The Night She Died

Hello all,

I believe its accurate to state that the only Canonical victim that has strong suggestions of "intimacy" between the killer and the victim, is the murder in Millers Court.

Its a tiny intimate room, 2 chairs 2 small tables...Mary is in a state of undress, on her bed...its later than one might expect to receive strangers at the door. By the surroundings and her manner of dress, its also the only murder that has overt sexual tones...late at night, Marys undressed and in bed...she is found posed almost "provocatively" in a reclining "come hither" pose....some feel this is accidental, I dont myself. Look at sketches of models from the period by famous artists....the pose is similar to those.

What if any indications are there that the killer of the 4 Canonicals prior craved or wanted greater levels of intimacy between he and his victims?

It seems to me that after charming them to someplace dark, he treated them without any regard for their humanity, or femininity..almost as a butcher would treat a piece of meat. The only real sexual overtones in those murders would be the site of the mutilations, and the position of the womens legs. And both those issues are resolved when you consider that he apparently wanted to cut them in the abdomens. Their demeanor and pose is therefore logical,.. so he could accomplish his goals.

Propping Marys head up with a breast is not in that logical realm.

On that item.....if a bolster is a rectangular pillow, stuffed with feathers, used at the head of the bed to prop oneself up to read, or to talk with someone in the room, or knit...whatever, then where it is placed makes sense...if the person in the bed wished to lie flatter when sleeping. They could then just place it on the table beside them. Who knows how often Mary cleaned the floors...she may have put it there to keep it off dirty flooring.

Brings up a point....if Marys head is propped up by a breast....then its most likely the bolster wasn't under her at that time,...which would reasonably suggest that she had placed it there herself earlier....before getting ready to sleep lying flat. Why would the killer have moved it if he wanted her head propped up anyway...as he evidently did.

Best regards all.

[Chava]

Hi Robert,

I don't necessarily believe that the murder of Mary Jane Kelly was sexual as I'm not completely convinced she was a victim of the Ripper. However I do believe that the other canonicals were sexual murders. One of the reasons why I'm not sure about Kelly is the general pattern of wounding rather than the concentration on the generative organs we see in the others. It's difficult, because you could argue that the wounds inflicted on the face in the Eddowes murder were transitional, and we see him move to a more general pattern in Kelly. I waver back and forward on this one. But one of my main reasons for thinking that Kelly may not have been a Ripper victim is that I believe she was either surprised in her sleep by someone breaking in--which could argue a stalker, and we don't know for sure, but it doesn't look like the others were stalked--or she was woken up by someone she knew knocking on the door and let him in. Because she was certainly found dressed for bed, and I don't see the Ripper allowing his victims that much time before he kills them. I think if it was a Ripper murder and she'd brought in the worst trick, he would have killed her as soon as he walked in the door.

[Robert]

Hi Chava

If you believe that the murder was sexual, but that Jack was not a client who had been taken home, could you give a scenario, e.g. Jack stalks Kelly and waits till she's alone, or he comes along in the middle of the night and peers through the window..........

[Sam Flynn]

And please can someone give a reason why the crocodile, alias the bolster should have been slung over the table?
My answer... Mary put it there.

Possibly - can't see why the killer would have wanted to move it, still less place it neatly on the table.

Reason....

... the bolster was not on the bed that night, indicating that Mary was not sleeping, nor intending to sleep, at the point she died?

It had been used as a draught excluder at the base of her door, as it was not used as a head rest. It had been placed there when Mjk ventured out...

Ah - can't quite see that, Rich. Why would you put a bolster-cum-draught excluder on the bedside table? More to the point, why not just leave it by the door - kicking it aside perhaps - or simply put it back on the bed?

[richardnunweek]

Hi Robert,
Its a case of having too, at least it didnt duplicate thirty nine times...
Richard.

[Robert]

Richard, you believe in driving home your point.

[richardnunweek]

Hi
What the Hell happened there , now that is a multiple post if ever I saw one, my PC must have been poccessed.
Sorry one again.
Richard.

[richardnunweek]

Hi Chava,
I have always had the opinion that the blanket was placed in that area by Mary, as you you rightly said 'It would only have been put there if it was not wanted'
Precisely..like having no need for it until the next night.
And please can someone give a reason why the crocodile, alias the bolster should have been slung over the table?
My answer... Mary put it there.
Reason. It had been used as a draught excluder at the base of her door, as it was not used as a head rest.
It had been placed there when Mjk ventured out around 8am on the morning of the 9th, some 45 minutes before she encountered her killer.
We are all conjuring up all these night scenerios, ie..
She was killed by a very patient 'Astracan'
She was disturbed by a intruder.
Could he have been Hutchinson?
Mrs Prater proberly made up her evidence.
The killer made a fire to obtain light.
The killer rolled back the bedroll [with one hand]
That bolster is a gigantic lump of flesh.
The white object around the blanket although shaped like one, is not a stocking[ left leg].
And theres more...
Why cant we simply suggest [ like myself[ that medical reports were no more then educated guesswork based on reports of a possible cry heard.
Why can we not believe Praters inquest report of 'Awaken from a nightmare', especially as that observation is backed up by a report some three years after.?
Summing up.
Why can we not say, Mary Jane, alias Ginger, alias Black Mary, alias, Mary Jane McCarthy, alias Mary Jane Lawrence, alias Mary Kelly, alias Marie, Jeanette, alias Mary Jane Davies, was actually killed around 9am by the last person seen with her, ie, One middle aged Market porter?.
Then everything falls into place.
Regards Richard.

[richardnunweek]

Hi Chava,
I have always had the opinion that the blanket was placed in that area by Mary, as you you rightly said 'It would only have been put there if it was not wanted'
Precisely..like having no need for it until the next night.
And please can someone give a reason why the crocodile, alias the bolster should have been slung over the table?
My answer... Mary put it there.
Reason. It had been used as a draught excluder at the base of her door, as it was not used as a head rest.
It had been placed there when Mjk ventured out around 8am on the morning of the 9th, some 45 minutes before she encountered her killer.
We are all conjuring up all these night scenerios, ie..
She was killed by a very patient 'Astracan'
She was disturbed by a intruder.
Could he have been Hutchinson?
Mrs Prater proberly made up her evidence.
The killer made a fire to obtain light.
The killer rolled back the bedroll [with one hand]
That bolster is a gigantic lump of flesh.
The white object around the blanket although shaped like one, is not a stocking[ left leg].
And theres more...
Why cant we simply suggest [ like myself[ that medical reports were no more then educated guesswork based on reports of a possible cry heard.
Why can we not believe Praters inquest report of 'Awaken from a nightmare', especially as that observation is backed up by a report some three years after.?
Summming up.
Why can we not say, Mary Jane, alias Ginger, alias Black Mary, alias, Mary Jane McCarthy, alias Mary Jane Lawrence, alias Mary Kelly, alias Marie, Jeanette, alias Mary Jane Davies, was actually killed around 9am by the last person seen with her, ie, One middle aged Market porter?.
Then everything falls into place.
Regards Richard.

[richardnunweek]

Hi Chava,
I have always had the opinion that the blanket was placed in that area by Mary, as you you rightly said 'It would only have been put there if it was not wanted'
Precisely..like having no need for it until the next night.
And please can someone give a reason why the crocodile, alias the bolster should have been slung over the table?
My answer... Mary put it there.
Reason. It had been used as a draught excluder at the base of her door, as it was not used as a head rest.
It had been placed there when Mjk ventured out around 8am on the morning of the 9th, some 45 minutes before she encountered her killer.
We are all conjuring up all these night scenerios, ie..
She was killed by a very patient 'Astracan'
She was disturbed by a intruder.
Could he have been Hutchinson?
Mrs Prater proberly made up her evidence.
The killer made a fire to obtain light.
The killer rolled back the bedroll [with one hand]
That bolster is a gigantic lump of flesh.
The white object around the blanket although shaped like one, is not a stocking[ left leg].
And theres more...
Why cant we simply suggest [ like myself[ that medical reports were no more then educated guesswork based on reports of a possible cry heard.
Why can we not believe Praters inquest report of 'Awaken from a nightmare', especially as that observation is backed up by a report some three years after.?
Summming up.
Why can we not say, Mary Jane, alias Ginger, alias Black Mary, alias, Mary Jane McCarthy, alias Mary Jane Lawrence, alias Mary Kelly, alias Marie, Jeanette, alias Mary Jane Davies, was actually killed around 9am by the last person seen with her, ie, One middle aged Market porter?.
Then everything falls into place.
Regards Richard.

[richardnunweek]

Hi Chava,
I have always had the opinion that the blanket was placed in that area by Mary, as you you rightly said 'It would only have been put there if it was not wanted'
Precisely..like having no need for it until the next night.
And please can someone give a reason why the crocodile, alias the bolster should have been slung over the table?
My answer... Mary put it there.
Reason. It had been used as a draught excluder at the base of her door, as it was not used as a head rest.
It had been placed there when Mjk ventured out around 8am on the morning of the 9th, some 45 minutes before she encountered her killer.
We are all conjuring up all these night scenerios, ie..
She was killed by a very patient 'Astracan'
She was disturbed by a intruder.
Could he have been Hutchinson?
Mrs Prater proberly made up her evidence.
The killer made a fire to obtain light.
The killer rolled back the bedroll [with one hand]
That bolster is a gigantic lump of flesh.
The white object around the blanket although shaped like one, is not a stocking[ left leg].
And theres more...
Why cant we simply suggest [ like myself[ that medical reports were no more then educated guesswork based on reports of a possible cry heard.
Why can we not believe Praters inquest report of 'Awaken from a nightmare', especially as that observation is backed up by a report some three years after.?
Summming up.
Why can we not say, Mary Jane, alias Ginger, alias Black Mary, alias, Mary Jane McCarthy, alias Mary Jane Lawrence, alias Mary Kelly, alias Marie, Jeanette, alias Mary Jane Davies, was actually killed around 9am by the last person seen with her, ie, One middle aged Market porter?.
Then everything falls into place.
Regards Richard.

[richardnunweek]

Hi Chava,
I have always had the opinion that the blanket was placed in that area by Mary, as you you rightly said 'It would only have been put there if it was not wanted'
Precisely..like having no need for it until the next night.
And please can someone give a reason why the crocodile, alias the bolster should have been slung over the table?
My answer... Mary put it there.
Reason. It had been used as a draught excluder at the base of her door, as it was not used as a head rest.
It had been placed there when Mjk ventured out around 8am on the morning of the 9th, some 45 minutes before she encountered her killer.
We are all conjuring up all these night scenerios, ie..
She was killed by a very patient 'Astracan'
She was disturbed by a intruder.
Could he have been Hutchinson?
Mrs Prater proberly made up her evidence.
The killer made a fire to obtain light.
The killer rolled back the bedroll [with one hand]
That bolster is a gigantic lump of flesh.
The white object around the blanket although shaped like one, is not a stocking[ left leg].
And theres more...
Why cant we simply suggest [ like myself[ that medical reports were no more then educated guesswork based on reports of a possible cry heard.
Why can we not believe Praters inquest report of 'Awaken from a nightmare', especially as that observation is backed up by a report some three years after.?
Summming up.
Why can we not say, Mary Jane, alias Ginger, alias Black Mary, alias, Mary Jane McCarthy, alias Mary Jane Lawrence, alias Mary Kelly, alias Marie, Jeanette, alias Mary Jane Davies, was actually killed around 9am by the last person seen with her, ie, One middle aged Market porter?.
Then everything falls into place.
Regards Richard.

[Ben]

Yep, I'd tend to agree with that, Chava.

[Chava]

This is hard to explain without hand-gestures, but if that (I presume woollen) blanket was lying over her, and the killer wanted to get it out of the way easily, the easiest thing to do would be to reach over and fold the part covering her legs back towards the middle, fold the part covering her upper body back over that, and then roll the whole thing to the side. And that is what it looks like to me. The whole operation would take about 5 seconds and he could do it with one (left) hand. The problem with woollen blankets is that they are heavy and hard to manoeuvre. If he tries to pull it off and throw it to the floor, it might drag or snag, especially if it was wet. And it would make a noise hitting the ground as well. Wool, in those days before flannelette and nylon mixtures, was coarse and heavy. If I were in his position I would fold it as above and bundle it out of the way. And that is what I believe he did.

By the way, even if Kelly was a very neat and particular person, I would be surprised to see her blanket folded rather than laid out on top of the top sheet and possibly tucked in. You'd only leave the blanket folded if you weren't expecting to use it. There's no advantage in having to come home and make your bed before you fall into it, especially if you like a drink of an evening. However she may have expected to bring clients there and not wanted to soil her bed-linen. In which case she wouldn't have left her top sheet on the bed. For if the blanket's off, surely the top sheet would be as well? And for that again, if she was leaving her blanket folded, why is it lying on the far side of the bed and halfway up the bed and more or less against the wall rather than neatly at the foot of the bed where it's so much easier to deal with? All you need to do is just pull it up and there you are! If it's folded on the side you have to wrangle it. It's much easier to fold a blanket up like that than to unfold it. The former you can do with one hand. The latter you'll need both hands and a bit of distance from the bed to shake it out.

(I don't know if I'm making sense here but I am doing my best to explain myself under very difficult circumstances!)

[Ben]

Hi Stephen,

All I can discern from the Kelly photograph are some bedclothes that have been bunched up in some fashion, and it's worth bearing in mind that we can only see part of the bedclothes in question. It would have taken some effort to compact it into a small folded bunch prior to it being tied together, and I'd be very surpised if Kelly ever had occasion to go to such meticulous lengths.

Maybe I'm wrong. Who cares?

That's just it, Stephen. Maybe I'm wrong too. That's why I'm dubious about drawing any hard any fast conclusions from the photograph which, let's face it, no more announces "She must have had a client with her", than it screams "She must have been disturbed in her sleep". I'd plump for the latter on balence, but not on the basis of the photograph.

All the best,
Ben