The fire in the grate...

[Jane Coram]

Hi All,

Sorry, long post, but I don't post often so you'll have to put up with it!

These are obviously just personal thoughts on the matter as there really is not enough hard evidence to say anything for certain -but it doesn't hurt to ponder now and again.

Starting at the right end of the sequence of events, I think it has to be almost certain that Mary lit the fire. Starting fires in those conditions and more importantly in those grates takes bloody ages.

You have to sod about, screwing up old newspaper into just the right size balls, put kindling in, put the coal on exactly right, then light it, hold newspaper or something over the front to give it a good start and even then it takes ages to actually catch. Not only that, but if there are ashes in it from the night before you have to clean them out, otherwise it won't start at all! Bearing all that in mind, I sincerely doubt that Jack would stop and play boy scouts in the middle of his crime.

Having said that, I can't even imagine Mary drunk going to all that trouble, so best guess is that she lit it earlier in the evening, possibly just before Joe and Maria Harvey/Lizzie Albrook dropped in so that she could put a kettle on and give Maria at least a cuppa, even if she couldn't get rid of Joe fast enough.

We don't really know for certain that Mary did go out looking for punters that night, but we do know that she brought Mr Blotchy back for whatever reason, and possibly Mr Astrakhan, so it would seem sensible on her part to have a fire at least idling in the grate so that when she came back it would just be a case of putting a bit more coal on. This does fit in with her comment to Mr Astrakhan about him being comfortable.

So by the time Jack got into Mary's room, by whatever means......I would say that the fire was there, just about, ready to be stoked up again.

Now back to Magpie's suggestion, which is a really interesting one. Did Jack do it to draw attention to the room? I suppose it's possible........but as someone has pointed out, why not just leave the door open. (Again possible that he did and it actually slammed shut after he had gone).

The layout of the room and yard might be important here, if Jack intended for someone to see the light.

Walking down into the court from Dorset Street both of Mary's windows would not be visible as they were around the corner to the right. The window nearest the court entrance was the smaller of the two and covered by the man's pilot coat, which would probably not have let much light through. The other window though which was directly next to the pump itself in the pump yard was larger and we don't really know what it was covered with. Walking along the court towards the entrance the windows could both be clearly seen, but they were both covered. Whatever it was it must have been thick enough to keep out prying eyes. (There is possibly a separate discussion here about visibility, but we won't get into that here!)

One thing we can say is that whatever lighting conditions Jack worked in, he must have felt fairly confident that no-one could actually see him at work through that big window, or he would have covered that with one of the many pieces of bedding that were at the foot of the bed.

My best guess is that Jack lit the fire just as he was about to leave, for some reason only known to himself. Perhaps it was to burn evidence, perhaps to attract attention, it's impossible to say of course.

What I do think though is that he would probably not have lit it until he was about to leave, because burning thick clothing like that must have thrown out a fair bit of black smoke and possibly set fire to the chimney. I don't know if anyone has tried to burn heavy clothing on a fire, but it smoulders, and throws out tons of smoke and stinks, especially if it's a bit damp. I can't see Jack wanting to risk it personally. If he did it just as he was about to leave, it wouldn't matter much.

Of course we have Abberline suggesting that Jack used the fire to get more light, which throws a bit of a spanner in the works, but that was obviously only a guess on Abberline's part as he couldn't say for certain why Jack did light it. Jack had certainly proved he could work in darkness on more than one occasion. There was a candle right over the top of the fireplace. If Jack had needed light he would have seen it when he went to stoke up the fire, so it seems daft that he didn't use it.

The only thing against the idea that it might have been lit just to attract attention is that if he left in the hours of darkness is that it would probably not have been easily visible by people going in and out of the court, and surely he would have ripped the pilot coat off of the smaller window as he left so that it was more clearly seen? If he left in daylight hours, then it's unlikely anyone would have seen it anyway.

Sorry Richard, much as I love you, and as good as your arguments are, I still don't think that Jack could have killed Mary in daylight hours.

That's about it really. Makes a change for me to be able to post on something though!

Hugs

Jane

xxxxx

[Doctor X]

. . . which is why a later time for the murder seems a tad bit inconvenient.

--J.D.

[Fisherman]

...not to mention how much harder it would have been to sneak out of the court unseen.

The best,
Fisherman

[Carrotty Nell]

To me the above points lead me to the scenerio that Kelly was alive during waking hours, and that she left her room obtained milk.lit the fire with any fuel she had, went out saw Maxwell, allowed herself to be picked up by a market porter around 845am, suggested to him that he called on her in say 15minutes saying' Second door on the right my Love, down the court'.

But Richard, this is a substantial fire we are talking about, even an inferno, according to Inspector Abberline who felt the ashes later. It must have been visible in some way from outside in the court, even as only a glow behind the improvised curtain. It is possible to believe that if it had burned in the small hours, say 4.30 to 5.00 am, that no-one was in the court to see it, and it had died down by the time Elizabeth Prater went out for her drink. It is much harder to believe that it went unseen in the morning hours when the whole neighbourhood would have been stirring.

[Doctor X]

You cannot resist the PEZ!

You love it!

Your life is meaningless without PEZ!

--J.D.

P.S. I realize that certain topics are, to put it mildly, "contentious." 'tis rather easy for some to take debate as personal rather than investigative.

[Fisherman]

Richard writes:

"the most obvious is Mjk lit the fire on awakening proberly by Catherine Picketts knock around 730am"

...Pickets unanswered knock, that is!

Doctor X writes:

"Because I am wearing my Serious Pants.

That and I have PEZ."

Well, doc; that settles it, then!

The best,
Fisherman

[Doctor X]

How can I be sure that was a serious question...?

Because I am wearing my Serious Pants.

That and I have PEZ.

--J.D.

[richardnunweek]

Hi Fisherman,
My scenerio is based on observation, that being,the most obvious is Mjk lit the fire on awakening proberly by Catherine Picketts knock around 730am.
That being the case when she returned to the room around 845am the room would have been relatively warm.
Regarding my suggestion that the man did not accompany her back, I felt Mjk would not have wanted to be seen escorting a man back to the court especially so close to her landlords shop in daylight, also if the man was her killer, it would have suited him to go solo.
Also it would have given her time to undress to await his arrival, as for the kettle, it does appear to have melted that evening /morning as no information came forth to oppose that assumption, and as I understand Mrs Harvey had breakfast with kelly on thursday morning surely she was in a position to answer police questions regarding that.
Regards Richard.

[Fisherman]

How can I be sure that was a serious question...?

Fisherman

[Doctor X]

How can we be sure that Maxwell's testimony is accurate?











--J.D.

[Fisherman]

Hi Richard!

You write:
"To me the above points lead me to the scenerio that Kelly was alive during waking hours, and that she left her room obtained milk.lit the fire with any fuel she had, went out saw Maxwell, allowed herself to be picked up by a market porter around 845am, suggested to him that he called on her in say 15minutes saying' Second door on the right my Love, down the court'.
She then returned to her room, fillled the kettle with water to make tea, for her , and her client, then undressed leaving her boots near the fireplace, and her dress and other clothing on the chair, before sitting on the bed when down to her chemise.
It was at this point her killer entered , closed the door and killed her immediately.
That is why the kettle melted ,as no one removed it away from the heat"

...and I have a small objection: if the market porter was a punter - any punter, to Mary´s mind - I fail to see that she would have undressed in advance and sat down on the bed to wait for him.
Undressing would have been a chilly affair with the broken window panes, and I don´t think that she would have taken the risk to jump the gun (or is that knife...?)

About the kettle: How can you be sure that the fire on that very night was the one that melted it?

The best, Richard!
Fisherman

[richardnunweek]

Hi,
The fire issue is a intresting one, the main question asked being ,'Who lit the fire'?
Four observations prompt me to suggest that Mjk herself lit the fire.
A]Maurice Lewis ... 'Return with some milk'.
B] Her boots and their position in the room.
C] Her clothes dangled over the broken backed chair, where found
D] The melting of the kettle,
To me the above points lead me to the scenerio that Kelly was alive during waking hours, and that she left her room obtained milk.lit the fire with any fuel she had, went out saw Maxwell, allowed herself to be picked up by a market porter around 845am, suggested to him that he called on her in say 15minutes saying' Second door on the right my Love, down the court'.
She then returned to her room, fillled the kettle with water to make tea, for her , and her client, then undressed leaving her boots near the fireplace, and her dress and other clothing on the chair, before sitting on the bed when down to her chemise.
It was at this point her killer entered , closed the door and killed her immediately.
That is why the kettle melted ,as no one removed it away from the heat
Regards Richard.

[Doctor X]

There is, to my knowledge, quite a few murderers who have done that--watched the investigation. Certainly, Jack could have done that.

Which, in my mind, lessens the likelihood of him being a raving "psychopath"; he was not noticed.

--J. "The FOOLS!" D.

[j.r-ahde]

Hello Doctor X!

I find it even possible, that he was among the crowd following the police actions!

(And maybe quietly and unnnoticed sneering by himself! )

All the best
Jukka

[Doctor X]

j.r-ahde:

Exactly.

Assuming he did not cover up the window. Anyone know what condition the window was in--would a passer by not trying to peer in be able to see anything?

Mitch:

I do not think he cared much about when people would discover his work--having done his previous known murders in the street. Mary Kelly was going to make an "impression" soon enough! I think his only concern was getting away with it when done. Obviously, he succeeded.

--J.D.