Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Help On Some Details

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Wickerman View Post
    The latter part of your query may be answered by reading Barnett's police statement where he says he left her on the 30th, the second reason he gave was:
    "....and her resorting to prostitution".
    She was already earning her own money.
    Do you seriously think a prostitute needs a reason to prostitute herself?, prostitution was all she had ever known.
    .


    Joseph Barnett deposed :

    I lived with her in No. 13 room, at Miller's-court for eight months. I separated from her on Oct. 30.
    [Coroner] Why did you leave her ? - Because she had a woman of bad character there, whom she took in out of compassion, and I objected to it. That was the only reason. I left her on the Tuesday between five and six p.m. I last saw her alive between half-past seven and a quarter to eight on Thursday night last, when I called upon her. I stayed there for a quarter of an hour.
    My name is Dave. You cannot reach me through Debs email account

    Comment


    • Originally posted by DJA View Post
      Elizabeth Prater, a married woman, said:

      [Coroner] Could the witness, Mary Ann Cox, have come down the entry between one and half-past one o'clock without your knowledge ? - Yes, she could have done so.
      Of course.
      There's nothing airtight about any of these stated times.

      There's nothing to say Kelly didn't fall asleep for a hour or so, till after 1:30, then get up an leave.
      We can't rule anything out, and we can't expect proof for every possibility.
      Regards, Jon S.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by DJA View Post
        Joseph Barnett deposed :

        I lived with her in No. 13 room, at Miller's-court for eight months. I separated from her on Oct. 30.
        [Coroner] Why did you leave her ? - Because she had a woman of bad character there, whom she took in out of compassion, and I objected to it. That was the only reason. I left her on the Tuesday between five and six p.m. I last saw her alive between half-past seven and a quarter to eight on Thursday night last, when I called upon her. I stayed there for a quarter of an hour.
        Are you contesting what he told police?
        Regards, Jon S.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Sunny Delight View Post
          It is a fairly straightforward case made extraordinarily complicated by mad hat ideas and crazy theories. Mary Kelly was a casual if not full time Prostitute. Her partner confirms that she allows Prostitutes to stay with her so he leaves meaning she has no money or many options as a female in the 1880's in Whitechapel. On the night of the murder she is soliciting- she picks up a man we call Blotchy . That earns her 6 pence we can assume. She is in arrears. There seems to be a time period unaccounted for where she may have purchased food. No matter she would still require more money for the next day. Food to buy, maybe some rent to pay off to keep McCarthy off her back. She goes back soliciting probably for the last time that night. She runs into George Hutchinson. He is a irregular client- they know each other and she propsitions him. He has no money as he is 'spent out going to Romford'. Why he was there we don't know but it's irrelevant to the case anyways. Kelly bides him good night as he is no use to her now. As he says in his statement a man who he had passed approaches Kelly. Well dressed it is unusual to see such a man in her company( I take this to mean when he told Abberline- a Prostitutes company and not Kelly per se). They go back to Millers Court and Hutchinson watches the court. Strange behaviour. Creepy bebaviour. But nonetheless he leaves at 3 and that is that as far as he is concerned. Kelly is murdered by the Ripper between 3 and her body being discovered at half 10 the next mornning. Medical evidence suggests she had been dead some hours before so we can assume betwwen 1-4:30 am on medical evidence. That leaves Astrachan man as the last person seen with the deceased and if he isn't the killer then Kelly was killed between 3 and half 4 after Hutch had left. In which case if Mrs Kennedy is real Brittania man becomes the prime suspect. Simple.
          Case closed!

          Regards, Jon S.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Sunny Delight View Post
            There is nothing that rules Hutch out of being the killer. He places himself at the scene until 3am. It is only his own word which we havel that he left the scene. But for me he is an honest witness who came forward and told the Police what he had seen like a good citizen. Theories on him being the murderer don't stack up for me. For me Aman is the prime suspect- followed by Brittania man then Blotchy and then Hutchinson. If I can see this 130 years later I am quite sure the Police were following multiple lines of enquiry and were engaged in trying to track down each individual. Hutch as the loiterer made himself known and it seems after an interrogation with a top detective who had 85 commendations on retiring was believed. The other three it seems were never tracked.
            hi SD
            Thanks. yeah I guess it comes down to simply if you believe hutch or not. I do not. gun to head I would say more than likely he was just a lying attention seeker ala packer and violenia. I think aman is more than likely fictional. Abberline wouldnt be the first smart cop to be fooled by a witness/criminal.

            but ive got hutch and blotchy as 1 and 1a as marys killer, followed by the BGB (bethnal green botherer/Britannia man), Barnett and bowyer.


            of course its possible that marys killer could have been other ripper suspects like bury or koz or kelly, but that would involve fitting them up to also be hutch, aman (if he was real) or the bgb.


            I think mary kelly is the key to the case as it seems the circs that night point to her knowing her killer... and that one of the men that witnesses describe either being with her that night (hutch, blotchy barnett) or in the area (bowyer, BGB) were probably her killer and hence the ripper.


            personally I lean toward mary not going out again after blotchy...it was either him or aforementioned men, and they came to her room after blotchy left and she was passed out.
            "Is all that we see or seem
            but a dream within a dream?"

            -Edgar Allan Poe


            "...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
            quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

            -Frederick G. Abberline

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post
              hi DK
              you really think that after Abberline has Blotchy on his mind as a prime suspect -a man with a carroty mustache and blotches on his face, that he wouldn't notice, if blotchy/hutch comes in right after the inquest??
              Not really Abby, note I said slight chance. I am just not 100% discounting it on theories i have of Hutch [maybe 95%]. Again i don't want to sound as if i am championing this theory but Hutch could have shaved his tache and for Blotcy read ruddy as a lot of victorian working men possibly had [complexion].

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post
                hi SD
                Thanks. yeah I guess it comes down to simply if you believe hutch or not. I do not. gun to head I would say more than likely he was just a lying attention seeker ala packer and violenia. I think aman is more than likely fictional. Abberline wouldnt be the first smart cop to be fooled by a witness/criminal.

                but ive got hutch and blotchy as 1 and 1a as marys killer, followed by the BGB (bethnal green botherer/Britannia man), Barnett and bowyer.


                of course its possible that marys killer could have been other ripper suspects like bury or koz or kelly, but that would involve fitting them up to also be hutch, aman (if he was real) or the bgb.


                I think mary kelly is the key to the case as it seems the circs that night point to her knowing her killer... and that one of the men that witnesses describe either being with her that night (hutch, blotchy barnett) or in the area (bowyer, BGB) were probably her killer and hence the ripper.


                personally I lean toward mary not going out again after blotchy...it was either him or aforementioned men, and they came to her room after blotchy left and she was passed out.


                Hi Abby, yes it is a matter of opinion really. It is possible Hutch was an attention seeker and Abberline was taken in. Just not very likely in my opinion. This is a man of immense experience- a man who knew Whitechapel inside out. He was a man with 85 commendations when retiring. So I feel it would be remiss of me to claim that Hutchinson- who Abberline looked in the eye and interrogated- duped the Police. We know next to nothing on George Hutchinson. With that in mind I take Abberlines opinion extremely seriously. He believed him and thus- so do I.


                I think Barnett seems a decent sort. He went on to have a decent life and married. He visits Kelly every night after their break up. He gives her some money if he has it. I would be astonished from what we know if he was the killer. Bowyer is someone we know little on. It seems though he was genuinely shocked and appalled by the sight that met him when he pulled the coat back. Another who would be a very long shot. No for me the killer is one of three- Blotchy, Aman or Brittania man. If you think Hutch is lying- Blotchy is the Ripper. If you believe Hutch then Aman is the most likely killer. If you believe Mrs Kennedy existed and she saw Kelly then Brittania man is the one. As an aside though- Blotchy is by far the suspect whose description fits the others we have. Aman and Brittania man are anomalies in that regard.

                Comment


                • Britannia Man.

                  Would a man so conspicuous by his actions of openly accosting women for their way of living really be capable of being swift, deft and silent while killing before slipping back into the shadows?


                  To me, he sounds more like a spurned punter who's a bit pissed and aggy and so taken it out on a couple of women as he passes through the area. It's not unusual to occasionally come across or be passed by that type of bloke on a night out. To then switch to being a calm, skilled and accomplished killer without drawing attention to himself just before or just after with his agrivated behaviour doesn't seem to quite fit.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Curious Cat View Post
                    Britannia Man.

                    Would a man so conspicuous by his actions of openly accosting women for their way of living really be capable of being swift, deft and silent while killing before slipping back into the shadows?


                    To me, he sounds more like a spurned punter who's a bit pissed and aggy and so taken it out on a couple of women as he passes through the area. It's not unusual to occasionally come across or be passed by that type of bloke on a night out. To then switch to being a calm, skilled and accomplished killer without drawing attention to himself just before or just after with his agrivated behaviour doesn't seem to quite fit.

                    There seems to be a myth that the Ripper was silent when it comes to his crimes but it seems he wasn't. Mrs Long heard him ask Annie Chapman- Will you? Cadosch hears a thud against the fence and if he had have just taken a look over he would have seen the Ripper. Schwartz sees a man physically assault Elizabeth Stride and by most accounts his man is assumed the killer whereas Lawende and his friends saw a man conversing with Eddowes. The Ripper was seen and heard on multiple occasions in the vicinity of his crimes. Brittania man seems to be someone who uses Prostitutes, he is someone who a few nights previous had frightened Lewis and her friend(although he may have felt he was being hustled). He is then seen in the vicinity of the crimes talking to a hatless woman(presumed Mary Kelly). He is certainly a person of interest. But only if you think Mrs Kennedy is real and truthful.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Sunny Delight View Post
                      Hi Abby, yes it is a matter of opinion really. It is possible Hutch was an attention seeker and Abberline was taken in. Just not very likely in my opinion. This is a man of immense experience- a man who knew Whitechapel inside out. He was a man with 85 commendations when retiring. So I feel it would be remiss of me to claim that Hutchinson- who Abberline looked in the eye and interrogated- duped the Police. We know next to nothing on George Hutchinson. With that in mind I take Abberlines opinion extremely seriously. He believed him and thus- so do I.


                      I think Barnett seems a decent sort. He went on to have a decent life and married. He visits Kelly every night after their break up. He gives her some money if he has it. I would be astonished from what we know if he was the killer. Bowyer is someone we know little on. It seems though he was genuinely shocked and appalled by the sight that met him when he pulled the coat back. Another who would be a very long shot. No for me the killer is one of three- Blotchy, Aman or Brittania man. If you think Hutch is lying- Blotchy is the Ripper. If you believe Hutch then Aman is the most likely killer. If you believe Mrs Kennedy existed and she saw Kelly then Brittania man is the one. As an aside though- Blotchy is by far the suspect whose description fits the others we have. Aman and Brittania man are anomalies in that regard.
                      a well reasoned post and I pretty much agree with all of it, except hutch being an honest witness.
                      "Is all that we see or seem
                      but a dream within a dream?"

                      -Edgar Allan Poe


                      "...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
                      quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

                      -Frederick G. Abberline

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Sunny Delight View Post
                        There seems to be a myth that the Ripper was silent when it comes to his crimes but it seems he wasn't. Mrs Long heard him ask Annie Chapman- Will you? Cadosch hears a thud against the fence and if he had have just taken a look over he would have seen the Ripper. Schwartz sees a man physically assault Elizabeth Stride and by most accounts his man is assumed the killer whereas Lawende and his friends saw a man conversing with Eddowes. The Ripper was seen and heard on multiple occasions in the vicinity of his crimes. Brittania man seems to be someone who uses Prostitutes, he is someone who a few nights previous had frightened Lewis and her friend(although he may have felt he was being hustled). He is then seen in the vicinity of the crimes talking to a hatless woman(presumed Mary Kelly). He is certainly a person of interest. But only if you think Mrs Kennedy is real and truthful.
                        agree, compare his appearance and cocky/joky/disarming tone with the man marshal saw with stride the night of the double event-"you would say anything but your prayers". this could very well be the same man.
                        "Is all that we see or seem
                        but a dream within a dream?"

                        -Edgar Allan Poe


                        "...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
                        quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

                        -Frederick G. Abberline

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Sunny Delight View Post
                          There seems to be a myth that the Ripper was silent when it comes to his crimes but it seems he wasn't. Mrs Long heard him ask Annie Chapman- Will you? Cadosch hears a thud against the fence and if he had have just taken a look over he would have seen the Ripper. Schwartz sees a man physically assault Elizabeth Stride and by most accounts his man is assumed the killer whereas Lawende and his friends saw a man conversing with Eddowes. The Ripper was seen and heard on multiple occasions in the vicinity of his crimes. Brittania man seems to be someone who uses Prostitutes, he is someone who a few nights previous had frightened Lewis and her friend(although he may have felt he was being hustled). He is then seen in the vicinity of the crimes talking to a hatless woman(presumed Mary Kelly). He is certainly a person of interest. But only if you think Mrs Kennedy is real and truthful.
                          I meant Mary Kelly's murder specifically.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Wickerman View Post
                            The latter part of your query may be answered by reading Barnett's police statement where he says he left her on the 30th, the second reason he gave was:
                            "....and her resorting to prostitution".
                            She was already earning her own money.
                            Do you seriously think a prostitute needs a reason to prostitute herself?, prostitution was all she had ever known.

                            As to your first point.
                            When you have Kennedy's sighting of Kelly "about 3:00", you dismiss it without reason.
                            When you have Hutchinson's sighting of Kelly about 2:00, you dismiss it without reason.
                            How many sighting do you want, and how many sightings are you going to dismiss, and on what basis?

                            Be honest Michael, no matter how many people claim they saw Kelly out after 1:00 you will dismiss them, and still maintain - "where's the evidence she was out after 1 o'clock?".

                            You have no intention of accepting that scenario.

                            Until some evidence somehow surfaces that someone saw her leave that room after 11:45am, then yes Jon, I have no intention of accepting statements from people I dont know could recognize Mary, or even knew Mary at all. I do not know that Hutch knew Mary at all, nor do I know whether other witnesses saw another working prostitute...like Mary Ann WAS... that night.

                            Barnett also stated that Mary had been reluctant to go out during the scare period that Fall, and we know that despite her being given money by Joe, she was in arrears to the tune of 2-1/2 weeks. I did point out how long Mary had the room to herself Jon, and we know that Barnett ddint let her work..as per other witnesses that also knew Mary.

                            So your premise on this point is thqt on the very first night she could have brought someone home as a client she does so, and instead of sex, offers him a seranade?

                            So you can understand something of human nature Jon, women who go from bawdy house resident or Escort to street whore have very poor work habits and low self esteem. Mary regretted being a whore. She said so. But you believe after she gets bombed, and is already home, and has no history of bringing clients home, and has a recent past that suggests she was not working due to fears and was as a result behind in her rent, which didn't need to be paid that night OR the next day, with all the pubs closed, she goes out for money...she cant spend.

                            That's a very weak premise, and contrary to what is known about the woman called Mary in that bed. This is her second home where she has run arrears.
                            Michael Richards

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Wickerman View Post
                              Yep, and there's Michael's answer to his second dilemma.

                              No, I prefer facts to someones opinion on what a few minutes could mean.
                              Michael Richards

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Curious Cat View Post
                                I meant Mary Kelly's murder specifically.

                                In that regard the two other suspects Blotchy and Astrachan man seem to fair little better to Brittania man. Blotchy is seen enter Mary Kellys room by a witness who gives a description of him whilst Aman is seen and followed by Hutchinson who also hears him speak and offers a very detailed description of him. Unless you fancy that someone else unknown to us was responsible?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X