Did Mary know her attacker?

[Chava]

Hello, Sam, All.

I'm not sure that it would have to be undiscriminating in the first place. The selection of women who most folks might not find as attractive as others could be driven by many other motives besides desperation. There might be a certian feature or body type that "attracts" for any number of reasons. It might remind the selector of someone else, or it might be just plain subjective aesthetics. It might be that "good looking" women intimidate him, or it might be that he just needs someone, who, again according to his lights, looks the part. And then it would seem that this is the very person who might well be a repeat trick. If, for example, he could find a woman who didn't intimidate him, who would accept him, he would be looking for her next time. Ya dance with who brung ya.

And maybe that would be all he could afford!

In any case, I think what's causing the trouble is the perception of what I mean by suggesting that it's not impossible that the first four women may have encountered the Ripper as a regular client. By 'regular' I mean 'normal' or 'non-homicidal'. I don't mean 'every Saturday night at 10 pm'. It's certainly possible that the women in question had occasionally picked up men they had picked up before. But I don't think any of them had what might be called 'regulars' in any real sense. Even Kelly was a fair way from Miss Whiplash. But the same applies to her and perhaps more so, because she was more attractive and younger. It's possible she had repeat clients. It's possible that the Ripper was someone who had patronized her before.

[Sam Flynn]

It's possible [Kelly] had repeat clients. It's possible that the Ripper was someone who had patronized her before.

Well, geography acts in support of that possibility, Chava - in that Kelly lived where she was killed, therefore her "Mondeo Man" had a fighting chance of zooming in on her. With the others, it all flies out of the window I'm afraid.

My brain fries if I try to accommodate the same "repeat client" just happening to pop up near Bucks' Row, Hanbury Street and Mitre Square (include Berner Street if you like) at all times of the night. This simply doesn't fit with the same man returning to his favourite pick-up point (Aldgate, say, or the 10 Bells) knowing he stood a fair chance of finding a familiar cheap prostitute, his familiarity with whom he could then exploit. The notion of the Ripper scouring the streets until - by magic - he found Polly, Annie and Kate in the most unlikely and varied locations before accosting them with a deceptively friendly smile is beyond the pale.

[Ben]

Why, therefore, would someone so undiscriminating as to "select" Chapman in the first place have worried about seeking her to the exclusion of others on his next night out

Not "select", Gareth. More a case of "Oh ere's this fella who wanders around this area looking for sex. He's an ugly bugger, but he pays like the rest of em". Similarly, the perspective of our local regular might have been: "Oh ere's this old gin-soak who I always see round this area. S'pose she's no uglier than thre majority of 'em round here." For the record, though, I share your doubt at the prospect of someone non-local venturing into Aldgate, selecting specific prostitutes and eventually killing some of them. Far too "cloak and daggers".

I'm angling more for a local chappie who sauntered the area in which both he and the prostitutes lived, who naturally encountered a number of them on several occasions whether through prostitution, hawking, or in a doss house kitchen.

Best wishes,
Ben

[Sam Flynn]

I'm angling more for a local chappie who sauntered the area in which both he and the prostitutes lived

Now, that I'm more comfortable with, Ben - but only inasmuch as I believe the killer to have lived "there or thereabouts". It's by no means certain that all five (or four) Ripper victims would have recognised him - in fact unless he really was Timothy Donovan, I'd find it extremely unlikely.

[Chava]

Now, that I'm more comfortable with, Ben - but only inasmuch as I believe the killer to have lived "there or thereabouts". It's by no means certain that all five (or four) Ripper victims would have recognised him - in fact unless he really was Timothy Donovan, I'd find it extremely unlikely.

Sam, I've never suggested that. In numerous posts I've said I thought that the first four were probably killed by someone they had never encountered before. Even if they had met him, they probably wouldn't have remembered him. You keep talking about 'Mondeo Man' and by that I assume you mean some kerb-crawler who is well-known in a red-light district. As Peter Sutcliffe undoubtedly was. I don't think that is who we're looking for, I've never thought that was who we are looking for and I do think that the first four were victims of a blitz attack from a man who was a complete stranger to them.

But I also think it's not unlikely given the circumstances that Kelly was killed by someone she knew or had met before. Regular client? Maybe, in the sense that she done business with him before. Ex-lover? Possibly. Landlord? Possibly. Ripper? Whoever killed her could have been any of the above and the Ripper as well.

[perrymason]

Hello folks,

Gareth, I think you took offense at my phrasing before, and it was'nt intended. But I do stand by the contention that if Mary did not meet her killer while she was working outdoors, he either enters her room without her permission, or with it. I know you like percentage calculations, so I think that in this case, if she did not go out, its at least 50/50 that he knew where Mary Kelly lived. One side has random chance, like all the C4 previous seem to indicate, ...painting the portrait of a local man that perhaps knows the haunts of the street women in general, and takes what opportunity presents him, in Marys case that would be finding an open door, or seeing the window access...the opposing side has the killer seeking his victim where she lives, going into Millers Court to seek out Mary Kelly specifically.

Within the confines of the known facts about that evening, it is therefore extremely plausible to include a killer known to the victim as one of a few likely possibilities.

Its the cumulative effect of these issues, and others.....the facial destruction and heart removal, the choice of working in a room, on a victims bed...(if Mary didnt go out again, and he wanted at her that night, he had no choice but to seek her out at home)...that at least to me suggest that its quite possible Mary Kelly was the intended target of her killer, that she was not chosen by the killer as she worked the streets.

A known killer is someone who knows Mary, but she needn't have know him well...or maybe at all....or its someone she does know well, but he doesnt know her well, or they are both well know to each other.

Those scenarios could be applicable here, and there is not one other attributed Ripper kill that we can say the evidence suggests that there may be some connection between killer and victim.

My best Sam, as always.

[Sam Flynn]

I know you like percentage calculations, so I think that in this case, if she did not go out, its at least 50/50 that he knew where Mary Kelly lived.

But that doesn't mean that she knew him, which was my point, Mike. Therefore, whether she stayed in or went out again, it has little or no relevance to whether or not she knew her killer.

[paul emmett]

A known killer is someone who knows Mary, but she needn't have know him well...or maybe at all....or its someone she does know well, but he doesnt know her well, or they are both well know to each other.

Those scenarios could be applicable here, and there is not one other attributed Ripper kill that we can say the evidence suggests that there may be some connection between killer and victim.

Hi, Michael. Certianly all of those scenarios could be applicable. But as you know there was talk at the time that Eddowes met her killer. And then there's the whole Stride thing, but I'm not going there. I guess I lean towards they knew him because they seem to have really let their guards down.

For MJK, I think, for example, she knew Blotchy: you don't sing sad songs to a complete stranger.

Chava, I am concerned why you said that they might be all he could afford.

I also am curious about how long it might take JTR to pick up just any old "willing" victim. Suppose he starts wandering the streets, say midnight on a weekend or holiday, how long do you feel that, on the average, he would walk? His selection or lack thereof has come up on so many different threads, I ask myself this often. I just can't answer it all that well.

[Chava]

Hi Paul,

I wasn't referring to the Ripper, but to any punter who picked up any of the first 4 women. I doubt they would be pricing their charms very highly, and probably performed for the price of a tot of gin. What the Ripper could afford I've no idea!

As for how long it would take him to find a victim, there do seem to be a lot of 'unfortunates' around. And I believe Mayhew suggested there were upwards of 60000 prostitutes working in London in the mid-century. So I assume there was a fair amount of choice. Of course you then have to narrow it down to personal predeliction, area of hunt, area of kill etc. But I can't imagine he would have had to spend too long looking. Unless he was looking for an exact type--which of course would fit in with the first 4, all of whom are remarkably similar in my opinion. But others would give me an argument on that

[paul emmett]

As for how long it would take him to find a victim, there do seem to be a lot of 'unfortunates' around. And I believe Mayhew suggested there were upwards of 60000 prostitutes working in London in the mid-century. So I assume there was a fair amount of choice. Of course you then have to narrow it down to personal predeliction, area of hunt, area of kill etc. But I can't imagine he would have had to spend too long looking. Unless he was looking for an exact type--which of course would fit in with the first 4, all of whom are remarkably similar in my opinion. But others would give me an argument on that

Hi, Chava.

No argument here: I'm the one--and I did think it was ONE--who thinks JTR is selective. I too think that there were aplenty to select from. And so I felt that the times of the kill, and perhaps even the times between kills, suggest he's not just settling for the first warm and willing body he haps upon.

I also like the similarities in the first(I'm for Tabram) 5. Indeed, I even think the progressions are important. My fiancee' said last night, "they get a bit prettier and younger looking." And she was just paging through "theoryless."

[perrymason]

But that doesn't mean that she knew him, which was my point, Mike. Therefore, whether she stayed in or went out again, it has little or no relevance to whether or not she knew her killer.

Sam,

I didnt say she knew him....I said the scenario on record allows for the possibility.... that he did not randomly select Mary Kelly while she trawled for clients in alleys. Sure, he may have tried the door and found it unlocked, or found the window method while there, but its also possible he knocked and was let in by Mary, or let himself in but was allowed to stay when Mary sees who it is. The faintish cry of approx 3:45am perhaps corroberates one of those possibilities, she is awakened, but allows the person who woke her without any appreciable noise or conversation, to stay...a nosey unfortunate upstairs attested to that.

No other canonical victim has the real possibility that she was selected, and possibly knew her killer, other than in the evidence regarding Mary Kelly.

My best regards Sam.

[Chava]

No Paul. I have always agreed with you. In my opinion the first four are all far too similar for it to be a coincidence--although I'm aware that many people will point out that there must have been hundreds of similar women out there on the nights when he killed. Nevertheless I believe he had a particular kind of victim in mind and killed when he found her. That is why I think it's entirely possible that Kelly was killed by a different hand. Or by the same hand for different reasons...

[paul emmett]

Hi, Chava.

I'm more of a same hand, different reasons guy. Although Joan still goes for progressions, which I do see. Now it's "less Reubenesque."

Have a good day.

[celee]

Hi,

In my opinion there is nothing at all that indicates that Mary Kelly knew her attacker. Ther a blanket statement, the emperor has no cloths.

Your friend, Brad

[Sox]

I think that maybe since the streets had up'ed the PC's after his first few kills, that may be why he decided to kill indoors.

My bold

There you have the crux of the matter, that one word, decided. There is a key element in the question posed by the OP that must be decided, and that question is: Was Kelly a Ripper victim? If you accept that she was, then the chances are, that it was she herself who chose the place where she died, not her killer.

Chava, ask yourself why the killer was murdering these women in autumn. Contrary to your belief, these women did prefer to earn an honest bob, as opposed to selling sex, and as the summer waned, the chances of earning that honest bob waned with it. The exception to this is Kelly, who seems to have been a common prostitute.

No other canonical victim has the real possibility that she was selected, and possibly knew her killer, other than in the evidence regarding Mary Kelly.

Sorry Mike but thats just nonesense.