Did Mary know her attacker?

[c.d.]

Hi Paul,

Mary's killer might have been invited in if he was a regular customer or if he had made an appointment with her earlier in the day or week.

c.d.

[steje73]

Chava said that a fish supper would have stunk up the room. I'm sure that the first thing everyone thought when they went in that room was 'Can you smell chips?'

[NOV9]

Hi Brad,

I agree - but it's a subject in itself, indeed whole threads have been devoted to it. A stranger could just as feasibly have broken into, or have been invited into, Kelly's room as someone who knew her. In the strict context of "Did Mary know her attacker?", therefore, the notion of whether she stayed in or not after the departure of Blotchy is practically irrelevant.

you said " A stranger could just as feasibly have broken into" you know that was not true, the only person to break into her place was the landlord.

[paul emmett]

A stranger could just as feasibly have broken into, or have been invited into, Kelly's room as someone who knew her.

Hi, Sam.

I think I agree with Michael here--kinda. IF it could be shown that Kelly stayed in after Blotchy, then odds go through the roof that her killer knew her. Consider your two alternatives: broke in or invited. You know that I feel that if the entire police force can't come up with the window trick in the light of the next day, then a passeby isn't going to figure it out the night before. I can't see a stranger breaking in, and I certianly can't see one invited in. What's his line, "'scuse me; is there a prostitute in here?"?

So I think stay in or go out IS a relevant question--unanswerable perhaps, but relevant.

[c.d.]

With regards to the rent being a factor that might have led Mary to go out later that night, we might be overlooking something. Since prostitution is not a steady job, I am sure that there were times when some of the women in Millers Court couldn't come up with the rent. McCarthy probably let a few long time residents slide now and then or maybe took it out in trade but I doubt that he wanted to appear to be a soft touch. In Mary's case, he might have been more willing to wait when he knew that there were two people contributing to the rent. Now that Joe was out of the picture, he might not have been so patient. This would not have been lost on Mary. Did she really want to tell him she couldn't pay the rent the first time that she was on her own?

c.d.

[Sam Flynn]

If Kelly's attacker went to Kelly's home and Kelly invited him in or if the Ripper broke into Kelly's home that would be an interesting change of MO.

Hi Brad,

I agree - but it's a subject in itself, indeed whole threads have been devoted to it. A stranger could just as feasibly have broken into, or have been invited into, Kelly's room as someone who knew her. In the strict context of "Did Mary know her attacker?", therefore, the notion of whether she stayed in or not after the departure of Blotchy is practically irrelevant.

[Chava]

Hi Chris! Our paths haven't crossed for a while.

From the inquest and press reports it sounds as if McCarthy said words to the effect of 'see if you can go and get any money from the Kelly woman. She owes me a bunch.' It certainly didn't sound as if he went round every Friday, if McCarthy has to tell him to do so. However it is possible that normally McCarthy himself collected the rent on Friday. I don't know whether this was the case or not. In any case, Kelly wouldn't have been able to come up with much. Certainly only a small percentage of what she owed.

[celee]

The idea put forward below is not amenable of proof - we simply do not have the relevant information. It is ONLY an idea, nothing more.
If Kelly ventured out onto the streets of Spitalfields at a late hour, on an inclement November night, logic would suggest that she had a very pressing reason for doing so. The most pressing financial need that we know of in her situation was the money she owed McCarthy. The great unknown is the pattern, if any, to McCarthy's and/or Bowyer's visits to try to get the outstanding rent. What I am driving at is, did Kelly know that Bowyer would be round on the Friday morning to see what money he could collect? Maybe Friday was the regular "rent day" and Kelly knew a visit was pending.
We do not know what threat, of any, Kelly faced of eviction for non payment, but such a drastic sitution could, if true, explain her need to go out seeking business at such an hour.
Chris

Hi,

Okay, why would Kelly have to have a pressing need to go back out other then wanting to get more money for what ever the reason, rent or drink.

I do not believe she had to be in dire straits to go back out. She may have simply wanted another drink.

Your friend, Brad

Your friend, Brad

your friend, Brad

[Chris Scott]

The idea put forward below is not amenable of proof - we simply do not have the relevant information. It is ONLY an idea, nothing more.
If Kelly ventured out onto the streets of Spitalfields at a late hour, on an inclement November night, logic would suggest that she had a very pressing reason for doing so. The most pressing financial need that we know of in her situation was the money she owed McCarthy. The great unknown is the pattern, if any, to McCarthy's and/or Bowyer's visits to try to get the outstanding rent. What I am driving at is, did Kelly know that Bowyer would be round on the Friday morning to see what money he could collect? Maybe Friday was the regular "rent day" and Kelly knew a visit was pending.
We do not know what threat, of any, Kelly faced of eviction for non payment, but such a drastic sitution could, if true, explain her need to go out seeking business at such an hour.
Chris

[celee]

I reciprocate that sentiment, Mike

I guess it's just another "Kudzu" issue. Whenever the "Kelly stayed in" idea is introduced, it has a tendency to take on a life of its own. I'd rather we kept it separate, because I genuinely believe that it has only tangential (and somewhat debatable) relevance to the current discussion.

Hi,

I do not know if I agree. If Kelly's attacker went to Kelly's home and Kelly invited him in or if the Ripper broke into Kelly's home that would be an interesting change of MO.

I believe that Kelly went out after three and the Ripper just happend apon her. However if the Ripper went a calling or broke into her home that would be an interesting change.

Your friend, Brad

[Sam Flynn]

I know we have discussed this and frankly I had hoped you would see the light on this issue by now

I reciprocate that sentiment, Mike

I guess it's just another "Kudzu" issue. Whenever the "Kelly stayed in" idea is introduced, it has a tendency to take on a life of its own. I'd rather we kept it separate, because I genuinely believe that it has only tangential (and somewhat debatable) relevance to the current discussion.

[celee]

Your gift for tact always makes me smile Ben. In fact, as early as November 15th..3 days after the taking of the statement George Hutchinson provided, Blotchy Man is the official suspect description. How or why aside, as either cannot be answered by any of us using existing documents, thats the historical perspective.

I would think that the Police who took Hutchinson's statement first hand expected some legitimate new truth, being from a man claiming to be Marys friend..they weren't gullible at all, its that Hutchinson sold his story......with his emphasis on details and the ability to recognize the man again on sight, he had not simply told his story.

Best regards Ben.

Hi,

Ben always is polite no matter what side of the argument he falls. So, I shall smile.

The fact remains that after interviewing Hutchinson, something no one at the Casebook has had a chance to do, Abberline is convinced Hutchinson is telling the truth.

We do not know for a fact that Blotchy face man was the main suspect three days later and I find it hard to believe that Detectives who worked the case dismissed two witnesses claim that they heard a cry of "Oh murder" around 3:45 and then the body of Kelly was found. I am assuming that they would have felt the way that I do that the Ripper would not stick around for three hours before attacking Kelly. Even the hour that Kelly was heard singing would make me dismiss Blotchy face man as a suspect.

They may have dismissed Hutchinson's story for similiar reasons as they dismissed Maxwell's tale. However there is no reason to believe they thought George Hutchinson was an out right lier.

Your friend, Brad

Bike week, I hate it.

1. As I've said more than once on this thread, the possibility that Mary went out again or not has almost no bearing on whether she knew her killer. An unknown killer or someone familiar could have killed her under both circumstances, so let's try not to confuse the debate.

...and as relates to Mary entertaining clients in her room....

2. Aside from the paradox inherent in "knowing" something that is only "likely", we actually know nothing of the sort, I'm afraid - and certainly not the "never" bit.

Sam,

I know we have discussed this and frankly I had hoped you would see the light on this issue by now, but if Mary Kelly did not leave her room after midnight, it is indeed very germaine to the issue of whether her killer may have come to her, and perhaps how he arrived at her door..by chance or intent. And whether he forced his way in, or was let in. Its completely investigatorially (?) irresponsible to just set aside something that has a 50 % chance of being true, until it can be proven otherwise...and guess what, it cant as yet.

No amount of protestations from you on this point make any difference Sam, and you know I respect your opinions,... if she did not go out after midnight there is at least a 50-50 chance that he knew who he was looking for, and where to find her. Its that or chance. One way he knows her, the other he doesnt have to. Equally probable.

On point 2, there is not one tiny bit of teensy weensy information on record regarding Mary and 13 Millers Court that indicates she "ever" took a single client there. Hence my "never" usage. In fact we have testimony from her live-in lover that he objected to her "working the streets", and since he has been gone only 8 days, its a little presumptuous to assume she at that point begins to bring men home without even one corroborating account to support it.

Dont make me defend her obvious relationship with Blotchy Man, which was that of a friend or acquaintance Sam, no trick Ive ever heard of starts with an aria that lasts off and on for over an hour. They were eating together, she singing, both bombed, and one, doomed. But he was'nt a trick by all indications....at least not as far as she was concerned, Maybe he had other ideas..

As I said, IF she did not go out again...as the records seem to indicate, then her killer came to her by chance, or intentionally. One of those answers leads to another question, could an intentional path directly to Marys door, and perhaps gaining access to her room with her permission, or by an unlocked door without it...but being able to stay,... indicate that the man may have known Mary, or that room....which we can safely establish has not been a brothel before November 1st.

Its beneath you Gareth to dispute that point...the answer is yes, the man may have known Mary, and where Mary Kelly lived, and not been a client, since she didnt entertain clients in her room that we know of,... and went to her room that night purposefully....maybe people dont like my phrasing, but Im sure the logic isnt that opaque.

Better I keep with my idea of bowing out...because these plain as day/dark as night rebuttals seem odd when we are in different time zones. I say its night....and it isnt to you... cause its morning. Thats understandable confusion....but not admitting that in the case of Mary Kelly there is evidence that suggests she did not leave her room, or rather there is no credible contrary evidence to suggest otherwise, it is at least 50 % possible that her killer knew her. He either did, or he didnt...but coming to her room and gaining access in the middle of the night, without obvious resistance tilts the odds somewhat.

My best Gareth...sorry, just tired.

[Sam Flynn]

Oh dear, Mike! This is turning into another "Did Mary go out after 1AM?" argument. As I've said more than once on this thread, the possibility that Mary went out again or not has almost no bearing on whether she knew her killer. An unknown killer or someone familiar could have killed her under both circumstances, so let's try not to confuse the debate.

Since we know that the opposite is likely true, that she never entertained clients in her room

Aside from the paradox inherent in "knowing" something that is only "likely", we actually know nothing of the sort, I'm afraid - and certainly not the "never" bit.

[Tron]

Tron, thats why I said approximate. As far as evidence that suggests Mary Kelly was killed by someone she knew, perhaps you have another explanation for the killer coming into the court and her room by herself....and Ive already acknowledged it could have been accidental luck too.

The problem is she could have been killed any time after say 2 AM, that does not really help us when it comes to determining her time of death. I don't disagree with you, I just feel there are too many assumptions when it comes to MJK (the reason why I ultimately joined the board).

Ok, now I am trying my best to contribute to the points you raised...

1. What proof is there that Mary Kelly left her room after 11:45pm? Again...please dont use discredited statements in your answer.

Well, she must have been out to eat at least as can be deduced by the absence of food in her room.

2. What proof is there that Mary Kelly ever brought a client to her room?

There is no proof. She seems to have been a street prostitute, her addiction and the fact that she was outside looking for work seem to support this assumption. Statistically street prostitutes don't work indoors.

4. What evidence is there that Mary did not let her killer enter from the inside of her room?

There is little to no defensive wounds indicating she was incapacitated during the initial attack. Most likely she was asleep. If she had opened the door, she would not be partially undressed and had most likely focussed on the person in the room (looking at them). This would have given her an advantage during the intitial attack resulting in more defensive wounds. Of course there are alternatives that would work equally well.

5. What evidence is there that the killer did not know the window/latch method?

None since I believe there was no forensic team examining the lock. A lock pick would can not be ruled out. Furthermore it is possible whoever broke into the room might have "experimented". Unlikely but not impossible, the missing key could have come into the possession of the perpetrator.

6. What evidence is there to state for certain only 1 man was involved in her death? Remember Jacks a lone wolf apparently.

It is possible that there was an apprentice present, many serial killers were not working alone but there is of course no evidence to support this in this particular case.

7. What evidence exists that demonstrates only Jack the Ripper could cut women open? We have other killings that mirror Ripper style, but weren't attributed to him.

None of course. The real question is what makes this a Ripper murder?

8. What evidence is there that Mary was soliciting at the time of her death, or when she meets her killer?

No evidence but she was desperate for money so it is likely she was looking for johns. She had dinner and alcohol, so there must have been some income source.

9. What evidence is there to suggest that Mary would go to work in the streets when it is raining, and she is already fed, drunk, and at home? Use her work ethic as gathered from friends testimony, and her "responsible" behavior on her rent arrears as a guideline.

What came first? I think work came before dinner since she needed the money. It also seems she spent some money on drinking so responsible is no real argument here.

10. What evidence is there that confirms Mary could not, and did not know her killer prior to her death? Is it the struggle that didnt she put up until attacked with the knife, is it the screams for help that she doesnt make when she finds someone at her door or in her room, or is it the way he forces himself in on her [U]quietly?

There is no evidence of course. Whether she has known the attacker or not is not as important as whether she was aware who attacked her since she might have known the person but was not aware of their presence.