The Broken Window

[Abby Normal]

Or of course Ochams razor dictates that the killer entered the room by the door which was not locked after MJK's visitor left.

MJK leaves the door on the latch for ease of entry and besides what is there to steal.

She enters with blotchy face and has a beer and a sing song, she gets out of her wet clothes, lights a few rags in the grate to try and dry them and eventually passes out on the bed, blotchy face leaves forgetting to press the snib and lock the door.

Killer arrives and finds the door on the latch and enters. He stabs down through the sheet which wakens MJK who manages to gasp out 'Murder' before she succumbs.

Murderer mutilates body and leaves after pressing snib and causing the door to lock after him.

I believe this is a very likely possibility. It could have been Blotchy or a subsequent customer that the killer was waiting for to leave.

[Chava]

Please let's leave Kudzu out of this!

Fisherman, the rain may not have destroyed evidence on the window which would have been situated within a window case which was itself situated within a window recess. The only way the rain washes away blood from the shard of glass is is the wind is blowing directly at it.

Once again, I'm not putting forward a theory, simply examining a possibility.

[richardnunweek]

Hi Ben,
I agree with what you have said about the 'internal report', but would he not have sent any bogus statement to his superiors , along with the authentic one, if the plot I have suggested took place.?
As for his detective force, and beat officers, they would have been informed to apprehend any man fitting a description given to them at briefing.which could have been anyone..not necessarily 'Astracan'.
I guess I am attempting to fight myself out of a 'paper bag'
Regards Richard.

[Fisherman]

Chava:

"that is the obvious explanation. And in general one I subscribe to, since I think that of everyone mentioned, Blotchy-Face is the best suspect if only because there are other witness statements in other events that sound like him. Particularly the attempted murder of Ada Wilson.
However, to address the issue of a random killer, it is possible that someone who has the predilection to be a voyeur wanders around the area at night. Wanders into Millers Court. Sees the broken window through which he can easily pull the coat away to look inside. Sees a woman alone and asleep on the bed. Sees that the door is close and that it is possible to unlock it from the window. Attempts to do this and succeeds at the cost of a ripped arm. Now furious at the woman who has caused him to hurt himself, he kills her and basically rips her apart.
I'm not saying this happened. The above is entirely conjecture based on the reporting of blood on edges of the broken window. That blood suggests the possibility of a random killer--I mean random in the sense that MJK did not know him and had had no dealings with him. However this could also point to to someone like Barnett, who admitted to Abberline that he had gained ingress to the room that way in the past.
Whoever he was, if there was any blood trace outside the window or the door, it would be washed away if it rained. Was it raining that night? I think it was but I don't know for sure."

Well, Chava, my own feeling is that cutting himself would not be the main incentive for this killer to rip people apart. It went deeper than the wound you speak of.
By the way, do we know that the blood Bowyer speaks of was on the edges of the broken pane, as you say?
And yes, it did rain that night. But if the rain washed the blood away, then how did Bowyer see it ...? He arrived a good many hours before the blood (alledgedly) ended up on the window.

The best,
Fisherman

[richardnunweek]

Hi,
Forgive me if the last post was slight 'off thread', we are discusssing the broken window here.
Regardless of description I too accept that Hutch saw MK, with a man entering her room, but I dont accept he killed her, although the police and Hutchinson would have believed so..via medical reports, and cry heard, even if some ninety minutes later.
Explanation for the cry, was explained by Prater at the inquest, with 'vocal 'interpretation.
No acceptable reason has been given, for Mrs Maxwell to have been either mistaken, or having lied.
And why would Maurice Lewis, inform a newspaper he was 'playing pitch' which was illegal, clearly he considered his sighting important?
Off thread ..once again.
Regards Richard.
The broken window I feel, was never even noticed by Kellys killer, he simply walked in her door at 9am, with kelly waiting for him dressed down to her chemise.
So its a 9am murder for me anyway.

[Ben]

So I will suggest, that Hutchinson saw a different man altogether, and that the description given was made up by the police with the intention of giving the real suspect a 'false' sense of security.

Not possible, I'm afraid, Richard.

Abberline sent a private, internal police report on the subject of Hutchinson's account and it included the full "Astrakhan" description. Obviously there were no advantage to be gained by giving his police colleagues and superiors a "made up" description.

All the best,
Ben

[Chava]

Raoul, that is the obvious explanation. And in general one I subscribe to, since I think that of everyone mentioned, Blotchy-Face is the best suspect if only because there are other witness statements in other events that sound like him. Particularly the attempted murder of Ada Wilson.

However, to address the issue of a random killer, it is possible that someone who has the predilection to be a voyeur wanders around the area at night. Wanders into Millers Court. Sees the broken window through which he can easily pull the coat away to look inside. Sees a woman alone and asleep on the bed. Sees that the door is close and that it is possible to unlock it from the window. Attempts to do this and succeeds at the cost of a ripped arm. Now furious at the woman who has caused him to hurt himself, he kills her and basically rips her apart.

I'm not saying this happened. The above is entirely conjecture based on the reporting of blood on edges of the broken window. That blood suggests the possibility of a random killer--I mean random in the sense that MJK did not know him and had had no dealings with him. However this could also point to to someone like Barnett, who admitted to Abberline that he had gained ingress to the room that way in the past.

Whoever he was, if there was any blood trace outside the window or the door, it would be washed away if it rained. Was it raining that night? I think it was but I don't know for sure.

[Fisherman]

Raoul:

"Why can we not take a simple sollution and say that Kelly took her punter home"

We can, Raoul - nothing wrong with the suggestion. But just like Claire, I feel that she may just as well have opted for the relative comforts of home on a very late night, being drunk and in no position to make up for more than a tiny fraction of the money she owed McCarthy anyway. Ask yourself how "simple" the decision would be to in a drunken state venture out alone on dark, raindrenched and cold November night streets, prowled by a mad killer with a professed taste for prostitutes...?

The best,
Fisherman

[richardnunweek]

Hi,
The Astracan description has always bugged me, the man simply was not dressed for a bloodbath.
I find it extremely unlikely that any woman , prostitute or not , would let a man of such attire, escort her home , and invite them in,.. he would have aroused suspicion big time.
It has always concerned me that such an 'description' if accurate?, would be released, as surely if the man Hutchinson saw, was indeed dressed as described, the killer knowing that, would have dressed down somewhat,altering appearance to evade capture.
Even if Astracan was innocent, and just a early morning punter[ unlikely], he would never have stayed in that area , at least dressed in the clothes he wore that night.
So what was the point in releasing such a description if accurate?
None.
So I will suggest, that Hutchinson saw a different man altogether, and that the description given was made up by the police with the intention of giving the real suspect a 'false' sense of security.
I should add that this was with the permission of GH, and he duely added his signature, with possible funds for his help , which included walkabouts with police officers looking for a completely different person then his statement suggested.
Far fetched?, what if GH was Topping, why would he describe the man he saw with kelly many years later as recorded in his statement.
He could hardly say different could he? without suggesting the police issued a false description, and he put his name to a lie . also what a party peice keeping it the way it was.
According to Reg Hutchinson his father used to say' He knew one of the women, and had to give a statement to the police', however dispite all his efforts , nothing came of it.'
That much I believe, but the rest..mmm.
Regards Richard.

[Raoul's Obsession]

MJK leaves the door on the latch for ease of entry and besides what is there to steal.

She enters with blotchy face and has a beer and a sing song, she gets out of her wet clothes, lights a few rags in the grate to try and dry them and eventually passes out on the bed, blotchy face leaves forgetting to press the snib and lock the door.

A few people on these boards have been wondering why Elizabeth Prater (I think it was her?) claims to have put items of furniture against her door on the night in question while Mary Kelly seemed happy to leave the door unlocked when she left. Clearly Prater put the furniture there because she feared for her life with the Ripper on the prowl. And I think that is the key - they feared for their life, not for their possessions. After all, what was there to steal. Why would you bother locking the door when you left if you knew you had nothing of interest to a thief. It's highly unlikely that they will steal your bedside table or the priint on the wall. But whether Kelly would have left the door unlocked while she went to bed - well that is a different story I think. I doubt she would have done given the fear she herself expressed to Barnett.

As for Mary burning some clothes - I highly doubt that. Any clothes, even the worst of the worst had some value over and above burning for warmth. Given her financial situation I doubt she would have burnt them. She certainly didn't have to go far to sell them. That is, if they were even hers. I can only assume that the ripper burnt them for light or heat or both. As for the kettle though - I doubt it was made of very stern stuff. With a very high lead content it would have had a rather low melting point.

Why can we not take a simple sollution and say that Kelly took her punter home, they both entered through an unlocked door, she took off her clothes ready for bed with him pretending to fiddle with his boots (insert your delaying act of choice here). She lies down turning her head away from him for a second. He takes his oportunity and kills her. He lights a fire. Butchers Kelly and then leaves flicking the catch on the door and pulling it shut.

[Bob Hinton]

Not really.

Bob,
If we accept Astrakan man as being real,it would mean Hutchinson told the truth on that score,and we can then accept him(Hutchinson) truthfully as being there untill 3am,Lewis seeing him at 2.30,and then leaving..How long do you believe Kelly entertained Astrakan,and how would the killer know that she was then alone.

No I accept that Hutchinson saw MJK with someone in the street and later going to her room, however he was nothing like the description he gave which is totally fictitious. I use the phrase "Astrakhan Man" simply as a means of giving him a label.

[claire]

He knew her, he knew where to find her and he knew that she was alone - once we try that angle, we find a much more even and broad path to walk.

Agreed. It stretches belief that, not knowing what he would find, he'd just try a few doors/windows.

This said, it's possible, I concede, that he simply knew about McCarthy's rents (knowing exactly what that euphemism meant), picked the first room nearest the passageway, and if he walked in and found a man in there, then he'd most likely have enough time to hightail it back down the passage before the occupants struggled upright in their bed.

[Fisherman]

... and why would we believe in Astrakhan man in the first place, given the treatment Hutchinsons testimony received? Otherwise, yes, the killer may have seen Kelly enter her room with a punter - but we must then suppose that Kelly was desperate enough to try and raise a bob or two in a - reasonably - drunken state in the early hours of the morning.
Moreover, how did the killer know that the punter - especially if it was a man of some wealth as Astrakhan man seemed to be - was not paying for a full hour? Or two? Or three? And why would he feel certain that as the punter left, the prostitute would not do so too - if she was in dire need of money, then why not just get dressed and leave alongside the john, looking for further business?
Standing around, hoping for some sort of statistical outfall, seems a risky thing to do.

We can of course change the picture and make the guess that the Ripper could have passed outside the court just as Kelly wawed goodby to a client, making it clear that she was on the game - but this too would be a bit too much to hope for, I feel.

He knew her, he knew where to find her and he knew that she was alone - once we try that angle, we find a much more even and broad path to walk.

the best,
Fisherman

[harry]

Bob,
If we accept Astrakan man as being real,it would mean Hutchinson told the truth on that score,and we can then accept him(Hutchinson) truthfully as being there untill 3am,Lewis seeing him at 2.30,and then leaving..How long do you believe Kelly entertained Astrakan,and how would the killer know that she was then alone.

[Bob Hinton]

Reply to your post

Good points let me answer them.

First of all I am in error in my post. I meant to say that MJK entered her room with Astrakhan man not blotchy face. After her business with him is finished she lies down asleep and off he goes.

Why was he there in the first place? He would not go in search for street prostitution inside the court, would he? And he would not start at one end of Dorset street, checking all the doors, would he?

No of course he wouldn’t , but if he was outside in the street and saw MJK enter with a customer, Astrakhan man, and then see customer leave he could reasonable expect her to be alone. Trying to gain access he tries the door and finds it open.

Her life, obviously. And we know she was scared of the Ripper, as witnessed about by Barnett. Then again, not remembering to lock the door would be easy to accept if she was more or less drunk.

I don’t mean she would leave it on the latch when she is in the room, merely when she leaves the room for whatever reason. She returns with Astrakhan man, she enters first gets undressed etc. When she is finished A Man goes off and she being asleep doesn’t secure the door.