Mary Kelly-By Luck, or Design?

[Jane Welland]

Hello All- as I am curious myself about this one, I thought a poll might be interesting. Thanks to Barry for instructions! Jane x

[halomanuk]

Aaah thanks Jane..
I still feel it is luck,but MAYBE he knew Mary was on her own by heresay..still luck in the fact Barnett had gone and he got a convenient night.

I don't think JTR is as clever or as premeditated as he is made out sometimes.

[richardnunweek]

Hi.
For countless years i have always held the opinion that Mjk, was a premeditated murder, committed by a person that was well known to her, however because of the Maxwell statement, i cannot ignore the last man allegedly seen with Kelly at 845 am , known as the market porter.
This being the case, and my interpretation being, that she went back to her room to await her client, i could make a case out for indeed a opportunist killer.
Regards Richard.

[Jane Welland]

How do we explain..

..that Mary Kelly was allegedly seen the next morning? I take it those sightings are generally discredited? Yet another aspect of this mystery, it seems. I think there's a logic in a progressive view. Jane x

[babybird67]

good poll Jane!

i voted he got lucky...no design at all.

You'll have to show me how to do polls! I had an idea for one a few weeks ago but never got round to finding out how to do it!

[Jane Welland]

Hello Jenny..

..I didn't know either! Barry kindly instructed me! I'm amazed it's worked! Jane x

[Graham]

I think it depends on whether you see MJK as a C5 victim or not. If a C5, then I'd say it was random. Speaking personally, I see her as a C5. For my money, only Stride was a non-WM victim, and the fact that she was murdered on the same night as Eddowes is mere coincidence. MJK was, perhaps, stalked that evening by her killer, but I don't believe that he had any notion of her existence until a short time before he, er, made her acquaintance.

Graham

[mariag]

What he said.

[richardnunweek]

Hi,
The fire, the burnt out kettle, the blanket roll, the positioning of the boots, the intense mutilations, all point to the murder being committed during daylight hours, that is another thread however.
It was recorded at the inquest that the deseased Kelly was last seen at 845am on the morning of the 9th , talking to a market porter, description was noted.
This was made under oath, and was made after a warning by the coroner that she[ Mrs Maxwell] should think carefully before speaking.
I find it so strange that we dispute such a positive action on Maxwells part.
Regards Richard.

[Sam Flynn]

Many other statements have been made on oath, Richard, and not all of them accurate. Having sworn an oath doesn't immunise one from making mistakes.

[richardnunweek]

Hello Sam,
I realise that, however, the oath Maxwell swore, was not shall we say, an attempt to get out of a crime, and as for a mistake, i find incredible, that a woman could make a statement to the police only a few hours, on the same day as a dreadful murder, and [1] get the wrong day[2] and get the wrong person, especially as she had the entire weekend to realise her mistake.
She admitted she had only spoken to her on a couple of occasions, but she also claimed that she had addressed kelly by name, and kelly had addressed her back.
Was she shown the deseased woman , to confirm that this was the woman she saw, i find it stange ,if she had not, it would have saved her attending the inquest , if it became clear that she had been talking to the wrong person.
Hutchinson was shown kelly, so why not Maxwell, especially if it could be proven that she had made a mistake.
If Maxwell had identified kelly as the person she saw from her corpse, then the morning murder is a real possibility.
Regards Richard.

[perrymason]

Hi all,

I think luck would be something we could rule out if a personal connection existed between killer and prey.....something that in the case on Mary Kelly remains quite possible, some might say even probable, based solely on the circumstances that night that are based on courtyard witness statements.

If the accounts ....that were believed,....were substantially accurate, they dont rule out either option....Luck or Planning.

But if she knew him, then she is likely the only victim of the 5 that has any connection between murderer and murdered, and he wouldnt need luck at all....just some semblance of a plan.

Ive wondered if Mary was killed for a relationship she had or was having, or as a result of her being a risk. 2 of the Canonicals were known to have recently... very recently...ended formal, established, relationships.

And they happen to be the two that I personally question as Canonical inclusions.

Best regards folks.

[j.r-ahde]

Hello you all!

I will present this presumption again;

Jack the Ripper might have felt the Vigilance Committee being on his heels, the ladies of the streets had got more cautious...

And thus MJK, despite being pretty clever, might have thought herself to be safe indoors!

All the best
Jukka

[perrymason]

Hi Jukka,

The issue I would have with supposition that he was affected by the "increasing patrols" and felt any need to move indoors is this.....if Jack killed the Canonicals, all of them, then there was as long a quiet period as there was an initial spree. If he starts late in August and stops for a while after the Double Event, then he kills his first 4 victims in 5 weeks, and his last victim is killed 5 weeks after that.

If anything, the streets would be returning to a desensitized state regarding the murders, like the state that existed before Martha was killed. Things did return to "normal" soon after Annie's murder on the streets, and by the end of the month they were not anticipating anything.

If the only place in the world you could make a few coins for your daily bed and food requirements is out on the streets servicing Dockers and Tradesmen after midnight, How long could they wait to get back out earning?

The move indoors for safety is a false premise I think, used to explain the radical changes seen in the location of the murder and state of intimacy engaged in with the victim. If she is in her "underwear", and her killer spent one second in that room with her being alive and consenting, its not the new Jack, based on the imminent danger outdoors...its that its not likely Jack at all.

Being in her room with her permission while she is virtually undressed sounds very much like someone quite close....and there is nothing in the first 4 deaths that leads us to conclude he knew any of those victims.

Cheers Jukka, nice to see you mate.

[kensei]

Hello Sam,
I realise that, however, the oath Maxwell swore, was not shall we say, an attempt to get out of a crime, and as for a mistake, i find incredible, that a woman could make a statement to the police only a few hours, on the same day as a dreadful murder, and [1] get the wrong day[2] and get the wrong person, especially as she had the entire weekend to realise her mistake.
She admitted she had only spoken to her on a couple of occasions, but she also claimed that she had addressed kelly by name, and kelly had addressed her back.
Regards Richard.

I've made this comparison before when it comes to Maxwell's story. In America in 1999 occurred the disappearance of mother & daughter Carol & Juli sund and Argentinian exchange student Silvina Pelosso in Yosemite National Park. It would eventually be found that they had been murdered on the night they disappeared by serial killer Cary Anthony Stayner who is currenty on death row. But during the search for the women when their fate was not yet known, a local female shopkeeper reported having seen and talked to them in her store between the time they were reported missing and when their bodies were found. She was adamant as to the time, and even said she'd talked with Pelosso about being from Argentina. It would be established that on the day the shopkeeper swore this happened, the women were definitely already dead.

It happens. No particular reason or explanation for it, it just happens.