[Sam Flynn]

"Love triangle"?

Presumably, a triangle comprising Kelly, Barnett and Fleming?

[Pierre]

[QUOTE=Michael W Richards;427257]

Harry, Mary Kelly was half the age of the prior victims, was known to be in a love triangle at the time of her murder,

"Love triangle"?

[Michael W Richards]

There isn't, Michael. I could list horrific murders with no prior connection between killer & victim.



Unless he was already in there, i.e. a punter.



Or maybe Mary Kelly was more extensively mutilated because she was killed indoors and because she was the most physically attractive of the victims? If this was a serial killer who enjoyed dehumanizing women (e.g. mutilating & removing their reproductive organs), that would make perfect sense.

Harry, Mary Kelly was half the age of the prior victims, was known to be in a love triangle at the time of her murder, and murdered indoors by candlelight while she was undressed in bed. Hardly the impersonal pick up on the streets and dark alleys. And the first 2 murders in this alleged series have abdominal focus with almost all of the pm knife work. A dedication that is absent in the rest of this so called series.

There is no strong reason to ponder how Polly and Annies killer met them on the respective murder nights, whether he knew them beforehand, and what his objectives were. The evidence suggests that he acted like a client and preyed on women who had been forced onto the streets that night to earn money for a bed that same night. Both of the first 2 victims were also compromised by poverty and state of being on those respective nights,...1 inebriated, 1 ill. The medical expert in the examination of Annie found that almost all the actions taken with a knife were to obtain what he obtained. That same once coveted organ is left under Marys head I believe. The fact that Polly has several of the same attributes, and is less mutilated, is almost certainly due to the venue, which is changed for privacy next time out,...less than 2 weeks after the first.

From those types of killings to a single throat cut a month later, and a kill that appears to have cuts that are amateur and meaningless in nature, then another month plus till someone gets cut to pieces indoors while in her own bed, that's hardly a breadcrumb trail of a single killer.

And you also skipped over the point I was making about multiple murderers at that same place in time, its a fact, not speculation,...like an arbitrary list of victims by a single mad killer,without a single shred of evidence, is ... certainly.

[Harry D]

In the case of the Kelly murder, there is evidence of prior knowledge between victim and predator

There isn't, Michael. I could list horrific murders with no prior connection between killer & victim.

there was a means of access to the room that very few people knew of

Unless he was already in there, i.e. a punter.

and you can fairly say that some of Marys injuries were caused by angry motions, an emotional commitment compared to what were "surgicalesque" cuts on Annie.

Or maybe Mary Kelly was more extensively mutilated because she was killed indoors and because she was the most physically attractive of the victims? If this was a serial killer who enjoyed dehumanizing women (e.g. mutilating & removing their reproductive organs), that would make perfect sense.

[Michael W Richards]

I believe that there is already proof that multiple killers existed within the confines of the East End during the Fall of Terror, so its an argument that history has already dealt with. There were multiple killers, lets just look for better arguments as to why 4 of the Five women suspected of being connected by the same lone killer were mutilated.

Were they mutilated in similar fashion? Well..., yes..., and no. Were there specific actions that may have revealed the objective of the killings? Some, yes. Did all the women match in profile? Yes...., and no. Is there any evidence that suggests prior knowledge of each other, killer and victim, prior to the murder? Well, no.....and yes.

The list of contrary's goes on and on. And this is only addressing a mere 5 of the 13 women in the Unsolved Files for that period.

In the case of the Kelly murder, there is evidence of prior knowledge between victim and predator, there was a means of access to the room that very few people knew of, and you can fairly say that some of Marys injuries were caused by angry motions, an emotional commitment compared to what were "surgicalesque" cuts on Annie. Those factors suggest that Barnett should have been looked at very closely, and that the other Joe she acknowledged she was seeing should have been as well. The problem is we don't know who he was, only that he sometimes treated Mary roughly.

[John Wheat]

Statistically, I'll take a post-mortem mutilator whose signature was evolving/escalating rather than multiple killers treading on each other's toes in a small corner of the East End.

I will too Harry.

[Harry D]

I don't claim that Marys killing was a copycat, it is hardly reminiscent of either of the first 2 Canonical murders, the ONLY ones I'm convinced that were by the same lone individual killer. I suggest that slicing her up suggests a killer who slices up women, the fact that almost all the actions taken were superfluous and completely unnecessary to extract and remove her heart...which is the only organ taken....shows us that the focus demonstrated in Annies killing for example is lacking in the room 13 killing.

I only speculate about serial killers when there is some evidence of one. In 5 murders, when 2 or 3 are very unlike the other 2, I don't see a series. I see a double murder, maybe 3.

Statistically, I'll take a post-mortem mutilator whose signature was evolving/escalating rather than multiple killers treading on each other's toes in a small corner of the East End.

[Michael W Richards]

Catherine Eddowes' killer also mutilated the face. Not to the same extent, sure, but this trajectory fits with a serial killer whose violence was increasing with each victim.

Furthermore, don't you see the contradiction in claiming that MJK's murder was a copycat on account of the extreme overkill, whilst arguing that the killer butchered her to this extent to frame the Ripper?

I don't claim that Marys killing was a copycat, it is hardly reminiscent of either of the first 2 Canonical murders, the ONLY ones I'm convinced that were by the same lone individual killer. I suggest that slicing her up suggests a killer who slices up women, the fact that almost all the actions taken were superfluous and completely unnecessary to extract and remove her heart...which is the only organ taken....shows us that the focus demonstrated in Annies killing for example is lacking in the room 13 killing.

I only speculate about serial killers when there is some evidence of one. In 5 murders, when 2 or 3 are very unlike the other 2, I don't see a series. I see a double murder, maybe 3.

[Harry D]

There is evidence of everyday violence there Harry...her defense wounds and the facial slashes for 2 examples. The utter destruction of Mary need not have been a motive at all, it may only have occurred because her killer deteriorated mentally during this attack...or it may have occurred to create a scenario where an unidentified killer suspected of other mutilation murders is the obvious suspect. Thereby directing suspicions away from her personal acquaintances.

Thing is...these mutilations were not focused on the abdomen, (Polly and Annies were), these extractions led to the removal of organs previously sought but strangely left behind in odd placements..(under her head, by her feet),...and there is quite a bit of removal of flesh from bone, something not seen in any other alleged Ripper murder.

The carnage was not focused at all, but some angry wounds were.

Catherine Eddowes' killer also mutilated the face. Not to the same extent, sure, but this trajectory fits with a serial killer whose violence was increasing with each victim.

Furthermore, don't you see the contradiction in claiming that MJK's murder was a copycat on account of the extreme overkill, whilst arguing that the killer butchered her to this extent to frame the Ripper?

[Michael W Richards]

There's violence and then there's violence, Michael.

There is evidence of everyday violence there Harry...her defense wounds and the facial slashes for 2 examples. The utter destruction of Mary need not have been a motive at all, it may only have occurred because her killer deteriorated mentally during this attack...or it may have occurred to create a scenario where an unidentified killer suspected of other mutilation murders is the obvious suspect. Thereby directing suspicions away from her personal acquaintances.

Thing is...these mutilations were not focused on the abdomen, (Polly and Annies were), these extractions led to the removal of organs previously sought but strangely left behind in odd placements..(under her head, by her feet),...and there is quite a bit of removal of flesh from bone, something not seen in any other alleged Ripper murder.

The carnage was not focused at all, but some angry wounds were.