The Night She Died

[Robert]

Gareth, I can't say I go for your striptease scenario - doubtless with a mug of tea for the client - but one point that it's got going for it would be the time : IF Jack worked different shifts on different nights, he would have been encountering Mary at the same time in the week that he met Nichols.

[Sam Flynn]

Indeed, Robert - and not all that long before he'd have met Chapman.

[Ben]

It's about the only scenario I can think of that would achieve that triple accolade

Indeed, Gareth. I'd go as far as to describe it as my join-"favourite" scenario alongside the Bundy-esque intruder.

[Fisherman]

Sam writes:
"at least the idea of a loiterer accosting a re-emergent Kelly has the virtues of being congruent with the facts, whilst not requiring the deus ex machina of a "break-in/doorstepping" event, simultaneously not being offensive to either pro- or anti-Hutch arguments. It's about the only scenario I can think of that would achieve that triple accolade "

Does she really have to venture out again for us to achieve that triumvirate, Sam? What if the loiterer knew her, was no punter and simply knocked on her door and was let in? To me, that would have the edge over your scenario, since it would give her the time to undress and go to bed before Jack made his entrance.

The best,
Fisherman

[Sam Flynn]

Hi Fish,

Does she really have to venture out again for us to achieve that triumvirate, Sam? What if the loiterer knew her was no punter and simply knocked on her door and was let in?

Ah, but there's that extra device again: "what if the loiterer knew her"... As I said earlier, this is one of those sprinklings of whiffle-dust required to make that scenario work. It would be less of a convoluted explanation if, on the other hand, one simply suggested that Kelly left her room and met someone who knew her on the street.

To me, that would have the edge over your scenario, since it would give her the time to undress and go to bed before Jack made his entrance.

That only has the edge if you've decided that (a) she knew her killer; and (b) she went to bed before he arrived.

Now, such a scenario might work, of course - however, it requires a number of preconditions (or even preconceptions) to be in place in order for it to do so. It also requires one to come up with contorted explanations to explain how the pillow was found on the table, a coarse overblanket appears still to have been rolled up and placed between the bottom of the bed and the wall, and that Kelly appears not to have removed all her hosiery.

Such preconditions as are required to support the "killer goes with woman he picks up on street" scenario are fully supported by Kelly's known behaviour, and fully congruent (no ingenious explanations required) with the Ripper's previous MO and the crime scene photos.

[Fisherman]

I see what you mean, Sam. As you know, I think that Kelly and her killer WERE aquianted, and I think that a number of things (the cut sheet probably having covered her face being one of the more obvious things - but we both know where we stand on that point) point to that.

"such a scenario might work, of course - however, it requires a number of preconditions (or even preconceptions) to be in place in order for it to do so. It also requires one to come up with contorted explanations to explain how the pillow was found on the table, a coarse overblanket appears still to have been rolled up and placed between the bottom of the bed and the wall, and that Kelly appears not to have removed all her hosiery."

Hmm - I count two "appears" here, and since we are speaking of perhaps not lending too much weight to appearances, I think we are on thin ice whichever way we turn here. But of course you are right in pointing out that we can find no absolute certainty in establishing an aquaintance between killer and victim.

"fully congruent (no ingenious explanations required) with the Ripper's previous MO"

Would you not say, Sam, that to describe the MO in the Kelly case as being fully congruent with the other cases, the intruder scenario offers the best alternative (and no, I don´t ascribe to it myself): If we have the Ripper waiting to act as she undressed, I think we have a clear deviance from his earlier MO.

All the best,
Fisherman

[Sam Flynn]

the cut sheet probably having covered her face being one of the more obvious things - but we both know where we stand on that point

Indeed we do, Fish. You believe that her face was covered, and furthermore ascribe to it a "familiarity" on the part of her killer - both of which points I have difficulty in accepting - the former simply because I believe that Dr Bond made an almighty error.

Hmm - I count two "appears" here

That's because I try to be very careful to avoid making assertions which I believe might derail a thread

Would you not say, Sam, that to describe the MO in the Kelly case as being fully congruent with the other cases, the intruder scenario offers the best alternative

Not at all - the exact opposite is true.

If we have the Ripper waiting to act as she undressed, I think we have a clear deviance from his earlier MO.

As I said earlier, the indoor surroundings made it possible for the first time in the Ripper series for the killer to allow a victim to get her kit off, which was never going to happen in a street or a back-yard. As I also suggested, perhaps this novel thrill accounts for the heightened degree to which he carried out the mutilations.

[Fisherman]

Sam writes:

"You believe that her face was covered, and furthermore ascribe to it a "familiarity" on the part of her killer - both of which points I have difficulty in accepting - the former simply because I believe that Dr Bond made an almighty error"

Sam, there is only one way that Bond could have been responsible for an almighty error here. And that is if he did NOT check the mattress under the sheet for corresponding cuts. If such cuts were there, then it would be perfectly obvious that the sheet lay over the cut area in the mattress as he carved away.
On the other hand, if there were NO cuts in the mattress that showed that the sheet had lain there during the onslaught - then it MUST have lain elsewhere. And if so, there are very few other logical explanations than Bonds.
Now, I propose that an experienced man like Bond must have
a/ made certain that the distance from the cut area to Kellys face would have corresponded roughly to be in accordance with his suggestion, and
b/ checked the mattress under the cut area on the sheet - and found no cuts there. If both items, sheet and mattress had been hacked much, it would have been totally obvious that the sheet had NOT covered Kellys face. And indeed, he only states that the sheet was cut, whereas he says not a word of the mattress being damaged by a blade. And I don´t think for a minute that this owes to him forgetting to check.
The error you are suggesting, is the error of a complete fool and a very inexperienced man, Sam. The solution to the question of whether the sheet was on the mattress as it was cut is not a hard one to reach, and there is no way of misinterpreting the evidence once you take a look. Bond would have been right. I feel pretty certain of that.

"the indoor surroundings made it possible for the first time in the Ripper series for the killer to allow a victim to get her kit off, which was never going to happen in a street or a back-yard"

Of course, absolutely and indeed - but if the Ripper waited until Kelly had undressed, then that does not mean that the MO stayed unchanged, does it? That is why I say that the intruder scenario fits better with Jacks MO than a scenario where he suddenly is able to give things time. The fact that the outdoor deeds were carried out under radically differing circumstances does not change the fact that the MO WAS altered in Kellys case.

The best,
Fisherman

[Ben]

If we have the Ripper waiting to act as she undressed, I think we have a clear deviance from his earlier MO.

I tend to agree, Fish.

As I mentioned earlier, the fact that she was found in a night-shirt needn't be viewed as indicative of anything especially kinky. The scene rather seems wholly compatible with her having retired to bed at the time of her rude awakening, and crime scene evidence (as well as the noteworthy comparisons with other cases) is by no means in conflict with this.

All the best,
Ben

[Sam Flynn]

Sam writes:

"You believe that her face was covered... I believe that Dr Bond made an almighty error"

Sam, there is only one way that Bond could have been responsible for an almighty error here.

There's a thread for that already, Fish (I think you started it, in fact), where I gave my reasons - so forgive me if I don't elaborate here.

[Sam Flynn]

The scene rather seems wholly compatible with her having retired to bed ...

... on a cold night, with the blanket rolled up and her pillow on a table. Makes sense to me, Ben

[Fisherman]

Feel fre, Sam. Myself, I fail to see why it would not also belong to a thread called "The night she died". All things involved in the nights scenario surely must be valid here? The character of the clue as such my also be extremely helpful to the discussion of whether the killer was aquainted to Mary or not, as far as I can see.

The best,
Fisherman

[Sam Flynn]

Feel fre, Sam. Myself, I fail to see why it would not also belong to a thread called "The night she died".

I think that an existing thread on the very specific subject of whether Bond was right about the cut bedsheet is a more appropriate place to discuss the subject of - um - whether Bond was right about the cut bedsheet, Fish. This one's about the events on the night leading up to Kelly's death, not the minutiae of what her killer did afterwards.

[Fisherman]

...and off we go!

Fisherman

[Robert]

Gareth, apparently prostitutes like to be paid in advance. Previous murders suggest either that the victims were taken by surprise before the transaction could take place, or Jack took the money back from them after he killed them. Now, if Kelly met a punter I imagine she would have wanted payment before taking him into her room - she wouldn't have wanted someone in her room still haggling over the price and maybe getting nasty. Perhaps she presented a menu :

Rendition of "Only A Violet" without sex - one penny
Quick one in alley - fourpence
Full kit off in luxury flat with own tin bath - two bob

When he paid her she would have put the money in a pocket in her dress. Now, unless she transferred it to a hidey-hole when she got into the room, it seems that the punter Jack didn't retrieve the money - the clothes seem to have remained undisturbed on the chair.

Isn't that a bit odd?

PS I won't go into MR A here.