Soliciting or night attack.

[DVV]

Hi Claire,

the fire can't last too long. But the pane was broken for good.

Amitiés,
David

[The Good Michael]

Claire,

I think we have some fairly obvious surmise about Kelly, as distasteful as surmise with regards to a woman's choice of trade may be. I believe there is little doubt that this is what she did for a living and what afforded her a room, albeit a small, sketchy one.

Cheers,

Mike

[claire]

True enough, Mike. But my point was really that, unlike the others whose street soliciting (albeit sporadic, perhaps) has been noted, we don't have the same information about Mary. Then again, if her previous 'work' had been in the comforts of a gay-house, whether in London, Cardiff or France, then she may well have been reluctant to take to the streets (a step down too far, perhaps). And, yes, she had to find custom somewhere.

David...cold outside, yes, but there was a fire in the room. It's pretty chilly here right now but I don't generally go to bed in all my clothes...and if it was really that cold in the room, she was perfectly able to conduct business without stripping right down.

[The Good Michael]

and yet there are many who don't distinguish between Mary's brand of very lackadaisical prostitution and the committed efforts of women like Mary Ann Cox.

Stride wasn't full-time and neither did any of them seem committed prostitutes. At least Kelly had an anecdotal history of having prostitution as a profession, which is more than can be said for the others.

Cheers,

Mike

[DVV]

Equally compatible with preparation for bed.
Ben

Hi Ben,

I'm not sure. A bit too cold, imo.

Amitiés,
David

[claire]

Completely agree with you on all those counts, Ben. It troubles me that Barnett said that he left because of Mary's consorting with bad types, along with the implication that she had turned to prostitution again (due to their having lost their income when he found himself out of work), and yet there are many who don't distinguish between Mary's brand of very lackadaisical prostitution and the committed efforts of women like Mary Ann Cox.

I think (and please correct me if I am wrong) that we only have a couple of very unreliable accounts of Mary soliciting on the street (at least one of which appears to be a case of mistaken identity). And, even if she had been known to, it doesn't appear she was doing it with any diligence on that particular day.

This all said, I think it at least as likely that this was not an intruder in the classic sense of the word, but someone knocking on her door at an utterly antisocial hour. We just don't know that she left the door unlocked when she was asleep in her bed; I think it at least as likely that she did not. But we do know that she received male visitors, whether customers, friends or former lovers, and I suspect she wouldn't be any more than blinking irritated that one would come a-knocking just as she was finally managing to fall asleep after an entire day on the sauce.

[Ben]

Hi Hunter,

Just a few counter-observations.

Mary was a prostitute.

That's true, but so was Mary Cox who, despite having a place of her own in Miller's Court, clearly preferred to conduct her business on the streets.

She was evidently seen with costomers that night.

It depends how strong the evidence is. The blotchy man could have been a client, certainly, but he could just as easily have been a drinking companion or close friend. The fact that she was singing for the next half an hour or so rather than getting straight down to contractual business may support the latter contention. The other possible customer is the Astrakhan man described by Hutchinson, but given the account's numerous implausible and suspicious elements as well as the indications that it was subsequently discredited by police, I doubt very much that the "customer" even existed.

She knew that McCarthy was going to come for the rent the next day.

Mary Cox had similar anxieties, but she appears to have reasoned, quite sensibly, that she'd get through a greater number clients more quickly (and thus earn more money) on the streets. Kelly's drunken serenading of the blotchy man is not particularly consistent with a feeling of urgency to secure the relevant amount of money in time for rent-collecting either.

She was known to take clients home with her.

This is far from proven.

She was found in a state of undress.

Equally compatible with preparation for bed.

There was no struggle heard- unless 'oh, murder!' qualifies as such.

Which would seem compatible with a surprise attack, which in turn would tally with an intruder scenario.

"If it is believed that she was murdered by the same hand as the others, it is likely that they were killed while soliciting- not by stalking"

Soliciting doesn't preclude stalking. We have no way of knowing the length of time taken by the killer to single out his previous victims. If we're to accept that the killer was capable of changing the type of location for dispatching his victims, we ought really to make the same allowances for his pre-crime approach.

Best regards,
Ben

[Hunter]

Probability

Hello All,

Some good points have been made by each side in regards as to whether Mary Kelly invited her killer in or was killed by an intruder. In testing theories, I only ask that what is obvious be considered.

Mary was a prostitute.

She was evidently seen with costomers that night.

She knew that McCarthy was going to come for the rent the next day.

She was known to take clients home with her.

She was found in a state of undress.

There was no struggle heard- unless 'oh, murder!' qualifies as such.

If it is believed that she was murdered by the same hand as the others, it is likely that they were killed while soliciting- not by stalking- and the killer had somehow gained their trust ( Of course, being intoxicated and desperate can help).

Any of the above viewed separately wouldn't amount to much, but as a whole, offer a probability.
Could Mary have been killed by an intruder? - Yes... In dealing with speculation, however, which is the most probable?

Got to go to bed. Have to build a fireplace for a costomer tommorow

Best Wishes,
Hunter

[DVV]

You're right, Jason.

Barnett was a "cocu magnifique".

Amitiés,
David

[jason_c]

Barnett had been gone from No13 barely nine days, so define 'regular'.

Whenever Barnett was working or getting drunk in a pub she had plenty time to get regulars, wether it be in her room or outdoors.

A fair point about Barnett only being away for nine days but my arguement still stands. Prostitutes and clients expect some privacy. Thats why back alleys and dark corners were used as places for sex. Privacy at 4am was almost guaranteed in Kelly's room.

Im also fairly sure Kelly had return customers.

[DVV]

Thanks Richard,

you know I respect all kinds of views, but in this case I can't help feeling you must have some reason to favor this quite unbelievable "morning scenario and timing"...
But I'm patient...one day I'll know why...

Amitiés mon cher,
David

[richardnunweek]

Hello David,
Do I believe Mary Kelly vomited?
Answer .
I believe she told Mrs Maxwell that, it is possible that she drank some ale. left from the previous night , and vomited .
If this was the case it would depend upon the severity of the vomiting.
I remember reading that fish and chips/potaoes, could be digested in 90 minutes, so if she was killed around 9am , it would have been possible to have eaten some around 730am.
Do I believe that ?
Answer No.
What time did kelly consume the food?
Answer... no idea.
Do I believe Maurice Lewis?
Yes And No, I accept he was in the court that morning playing pitch and toss, simply because he admitted playing an illegal game, but I also accept he described the wrong person, by the said description, but the mystery is .
If he saw this woman , who he believed was the dead woman, leave kellys room , and return to it.... Who was this woman?
And to top it all he saw this same woman talking to a man he describes as Dan [Barnett] at 10am[ not possible] in the Britannica.
So who was this woman, who was not Kelly, she was obviously known in the area, and what connection was she to both Mary, and Joe.?
More mysteries my friend.
Regards Richard.

[richardnunweek]

Hello Mike,
I must agree Fionas snippits on Casebook were short lived, however there were reasons for her departure, although I understand she and Coral corresponded after.
I agree dangling a 'carrot' is not cricket so to speak, for I feel her oral history could have been so important to Casebook, to actually hear the views of the McCarthy clan, would be most intresting, to say the least.
According to Fiona, her great-grandfather not only knew who might have been responsible, but motive also.
Fascinating, one wonders did the police hear of his suspicions?
Did he act privately on his suspicions?
For him to believe he knew who, and why, does this suggest the killer was connected to Mjk, and had a reason to kill her.?
Anyway we proberly will never know ....unfortunetly.
Regards Richard.

[DVV]

Hi Richard,

I asked you this on the other thread, and I ask it again...
Do you really believe Mary has vomitted in the morning, then has eaten fish and potatoes, then has taken a guy home...etc ?
And btw, do you believe Maurice Lewis ? (ie: Mary was short, stout and dark.)

Amitiés,
David

[richardnunweek]

Hi Claire,
If Kelly had lit the fire the question arises.
When ?
If it was when she entertained Blotchy, then Mrs Prater never saw it when she went up her stairs at 130am.
Was it when she arrived home with Astracan, after all she was alleged to have said 'You will be confortable' [ overheard by Hutchinson]
In which case why would she burn precious items such as pawnable clothing?
Did he say he would pay her well , and she believed this fine gentleman may be a a future sugar daddy? so the clothing was unimportant.
Was it Jack The Ripper she was taking back to her room, and he was in luck , this woman was even going to light a fire for him...
Questions I Cant answer, but the boots may be a clue.
I believe the most sustainable rain was at dawn , when it was wet enough for Catherine Pickett to know at the door of room 13, to borrow kellys shawl, as it was heavy drizzle.
So if her boots needed drying I would say she lit the fire on awakening before 8am, and speculation has me having kelly take them off , after returning home around 850am, to wait the arrival of Maxwells porter.
I have already in previous posts discussed the room clues, and feel this scenerio, best describes my idea of what might have occurred.
Regards Richard.