The burnt clothing

[Robert]

Hi Garry

The only way for him to make sure that there was no one in the room, would have been for him to have hung around outside the court checking on who went in and came out. This would have involved standing around in the rain for hours. Are you suggesting that he had a personal motive for killing Kelly, or simply that he wanted to commit a murder indoors?

[Garry Wroe]

Hi Garry

I agree that it was Kelly uttering the cry. But you said earlier that the room was a trap that the killer would not have wanted to be cornered in. Then you say that very few people were out on the streets because of the weather.

The point, Robert, is that if Kelly and her killer had been unknown to one another, he would have had no idea if he was going to be disturbed by a friend, fellow prostitute, boyfriend, husband or pimp - despite any assurances Kelly may have given him to the contrary. It is for this reason, I believe, that the crime occurred as late as it did. Quite simply, the killer waited until such time as he felt it unlikely that he would be interrupted.

[Garry Wroe]

"had the cry been emitted outdoors from within the court, it would surely have been heard by Mrs Cox who, by her own admission, was awake throughout the entirety of the night."

Prater said that the cry, a faint one by her account, seemed to come from the court, whereas Lewis said that it was a loud cry, as if at the door of the Keylers. But Cox, she said she heard no such outcry at all...?

It rather depends upon ones sources, Fish. Sarah Lewis was quoted as saying that the cry emanated from close by, seemingly from the direction of Mary Jane’s room. Be this as it may, the anomaly over the volume of the cry is easily rationalized when one remembers that the Keylers’ accommodation overlooked Mary Jane’s room. Mrs Prater’s room, on the other hand, was on the Dorset Street side of the building and looked out on to Crossingham’s/the Commercial Chambers. So not only was Sarah Lewis closer to Kelly’s room, she was closer to the broken window panes which allowed the cry to filter out into the courtyard. It should come as no great surprise, therefore, that the cry was more audible to Lewis than it was to Prater.

And Mrs Cox?

I tend to think that she drifted in and out of sleep without even realizing it.

Maybe she [Mrs Cox] was NOT awake through the night? That is one possibility. But another one is that there never even was any outcry, in spite of the suggested corroboration inbetween Prater and Lewis; as the people from the court woke that morning and Kelly´s fate was found out, there will have been a lot of discussions and rumours flying about, so what seems like a watertight corroboration may be something else altogether. It has been suggested before on these boards.

Indeed it has, Fish. But if Lewis and Prater were in communication on the morning of the murder and somehow fabricated the cry of alarm, it stands to reason that they also spoke to Cox and learned of Kelly’s midnight dalliance with Blotchy. Given these circumstances, it would almost certainly have been assumed that Blotchy was the killer and that he despatched Mary Jane shortly after her candle was snuffed out at one o’clock. How strange, then, that both women placed the cry within fifteen or twenty minutes of a quarter to four. Stranger still that this timing accords remarkably well with Kelly’s likely time of death – a timing that was yet to be established when police questioned Kelly’s neighbours on the morning of the murder.

So I don’t buy into the fabrication theory, I’m afraid, Fish. Sometimes the evidence speaks for itself.

[jason_c]

The killer was safer in Kelly's room than he had been when killing outside. Dont just take my word for it, take JtR's actions as proof of this. He spent far longer with Kelly than he had with any other victim. This suggests he felt safer inside.

One of the reasons he'd feel safe is he could reasonably assume he would not be disturbed. Kelly was a prostitute, it was in her interests not to be disturbed when with clients. Otherwise she'd have no repeat customers.

[Fisherman]

A few more points, Garry, though this post was directed to Fleetwood M and not to me:

"a series of delicate cuts to Kate’s face"

Delicate? I don´t see that, unless you call removing the nose "delicate".

"As for the Stride killing, I regard it on an evidential basis as unrelated to the Ripper series"

Heureka!

"That Blotchy was not the killer is borne out by the reality that he allowed Mrs Cox to view his face."

He had entered the court with Kelly. What was he to do when Cox surfaced? Pull his coat over his head? THAT would have looked very suspicious!

Joking aside, I don´t think this holds water. Many a serial killer have shown their faces. And the Church passage man did, remember! Not that we have any certainty that he was the killer, but I certainly don´t rule him out on account of his showing his face.

"Whichever way one looks at it, however, there must have been prior knowledge on the part of the killer."

No "must" involved - but I think you are right.

The best,
Fisherman

PS. I´ll be off the boards for some time, but I´ll check in again later!

[Garry Wroe]

… it's not much a of a stretch to envisage that JTR made a point of targetting a woman with her own place in order to indulge his desires, particularly if he killed Stride and was disturbed, and was then moments away from being caught with Eddowes.

I’m unsure as to why you assume that the killer came close to capture at Mitre Square, FM. He certainly had the time to inflict a series of delicate cuts to Kate’s face and liberate a portion of her apron. Such behaviour is hardly consistent with a man fleeing from the scene of crime. As for the Stride killing, I regard it on an evidential basis as unrelated to the Ripper series and therefore meaningless in context of understanding the killer’s underlying motivations.

Although I take your point concerning Kelly, I nevertheless maintain that everything about this killing suggests an element of knowledge on the part of the killer regarding Kelly’s domestic situation – and he didn’t come by this by looking her up in a trade directory.

… it follows that Kelly need not have been known to him, just another prostitute he'd picked up, only this time with a place for privacy.

Picked up when, though, FM? If prior to 9 November we have a pre-existing relationship. If not, then Kelly must have gone out in search of business after Blotchy’s departure. But the only evidence supportive of such a contention comes to us courtesy of the demonstrably spurious accounts of George Hutchinson – a witness who came to be discredited by the police.

If Hutchinson is factored out of the equation the facts become eminently straightforward. Kelly took Blotchy home shortly before midnight, shared his beer, then retired to bed for the night. That Blotchy was not the killer is borne out by the reality that he allowed Mrs Cox to view his face. Thus it is likely that he went on his way at some point before 3:30am, leaving Mary Jane alone and sleeping on the bed. Since it is probable that she was killed between 3:30 and 4:00am, it naturally follows that the killer either called on her in the guise of a friend or punter, or simply let himself into the room. Whichever way one looks at it, however, there must have been prior knowledge on the part of the killer.

[Fisherman]

Garry Wroe:

"had the cry been emitted outdoors from within the court, it would surely have been heard by Mrs Cox who, by her own admission, was awake throughout the entirety of the night."

Prater said that the cry, a faint one by her account, seemed to come from the court, whereas Lewis said that it was a loud cry, as if at the door of the Keylers. But Cox, she said she heard no such outcry at all...?

So the cry seemingly WAS emitted in the court, and if we are to believe Lewis, it was even a loud one. So why did not Cox hear it?

It can also be noted that Prater stated that crying "Murder!" was nothing much out of the ordinary in the neighbourhood. I agree, as you will know, that we are speaking of empty streets, more or less, but that is only more or less - it cannot be ruled out that somebody passing through the street did the shouting. If it happened right outside the passageway into the court, it would have travelled into it. And, if we are to rely on the inquest proceedings as recorded in the Times, we may not have to turn to the streets at all, for in these proceedings, Prater is quoted as saying that "she did not take much notice of it, however, as they were continually hearing cries of murder in the court." To me, that implies that stating that it is "overwhelmingly probable" that Kelly did the shouting may be too optimistic a bid.

As for the discrepancy inbetween Lewis´"loud" outcry and Praters "faint" one, I think it is reasonable to suggest that Prater was only just surfacing from the depths of sleep, and so she may have been hearing it all in a haze. It is much more troublesome to imagine Lewis having had the cry magically amplified. But if this is correct, then, once again, why did not the sleepless Cox hear a loud outcry, apparently from inside the court?

Maybe she was NOT awake through the night? That is one possibility. But another one is that there never even was any outcry, in spite of the suggested corroboration inbetween Prater and Lewis; as the people from the court woke that morning and Kelly´s fate was found out, there will have been a lot of discussions and rumours flying about, so what seems like a watertight corroboration may be something else altogether. It has been suggested before on these boards.

Whichever way we look upon this, we are left with built-in logical flaws on a major scale, and, consequentially, making deductions bordering on near-certainties from it may perhaps be unwise. At least that is how I see it.

The best,
Fisherman

[Robert]

Hi Garry

I agree that it was Kelly uttering the cry. But you said earlier that the room was a trap that the killer would not have wanted to be cornered in. Then you say that very few people were out on the streets because of the weather.

[Garry Wroe]

Knowing how these tenents came and went, anyone could have seen a light in Kelly's room and tried the door. Finding it locked? could have reached through the broken window turning back the curtain/coat and gasped, "Oh, murder!".

I think it overwhelmingly probable, Jon, that the cry of ‘Murder!’ emanated from Mary Jane herself. The night in question was cold, wet and windy, meaning that very few people were out on the streets. Likewise, had the cry been emitted outdoors from within the court, it would surely have been heard by Mrs Cox who, by her own admission, was awake throughout the entirety of the night. And since there is no evidence of an unrelated ‘domestic’ occurring within the court at the relevant time, it must be considered a near-certainty that the cry signalled the onset of the Miller’s Court murder.

[Robert]

Could it not also be that Kelly was one of the few women who lived behind a homeless shelter which had recently been closed and locked; that it was raining on the night of the 8th - 9th; that Kelly's door could have seemed like a back entrance to the shelter; and that the killer was used to wandering round, ducking into and out of places, and was becoming increasingly disorganized?

[Fleetwood Mac]

You could argue this both ways. In my mind, it's just as likely that he felt more secure in someone's home. I'm not sure how often East Enders popped into on another's home at 4 in the morning, although I'd guess not very often.

Plus, it's not much a of a stretch to envisage that JTR made a point of targetting a woman with her own place in order to indulge his desires, particularly if he killed Stride and was disturbed, and was then moments away from being caught with Eddowes.

Seems logical to me that he would have looked for another option i.e. someone's home.

And, it follows that Kelly need not have been known to him, just another prostitute he'd picked up, only this time with a place for privacy.

Perhaps this accounted for the length of time between the double event and the Kelly murder: nearly caught twice could have led to a decision to not kill on the street and he had the patience to wait until he found a woman with her own home.

Plus, if Kelly had a reputation for taking sailors back to her home, then I'm sure it would have been known to the local punters. And perhaps this is what accounts for the increased ferocity - she was known to him as a friend of sorts, he may have liked her but she was the only one he knew with privacy and his urge was getting the better of him - because he liked her, his self-loathing intensified and he took it out on her. I suppose this would put someone like Hutchinson in the frame.

A bit garbled the above; the point being that there are a few options, none of which are particularly any more realistic than the others.

[Abby Normal]

On the contrary, Robert. Out on the street the killer would have had ample warning of a stranger’s approach courtesy of the noise made by heavy Victorian boots as they impacted with roads and pavements, making either an escape or a retreat into the shadows a relatively simple process. Kelly’s room, on the other hand, accorded him but one escape route, rendering the venue far more risky than the Buck’s Row or Mitre Square crime scenes. Had anyone entered the room unexpectedly, the game would have been up.

Having said this, the psychopath does not respond to pain or fear as does a ‘normally’ functioning person. Indeed, many psychopathic serialists are known to have thrived on the element of risk that was part and parcel of their offences. Hence it is no accident that the active offender has a tendency to take increasingly greater risks as the series progresses.


The problem with this line of thinking though, Robert, is that very few women of Kelly’s ilk lived alone – especially not the younger, more attractive ones. If we therefore dismiss the notion that Mary Jane was targeted in advance, we are confronted with the proposition that the Ripper elected to commit in indoor murder and just happened to chance upon one of the few young and attractive East End women who lived alone. To my way of thinking, the odds against such an outcome would be truly astronomical.

To compound matters, Kelly had been living with Joe Barnett until ten days prior to her death, and Maria Harvey’s side of the bed had barely gone cold. Accordingly, we can either conclude that the Ripper was an individual blessed with an inordinate degree of serendipity, or that he was aware of her domestic situation and targeted her precisely because she lived alone.

I know where my money would be going.

Hi Garry

or that he was aware of her domestic situation and targeted her precisely because she lived alone.[/FONT]

I agree. I think the evidence points toward MK being done for the night after Blotchy, so I dont think she went back out. Which means the killer came to her place, so he must have known her.

[Wickerman]

... Had anyone entered the room unexpectedly, the game would have been up.

Knowing how these tenents came and went, anyone could have seen a light in Kelly's room and tried the door. Finding it locked? could have reached through the broken window turning back the curtain/coat and gasped, "Oh, murder!".

Astonishing no-one came forward, then again, perhaps this neighbour also recognized the villain, and feared for her life too.
Just conjecture.

...
To compound matters, Kelly had been living with Joe Barnett until ten days prior to her death, and Maria Harvey’s side of the bed had barely gone cold. Accordingly, we can either conclude that the Ripper was an individual blessed with an inordinate degree of serendipity, or that he was aware of her domestic situation and targeted her precisely because she lived alone.

I know where my money would be going.

Absolutely!

Regards, Jon S.

[Garry Wroe]

This man was prepared to kill and mutilate while someone next door toddled up the path to the toilet. He was either a risk taker, or someone oblivious to risk. Personally I'd have felt safer in Kelly's room than doing it out in the street.

On the contrary, Robert. Out on the street the killer would have had ample warning of a stranger’s approach courtesy of the noise made by heavy Victorian boots as they impacted with roads and pavements, making either an escape or a retreat into the shadows a relatively simple process. Kelly’s room, on the other hand, accorded him but one escape route, rendering the venue far more risky than the Buck’s Row or Mitre Square crime scenes. Had anyone entered the room unexpectedly, the game would have been up.

Having said this, the psychopath does not respond to pain or fear as does a ‘normally’ functioning person. Indeed, many psychopathic serialists are known to have thrived on the element of risk that was part and parcel of their offences. Hence it is no accident that the active offender has a tendency to take increasingly greater risks as the series progresses.

I think it was indeed someone who entered her room in the middle of the night, but I don't think she was being targeted.

The problem with this line of thinking though, Robert, is that very few women of Kelly’s ilk lived alone – especially not the younger, more attractive ones. If we therefore dismiss the notion that Mary Jane was targeted in advance, we are confronted with the proposition that the Ripper elected to commit in indoor murder and just happened to chance upon one of the few young and attractive East End women who lived alone. To my way of thinking, the odds against such an outcome would be truly astronomical.

To compound matters, Kelly had been living with Joe Barnett until ten days prior to her death, and Maria Harvey’s side of the bed had barely gone cold. Accordingly, we can either conclude that the Ripper was an individual blessed with an inordinate degree of serendipity, or that he was aware of her domestic situation and targeted her precisely because she lived alone.

I know where my money would be going.

[Robert]

Hi all

At this rate, the only place a guy can feel safe from interruption when he's carrying out a horrible murder, is in his own home - and then only if he lives alone.

This man was prepared to kill and mutilate while someone next door toddled up the path to the toilet. He was either a risk taker, or someone oblivious to risk. Personally I'd have felt safer in Kelly's room than doing it out in the street.

I think it was indeed someone who entered her room in the middle of the night, but I don't think she was being targeted.