Kelly's Killer

[richardnunweek]

Hi Henry.
I like the wit..
However if members only posted when evidence could be produced , Casebook would be a deserted forum, speculation is food for thought, and encourages posters to speak out, and express opinions, and by doing so, threads flourish.
The case of Jack the Ripper laid out, holds very few basic clues, the murders are unsolved , evidence was never conclusive, and the case was eventually closed.
We can only speculate, discuss alternative views, and hope we hit upon something that can be researched, and who knows possibly discover something exiting, we may even hit a nerve that may encourage someone ''out there'' to release information, maybe from a family member of MJK, or even the killers .
Lets adopt a positive approach.
Regards Richard

[richardnunweek]

Hi Heinrich.
If only the grave sitting account actually happened.
Two men were present..Joseph Barnett and ?
Let me guess his brother Dan
A male relation [ brother] of Mary Kelly
Joseph Fleming
The list surely ends there.
So if the spitting occurred the culprit most likely was someone with romantic attachment which surely places Joseph Barnett top of the list, he would be the most likely be the mourner left to his own thoughts as the other seven moved away.
Ah if only that happened did such a episode take place, well according to Associated R, they were considering doing a special involving that letter, but it never happened.
So its indeed likely, many have said even if it did occur, the spitting may have been an act of grief, but spitting down on a coffin is more likely to have been out of acute disrespect don't you think?
Regards Richard....I now will visit my flak tower.

[Henry Flower]

Caz, you can't merely assert these things without offering some evidence or research to back them up; we don't have to just take your word for things. I'd like to know, for instance:

a) 'Chocolate biscuit' is very vague. I'd like to know more about it. Chocolate HobNob? Chocolate Digestive? Bourbon? Penguin? Is it chocolate flavoured or does it feature chocolate topping, or chocolate filling? How can we debate this if you're so deliberately vague?

b) 'Demolish' - do you think it's fair to say there's been an increase in the ferocity of your attacks with each new biscuit you've eaten?

c) What made you select this biscuit and not another biscuit? Or do you just take your chances and eat whichever biscuit you find in the right place at the right time?

d) If you are interrupted while beginning an attack and have to abandon the biscuit, do you tend to devour the next biscuit as soon as you can, and with increased violence?

e) Some claim that during your last biscuit you dipped your finger in the chocolate and wrote the initials of a former love on the wall near the ripped open packet. Personally I can't see it. I think they're seeing what they want to see.

f) I don't think that someone like you will stop eating biscuits unless you're caught, or you die. Or your partner poisons you.

I hope your biscuit was very nise.

HenryFlower

[caz]

Hi All
Hi Caz
You think there's a possibility that one man killed Nicholls and Chapman and another killed Eddowes and Kelly....... and Stride commited suicide!!
Only joking
That is a very interesting supposition and I must admit one I've never heard of before. I can actually see where you are coming from with it. Very clever.
Personally I would still follow the progression of violence as a signature but you have made me think.
Still, that's what ladies do to us men innit?
Keep Well
Jimi

Hi Jimi,

Er, it was not my supposition at all! It was Lynn's. He is convinced that Is..Iss..Isc.. the pork butcher did for Nichols and Chapman. But because this individual was put away before he could have done for a third and become a serial whatever Lynn wants to call it, Stride's murder has to be attributed to someone connected with the Berner St club; Eddowes to someone who needed rid of her specifically and took advantage of the previous murders to do so; and goodness alone knows who is meant to have wanted Kelly turned into mincemeat. I'm quite surprised you haven't heard of it before considering how many threads are becoming infected.

Hi Errata, Limehouse, Carol, All,

Re the personal thing with Kelly, couldn't it be something akin to Bundy's victim selection based on the physical appearance of an ex girlfriend? In the ripper's case he had to make do with what was out there on the streets, ie mainly the older worn out specimens of Spitalfields. But the younger, more alluring Kelly may have struck a chord and reminded him of a bad emotional experience with a young woman of similar appearance.

Many ways to skin a cat here. I could see this murder as the most personal to him, but then all the murders would have been personal to him in a sense, and the facial mutilations to Eddowes tend to bear this out. He was owning the women at the scene, but I don't believe for a moment that he knew both Eddowes and Kelly, and certainly not on an intimate level. So I don't see anything uniquely personal in the Miller's Court 'job'. I don't think he gave a shi* about any of them while they were alive - any more than I care about the chocolate biscuit I'm about to demolish. I just want it in my tummy.

Love,

Caz
X

[Heinrich]

Since Mary Kelly was murdered by Joseph Barnett, the question should be whether he is Jack the Ripper also.

[DVV]

May I ask, where do you see anything personal about Kellys killing?
Jimi

There are many good reasons, Jimi. One being : because it's my belief.
'Night all.

[Jimi]

2+2

Hi All
Hi Caz
You think there's a possibility that one man killed Nicholls and Chapman and another killed Eddowes and Kelly....... and Stride commited suicide!!
Only joking
That is a very interesting supposition and I must admit one I've never heard of before. I can actually see where you are coming from with it. Very clever.
Personally I would still follow the progression of violence as a signature but you have made me think.
Still, that's what ladies do to us men innit?
Keep Well
Jimi

[Jimi]

Method or Motive

Hi All
Hi Limehouse
I completely agree, you can see an increase of violence all the way through the murders, quite possibly even from Tabram.
Hi Errata
JTR was forced to change his method, probably by the police presence on the street but also by his desire to need more time with the dead victim, surely this is a change of method, I believe his motive never changed.
May I ask, where do you see anything personal about Kellys killing?
Keep Well
Jimi

[lynn cates]

serial killers

Hello Caroline. Well, when you put it THAT way. . .

But it seems to me not quite correct to call someone a killer who was likely unaware of what he was doing.

Cheers.
LC

[Limehouse]

I think if JtR did kill Kelly, then it was kind of a Kemper thing.

It's all in how you see the murders as a whole really. Me, I don't especially see the three or four previous murders as personal, or even as sexual. Kelly on the other hand seems intensely personal, and intensely sexual. Her killer targeted areas left completely untouched in the other victims. I think it was a completely different motive.

But don't you think this mght have been because he couldn't get to those bits in the previous killings or he didn't have time to attack them? And with the exception of Stride, all of the women had the womb area and the pubic area attacked to some extent. Also, Eddowes was facially attacked - that's pretty personal.

[Errata]

I think if JtR did kill Kelly, then it was kind of a Kemper thing.

It's all in how you see the murders as a whole really. Me, I don't especially see the three or four previous murders as personal, or even as sexual. Kelly on the other hand seems intensely personal, and intensely sexual. Her killer targeted areas left completely untouched in the other victims. I think it was a completely different motive.

But then Edmund Kemper had one motive for killing co-ed hitchhikers, and quite a different one for killing his mother. Despite the similarities in method, There was an above and beyond his other murders that shows his mother's murder to be intensely personal. So maybe Kemper uses his mother's head as a dart board, and Jack the Ripper take Mary Kelly's heart.

To me, the murder of Kelly does not look the same. Whoever killed her was after something completely different than what Chapman's killer was after. But that doesn't mean it wasn't the same guy. It just means it was a different motive.

[Limehouse]

I agree. Kelly was a Ripper victim and I think it possible that she was 'targetted' because she had a 'private' place - her home. I think it also possible that Kelly had 'serviced' the Ripper before, but not in her own home. As she seemed to be so concerned about the Ripper I don't think she would have taken home a man that she was not already acquainted with and felt safe with.

Carol

I think this makes a lot of sense.

For me, I consider Kelly to have been a ripper victim and I believe that she was so terribly mutilated because the killer had the time and privacy to indulge his perversions.

I think the killer increased in confidence as he progressed through his victims, and it seems whereever he had the opportunity to go that extra bit further, he did so.

1. Annie Chapman, in the back yard of 29 Hanbury Street, not a great deal of privacy, it's true, but a little less risky than the thoroughfares of Bucks's Row and Berner Street.
2. Catherine Eddowes in Mitre Square - again risky - but the relative safety of a dark corner and a little more time to experiment with 'mark making' - this time on the face.
3. Mary Kelly in that squalid room, with at least four killings behind him, perhaps a little more skilled with getting the knife through flesh and fat and muscle (sorry to be so graphic, but it really is quite difficult to mutilate someone if you have no 'training') and more time and privacy to indulge. Nevertheless, all of these locations carried relatively high risk and therefore, I believe we are looking for a man with a degree of nerve and composure who could flee away into the night without drawing too much attention to himself.

[Carol]

Hello Carol, that's right.
Being both a non-random victim and killed indoors, it's just logical that the killer had changed part of his MO. But the signature is the same. Moreover, while some are insistent that we have Nichols and Chapman on the one hand, and Eddowes and Kelly on the other (dunno exactly their Stride theory, must be a Jewish anarchist), Kelly and Chapman have been ripped open in the same manner ("flaps removed from the abdomen"), which isn't the case with Eddowes.

Hello David,
For what it's worth, my thoughts at the moment keep going back to Stride being a Ripper victim. As he was interrupted before he could mutilate Stride I can easily imagine him being almost out of his mind with the need to mutilate. He took a very great risk with killing Eddowes but by then he was in such a state that he HAD to take the risk. Knowing that he might be interrupted again at any minute he slashed away at Eddowes' body in what might look a disorganized way but was, in fact, the murderer just trying as quickly as he could to get at the organs he wanted.

Carol

[caz]

The only difference between catching JTR and catching Napper was technology.

Too right, old sport. Too right.

In my opinion it's only the lack of cctv back in 1888 that allows for many of today's barking mad theories to see the light of day.

And I'm allowed to say that because I'm regularly accused along with others of swallowing the 'most absurd rot' that there was a lone serial offender (not dissimilar to Napper) roaming the streets of Whitechapel preying on women.

Assuming one man killed Polly and Annie, and they were both soliciting when they encountered him, he could have killed before or gone on to kill more, either way earning himself the definition of serial killer, or he began with these two and was stopped before he could earn that definition - enter Lynn's pork butcher. If he only stopped at two because he had no choice, he was in effect an ineffectual serial killer. Not so absurd a notion then, surely?

Love,

Caz
X

[DVV]

Hello Carol, that's right.
Being both a non-random victim and killed indoors, it's just logical that the killer had changed part of his MO. But the signature is the same. Moreover, while some are insistent that we have Nichols and Chapman on the one hand, and Eddowes and Kelly on the other (dunno exactly their Stride theory, must be a Jewish anarchist), Kelly and Chapman have been ripped open in the same manner ("flaps removed from the abdomen"), which isn't the case with Eddowes.