The Night She Died

[FrankO]

That doesn't give him surprise or proximity....

Hi Michael,

Why wouldn't someone she'd let into her room have any surprise or proximity any time before she was in bed? What I would have found strange is if she'd let him expecting him to attack her. So, sure he could surprise her. Furthermore, it was a small room, so I think there's no reason to think that he could only have gotten close enough to her while she was on the bed. Also, although it makes sense, it isn't a fact that the Ripper attacked his victims from behind.

The cry at 3:45am if Mary, logically cannot be her discovering she is being attacked in her room. There is no sound that follows that cry, and we know that Mary did use her hand to try and fend off slices or slashes.

This is logic I don't understand. If the cry of 'Murder' was in fact Mary Jane's, logic tells me that she was dead (almost) right after that one cry. In other words, that cry would not just mark the start of the attack, but also the end. It makes perfect sense if the attack took no more than just a few seconds. Also, it would perfectly fit with the medical evidence regarding the wounds on her right hand.

So, at some point she realises what's going to happen, only has time to raise her right hand in a weak attempt to ward off the knife and cry out a single cry, and then it's over, she's dead. So no other sounds follow the cry because she's already dead. That's perfectly in keeping with all the evidence at our disposal.

One quesion before 'leaving you to it': do you think that, if MJ's killer was known to her, he killed her out of the blue and without any 'verbal prelude', or was it a premeditated thing?

All the best,
Frank

[Robert]

Hi Gareth

Another time, another thread. I'm still a sheet-over-face man.

[richardnunweek]

Hi,
Once again, I stand alone in my conviction .
Everyone is desperate to find a solution to many mysteries, concerning Millers Court.
One being, why did her killer [Jtr] wait until Mary was nearly undressed before moving in? answers include.. Sexual foreplay,or she was already asleep, and an intruder was likely.
I consider the most likely explanation would be, that she was alone in her room when she started to undress, and her killer entered her room by invitation.
And as police investigations to any murder ususal pinpoint the last person to have seen that person alive as a starter, we should take that in Kellys case ,the market porter seen by Maxwell would have to be investigated, and cleared of any involvement.
Medical reports given by the police doctors with both Chapman/Kelly were simply not accurate.
The most likely scenerio that morning was Kelly was alive up to, and for a short time after meeting her killer outside The Britanica'.
That is why the bedroll was rolled up, the fire lit, and her wet boots placed near the fire, and why the killer could enter her room, without any alarm from Kelly.
She simply said give me five minutes, my room is the second door on the right down the passage, i will be ready for you.
This would have suited both Mary, and killer, as she would not have advertised the obvious in daylight, and he would not have been seen with what was to be his victim, walking together back to the room.
The cry' Oh Murder' was simply a nightmare, and as she told Maxwell 'The Horrors of drink'.
Simplicity, and no complicated mystery.
JTR. was proberly seen by two witnesses , Mrs Long [Hanbury street] and Mrs Maxwell [ Dorset street] that being the case a shortish man, around 50years old would be suspect.
I appreciate this leaves out Barnett/Flemming, however attitudes change as the years go by on Casebook.......
Regards Richard.

[Ben]

Thanks for the kind words, Jez.

As far as this discussion goes, though, I'm reasonably confident that I expressed none of my opinions as though they were facts. If anything, I was trying to emphasise the viable possibilities that exist when contemplating the manner in which the killer approached his victims.

[Jez]

Au contraire, Ben, your views are extremely valid. I just wish you would present them more as opinions sometimes rather than opinionated facts.
But for all that, you're a top geezer.

[Ben]

Those are all viable suggestions, Jez, none of which can be ruled out. However, the identity of the killer has very little to do with my views on the manner in which the killer approached this particular crime.

Chava - If you're interested in other eyewitness comparisons with Blotchy, perhaps the best is Ada Wilson's description of her attacker - 5'6, fair moustache, sunburnt complexion, and wore a wideawake (which is the same as a "billycock").

Ben

[Jez]

So who did it Ben? Have you a name? Was it somebody she once knew well who stripped the skin off her shins? Was it a close personal friend? Was it a total stranger?

[Chava]

I would really love to finger Blotchy Face for this. Not least because Stride was seen with a man with a dark moustache and sandy eyelashes, and in my experience you don't see that particular combination! Blotchy Face had a sandy moustache. Maybe he had eyelashes that matched, I bet he did. Maybe when he went after Stride he darkened his moustache for a disguise...

...and yet...

We know for sure that Kelly sang for an hour after she let Blotchy Face into the room. A number of people heard her, not just Cox. I just don't see him hanging around that long. He'd wait until she drew a breath and he'd jump her!

Of course there's nothing stopping him 'forgetting something' and coming back. She'd let him in. But if he wanted to kill her, I suspect he'd kill her the first chance he got. And that would be when he went in at 11.45 pm.

[Ben]

Well, I've never seen any reason to doubt that Kelly was killed by JTR, but I don't see why it should be considered a "far greater probability" that she encountered her killer as a client on the streets rather than the killer either breaking in as Rob suggested or turning up and being invited in, especially when we know that other serial killers have been shown to alter their pre-crime strategies as they "alter" their crime venues.

[Jez]

The "far greater probability" is that she met a client who turned out to be JTR -possibly a complete stranger to her. I had the misguided impression [?] that you disagreed with this.

[Ben]

I know it's hard to accept, Ben, but a serial killer was on the loose

Umm...

Sorry, how would the fact that a serial killer was on the loose (why would I find that hard to accept?) influence the question of whether she fell victim to a client she'd met on the streets or someone who had killed her as she slept? We know that other serial killers are quite capable of varying their method of approach, which was why I referenced Napper and Bundy, so I'm afraid your "far greater probability" is demonstrably nothing of the sort.

[Jez]

I agree that the "No" heard from Cadosch is as likely to have been a conversational negative rather than a cry for help. But I fail to see the deductive stance that Mary Kelly was asleep when attacked. The far greater probability is that she was killed and mutilated by a client she had met on the streets. I know it's hard to accept, Ben, but a serial killer was on the loose.

[Ben]

Hi Mike,

Which makes me believe the attack happened when both the soon to be victim and the ear witnesses were not awake

That's precisely my point.

Kelly wakes up at the beginning of the attack after being surprised by her killer while sleeping. She calls out, and is heard by a couple of witnesses. After that, he doesn't have to wait for her to "fall asleep again". He just kills her.

Incidentally, as Chapman was awake and seemingly could only manage a feeble "No!", then quite how an allegedly drink-anaesthetised, sleeping Kelly managed a loud-ish "Oh, Murder!" is rather baffling.

Depends on the severity of the interruption, I'd say, Gareth. Strictly speaking, it isn't proven that Chapman's "no" was exclamatory. It was simply one word that Cadosch was able to discern, and could have formed part of the pre-crime "inveigling" act:

"Does this deerstalker make me look shabby-genteel?"

"No."

[Sam Flynn]

When the cry is heard, 3 people are awake....Mary, if she called out, .. Sarah and Elizabeth. If that isn't the beginning of an attack...which it seems it wasn't

It seems that it wasn't? What makes you think that, Mike?

Why couldn't also indicate that she was surprised in her sleep by someone she didn't let it and wasn't expecting?

Hey Ben,

Because the obvious struggle that does occur during the actual attack, by Marys defensive wounds, would have created noise that Elizabeth was now awake and listening for. That noise never came. Which makes me believe the attack happened when both the soon to be victim and the ear witnesses were not awake. That addresses Mary's surprise factor, and the lack of anyone else hearing noises.

When the cry is heard, 3 people are awake....Mary, if she called out, .. Sarah and Elizabeth. If that isn't the beginning of an attack...which it seems it wasn't, then her killer has to remain in close proximity to her while she falls asleep again.

How many men would she let sit in her dark room while she falls asleep in her underwear? Any strangers fit that mold?

Im trying to "Holmes" this one ...by following logical thought progression.

Cheers Ben