Mary Kelly-By Luck, or Design?

[Jon Guy]

Hi Mike

Do you say that because of the presence of some very early daylight, or the windows that faced the backyard?

All of the above, and Mrs Long passed them at what appears to be the "business end" of the conversation. The killer would have been aware Mrs Long overhead him ask will you.

Cadosch appeared too, although the killer may have not been aware of him, but the fence was only five feet high, and could have had small gaps in it.

In context, we have no evidence the killer surveyed the scene multiple times in one night, as has been suggested.

Interestingly, in Evans and Rumbelow`s "Scotland Yard Investigates", they have picked up on the extra details to Elizabeth Long`s account in the Suffolk Chronicle of 22nd Sept.

One, a small detail, has Long saying that she saw a man come to a woman and stand and talk with her .

The killer has obviously picked up on Annie as a potential victim, and approached her, therefore some kind of evaluation must have taken place, no matter how brief.

[Chava]

I'd agree with Jon Guy. Hanbury Street is a much riskier proposition than Millers Court. If Cadoche had been curious. Or if a tenant at #29 had gone out to the cludgie, the killer would have been in deep ****. Once he's in #13 he's golden. If he knows that at present she's living alone and I think he does...

[Sam Flynn]

If he knows that at present she's living alone and I think he does...

... indeed, it wouldn't have been difficult for him to establish that fact, even if he hadn't known it beforehand. Mary - poor dab - might easily have volunteered the information to him. ("Bingo!", thinks the Ripper.)

[Fisherman]

Jane Welland writes:

"Reading this I just wondered whether the murderer might have taken a greater risk as time went on and he wasn't caught?"

Quite possibly, Jane. It would be in keeping with the well-known fact that many serial killers grow very self-secure as their numbers of victims rise - self-secure, and sloppy.

The best,
Fisherman

[Celesta]

Relative to the number of victims, that's a fair number, and very much at odds with the perception of the killer as some sort of invisible phantom. We don't know how often the killer was seen leaving the scene - probably a fair few times. He just wouldn't have been noticed, since a man leaving the court around the time of the morning market hustle and bustle wasn't likely to be remarked upon.
Best regards,
Ben

Yes, Ben. Sometimes it's like trying to pull a rabbit out of a hat, but I wonder if that's necessary. We know Blotchy was there. I don't know if he left and came back or not, but I think Mary was on his radar, even if for only a short period of time, so he knew she had the flat. Really, I don't think it was much of a secret that Joe had left that week.

[perrymason]

Hello,

Although sometimes I feel like Im reading a novel here, I can see why many would prefer one interpretation to another.....potatoe/potatoe.

I shouldnt keep interrupting the creative process like I do so often, ....but what the heck, its whats on paper that is the reality, not whats seemingly sensible to some.

The backyard at Hanbury was very risky for sure....like almost every outdoor Ripper murder venue is, and certainly all of the Canonical murders were. Anytime you kill someone in the open its risky. But it seems that potential risk alone wasnt a determining factor for him....since he went ahead with the crimes anyway.

But Millers Court is the only venue with a single entrance in and out. That might be a consideration to some killers....perhaps not this one if he is as much of an idiot as he is being portrayed. Lucky to find any organ to cut out, lucky he isnt seen leaving at any site, lucky to return to his home bloodied without anyone taking notice.....I guess some imagine he must have sat on a horseshoe years before and it embedded.

Ben, as I pointed out Lawende himself refutes your rebuttal...he stated emphatically within weeks of the sighting that his look at the man was not good and he likely wouldnt recognize him,....and neither did Schwartz get a good look at his face....why do you imagine we call him Broadshouldered Man?...., but the value of Israels Broadshouldered Man is essentially a myth perpetuated anyway... from what I can see. Its not a story told to a jury. Its not in Inquest transcripts...Its a reminiscence with support in some Investigators notes.

Best regards all.

[celee]

Hi,

"What made it easy for him is they took him to the place they knew interuption was least likely" The woman knew the streets better then anyone. They took Jack to the spot he killed them. Mary simply took Jack home. If she worked out of an ally she would have taken him there.

er?

Your friend Brad

[Ben]

Ben, as I pointed out Lawende himself refutes your rebuttal...he stated emphatically within weeks of the sighting that his look at the man was not good and he likely wouldnt recognize him

Yes, but the red neckerchief man couldn't possibly have anticipated that outcome at the time, Mike. The crucial point remains that he allowed his face to be seen by three witnesses, at close quarters, a few minutes before committing the crime. Where did you get the idea that Schwartz did not get a good look at the face of the broad-shouldered man? On the contrary, it would seem from the description of a "full face" with a short, brown moustache that Schwartz had acquired at the very least a reasonable facial sighting.

why do you imagine we call him Broadshouldered Man?....,

Because he had broad shoulders...?



All the best,
Ben

[celee]

Hi,

Inspector Abbeline claimed that nobody ever got a good look at the ripper and those who did see him only saw him from behind.

Your friend, Brad

[Celesta]

Although sometimes I feel like Im reading a novel here, I can see why many would prefer one interpretation to another.....potatoe/potatoe.

I shouldnt keep interrupting the creative process like I do so often, ....but what the heck, its whats on paper that is the reality, not whats seemingly sensible to some.
.

Hi Mike,

I understand where you're coming from. We have only certain info to work from, but people need room to utilize that info to hypothesize what it means. Otherwise it's just information. I can see from your statements that you understand this. Sometimes it's true that the simplest explanation turns out to be the most logical one and, in the long one, the answer to the question. When we have a man pushing a woman around, why isn't it reasonable to think that man was the one who actually killed her? If we know a man was seen escorting a woman into an empty flat and that no witness came forward to testify that they saw him leave, why is it unreasonable to hypothesize that this man killed the woman? We don't know that these men did, but sometimes the simplest explanation is the answer.

[perrymason]

Hi all,

I think you make a good point Celesta, that Blotchy Face must be a primary suspect that night as he is the only man known to have been in Marys company in her room that night. We only know that he did leave, not when.

Thats why the issue of where she meets him is so fuzzy Brad...because thats long before we have reason to believe she is murdered... when her lights are off and the singing stopped by 1:30am, we dont know if that meant he was still in there.

Heres my contention.....If what transpired between Blotchy and Mary, the singing off and on for over an hour... of the total time of 1 hour and 45 minutes that light was on and noise was heard from inside,....is all that was to transpire, then I dont think he stayed when the lights go out.

If he was a love interest, she wouldnt likely have just sung to him when alone in her room,...(which she did do for roughly 80% of the time behind closed doors before the room goes dark),... if he was a client, same deal,....if she was just being gracious because he walked her home and bought drinks, hes not likely of interest to her romantically.

However, If she warmed up to the idea while he was there, then he may have bedded down with her.

I suspect the serenade ended when her steam for the evening did, she was hammered when she arrived and she had entertained for over an hour and a half,...my bet is she was tired....it was Mayors Day the next day, and we know she was looking forward to seeing it.

Instead, she ended up stopping it.

Best regards Ms C, Brad, Ben, all...

[Chava]

I strongly suspect that Blotchy left quickly after Kelly started up her concert and I don't blame him. Cox has seen him close to and can probably identify him. But Kelly is singing and continues to sing while he's with her. Ergo Kelly herself is his alibi. Cox will testify that Kelly was alive and singing for hours after he accompanied her into the room. He can leave and then return in the small hours when Kelly is asleep. Quietly let himself in or get Kelly to open her door. Kill her. Then leave. No one is really looking for him. He's just one of Kelly's punters earlier in the evening...

[perrymason]

I strongly suspect that Blotchy left quickly after Kelly started up her concert and I don't blame him. Cox has seen him close to and can probably identify him. But Kelly is singing and continues to sing while he's with her. Ergo Kelly herself is his alibi. Cox will testify that Kelly was alive and singing for hours after he accompanied her into the room. He can leave and then return in the small hours when Kelly is asleep. Quietly let himself in or get Kelly to open her door. Kill her. Then leave. No one is really looking for him. He's just one of Kelly's punters earlier in the evening...

Chava,

Im not sure if you buy the above really, but consider this.....she has been alone in the room for half a week, she is hammered and that means someone bought her drinks cause she didnt have enough to get smashed...she arrives home with a unknown man and entertains him in her room by singing.

Isnt the most reasonable interpretation of this that Mary invited the man who bought her drinks that night into her room after he had escorted her home, and she sang to him as she missed company and felt she owed the man some hospitality?

When the "house singer" is finished her repertoire...which in this case may have been just one or two songs, the lights go out and the "crowd" goes home.

Probably so did this "crowd" of one.

Cheers Chava, nice to see ya.

[Celesta]

I just thought he was toying with her, getting his jollies out of listening to her sing, maybe watching her flirt and joke, knowing all along he was going to kill her. I think it's possible he might do something as chilling as that.

[Chava]

Hi Mike. Nice weather innit

Actually I do think the above is highly plausible. I agree, she's been stuck at home without too much to do and she's been reduced to hanging around with Maria Hervey. She has no money and she's not inclined to go to work, unlike industrious Mrs Cox. She goes out and finds a punter who'll buy her enough drink to get her plastered. She brings him home along with a pail of beer and then she starts to treat him to a song. I think all this is believable, and it's also believable that poor Mr Blotchy thought he was onto a good thing, only to see her burst into raucous song, at which point he realized she was way too far gone to give him any kind of a good time. So he departs.
Permanently.

I believed this for years. But then I read the other eye-witness descriptions, and Ada Wilson's description of the man who attacked her and I thought 'there he is!' Ruddy/sunburnt/blotchy faced. Similar hat. Similar stature. Carrotty/auburn moustache. And I realized that the man who I would put on trial for Kelly's murder has been obvious and in the files all along. I think he dunnnit. I think it's extremely possible that he noticed her earlier in the day or the week and kept an eye on her a little. However he could have just met her in the pub. The only things that stop him killing her when he went in with her would be the Cox encounter and the fact that she started to sing--which it sounds like she did as she went into the room. So no way to shut her up. He either sticks around for the concert or creeps out and comes back. But he's my boy!