Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Blood on Kelly's Window

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • The Blood on Kelly's Window

    Right, let's try and get to those 50 posts...

    On the 'Why can't I access the Other Mysteries' thread, I said that I was more of a reader than a contributer but having been reading about Jack for a while now and needing to get to 50 posts to be able to access 'Other Mysteries' again I thought I could elaborate a bit on a couple of things to do with The Case I've noticed.

    In the original Torygraph report on the Kelly murder (Evans/Skinner; Sourcebook pp 371-382), John (sic) Bowyer notices blood on the window while trying to rouse Kelly and fetches McCarthy, who then is the person who first looks into the room.

    Now, I know this is different to the inquest testimonies but it's the blood that interests me. The article gives the impression it is Kelly's blood but is there not a possibility the blood on the window came from Jack (drunkenly?) trying to open the door through the window and catching himself on the broken pane?

    Of course this blood isn't mentioned again as far as I can see and the story has changed by the inquest with Bowyer now discovering the body...

    Is this interesting...?



  • #2
    This is a possible hypothesis. In fact JtR need not have been drunk. He could have easily cut himself in his haste.

    Comment


    • #3
      Prolly shoulda read "noticed blood from the window".

      The journos
      are the ones to be blamed
      for being pissheads
      My name is Dave. You cannot reach me through Debs email account

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by DJA View Post
        Prolly shoulda read "noticed blood from the window".

        The journos
        are the ones to be blamed
        for being pissheads
        It is sometimes wise not to dub anybody pissheads before any certainty on the point can be had. Just saying...

        Comment


        • #5
          Bowyer's inquest testimony records that "I looked through the window and saw a lot of blood". Could the Telegraph's early report of blood on the window simply have been a scrambled version of what Bowyer said he saw through the window?
          Kind regards, Sam Flynn

          "Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Cody75111 View Post
            In the original Torygraph report on the Kelly murder (Evans/Skinner; Sourcebook pp 371-382), John (sic) Bowyer notices blood on the window while trying to rouse Kelly and fetches McCarthy, who then is the person who first looks into the room.
            That the Telegraph got its wires crossed is perhaps borne out by a similarly early report in The Star of 10th Nov:

            "McCarthy said to a man employed by him in his shop, John Bowyer, 'Go to No 13 and try and get some rent.' Bowyer did as he was directed, and on knocking at the door was unable to obtain an answer. He then tried the handle of the door and found it was locked. On looking through the keyhole he found the key was missing. The left hand side of the room faced the court, and in it were two large windows. Bowyer, knowing that a pane of glass in one of the windows was broken, put his hand through the aperture and pulled aside the muslin curtain which covered it. He looked into the room, and saw the woman lying on the bed, entirely naked, covered with blood and apparently dead..."

            Note that The Star makes the same mistake as the Telegraph in naming him "John" Bowyer, which might imply a common source for both reports. However, despite The Star also mentioning the broken window pane, there's no hint of any blood on it.
            Kind regards, Sam Flynn

            "Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by DJA View Post
              Prolly shoulda read "noticed blood from the window".

              The journos
              are the ones to be blamed
              for being pissheads
              Ha! It doesn't read like it's a typo though. It says he noticed 'blood upon the glass'. so 'noticed blood from the window' becomes 'blood upon the glass'? Doesn't seem quite right to me. Perfectly possible though.

              But again, it's really about the accuracy of a newspaper report though I find the the changes in the story interesting and might hint at Jack letting himself in rather than be invited in. But nowt more than a hint I guess.

              Comment


              • #8
                Thomas Bowyer,who recently had Michael Kidney and Liz Stride living next door to himself,did not mention the window blood in his police statement on the day or during Mary Kelly's inquest.

                Like Eddowes' demise,there are many things that do not add up.
                My name is Dave. You cannot reach me through Debs email account

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by DJA View Post
                  Thomas Bowyer,who recently had Michael Kidney and Liz Stride living next door to himself,did not mention the window blood in his police statement on the day or during Mary Kelly's inquest.

                  Like Eddowes' demise,there are many things that do not add up.
                  He mentioned that there was blood on the floor, but I don´t think he said anything about the blood on the walls. It doesn´t mean that there was none. I think the question must remain open, like so many other questions.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    If you read the whole sentence and the next, the likelihood of it being an error is significantly increased.

                    "Then he noticed blood upon the glass, and it immediately occurred to him that another murder had been committed. He fetched M'Carthy, who, looking through the window, saw upon the bed, which was against the wall, the body of a woman, without clothing, and terribly mutilated."

                    This version has Bowyer not seeing the body or the mess, only a bit of blood on a broken window pane. Why would Bowyer think a murder had been committed without seeing more? It doesn't make sense and is very likely a journalistic error.
                    dustymiller
                    aka drstrange

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Cody75111 View Post

                      Ha! It doesn't read like it's a typo though. It says he noticed 'blood upon the glass'. so 'noticed blood from the window' becomes 'blood upon the glass'? Doesn't seem quite right to me. Perfectly possible though.

                      But again, it's really about the accuracy of a newspaper report though I find the the changes in the story interesting and might hint at Jack letting himself in rather than be invited in. But nowt more than a hint I guess.
                      Hi Cody75111,

                      I think there are pointers away from JtR letting himself in that need to be weighed against that idea though.

                      Mary's apparent position in the bed when she was initially attacked (based upon the blood pattern on the sheets), suggests she was on the right side of the bed against the wall. That would be more consistent with her sharing her bed at the time of the attack than of someone entering the room while she slept (though, of course, it's not definitive). If there is anything to Hutchinson's statement, which must be viewed with extreme caution of course, his statement does include the interesting comment of Mary saying something along the lines of "Don't worry, you will be comfortable", which would fit with the scenario of a customer striking a deal with her to spend the night.

                      If JtR poses as a customer, and one apparently able to afford such a deal, then Hutchinson's description of someone better off than typical (though in all likelihood fanciful in his specific descriptions) becomes more interesting. It is also of interest that other hints at this exist, unfortunately also from other witness statements for which caution is required (I'm thinking Long's "shabby gentile" description of the man she reports seeing with Annie Chapman). Even statements of people possibly seen with Stride and Eddowes are not ones that suggest a destitute type individual. It would also provide an explanation as to how JtR was able to continue his crimes despite the fear in the area - he didn't "seem the type" to raise alarm bells.

                      Anyway, there are other ways one can piece events together as well, of course, but that's the nature of things.

                      - Jeff

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X