Partition wall

[Phil H]

You will have to forgive my ignorance re the slashed sheet thing I have read up on the circumstances of MJK's death and done a little research but didn't happen upon or have forgotten reading this information any chance you could point me in the right direction?

The A-Z is always a good start.

Try the dissertations etc here on Casebook, also look at old threads on Mary, try a search on MJK (under various words, I suggest); or search on bed clothes/sheet/bed clothes etc and see what comes up.

Phil do you think she was asleep when it happened? The reason I am not so sure is would she sleep with a client in the room? Assuming the killer was a client I know but still do you think she would?

I don't know. I have the impression from the evidence that she was attacked by sleeping and at the most managed an exclamation ("Oh, murder!!!) if that.

I think the autopsy found marks on her fingers and arms that might have been the result of her trying to protect herself, but equally could have been accidentally made by the murderer as he worked on the body.

I am no longer certain with MJK that the killer was "Jack" or a client - I think the injuries are so personal that they suggest a very intimate connection. I think her state of undress and where she was on the bed suggest that she had a lover in bed with her. I am inclined to suspect Joe Barnett; Fleming (or Flemming) - whom it appears she was still seeing; or A N Other such as Morganstone.

Phil H

Phil L

[FrankO]

[B]I don't know. I have the impression from the evidence that she was attacked by sleeping and at the most managed an exclamation ("Oh, murder!!!) if that.

I think the autopsy found marks on her fingers and arms that might have been the result of her trying to protect herself, but equally could have been accidentally made by the murderer as he worked on the body.

Hi Phil & Jim,

The quote below from Dr Bond’s post mortem indeed suggests that only the cut on her right thumb and some abrasions on the same hand were inflicted during life (so, not the arms).
“The right thumb showed a small superficial incision about 1 in long, with extravasation of blood in the skin & there were several abrasions on the back of the hand moreover showing the same condition.”

Or so I’ve understood that ‘extravasation of blood in the skin’ indicates this.

The fact that she was attacked on the ‘far’ right side of the bed, the lack of more defense wounds and the lack of noise of a struggle (except for possibly the cry of murder) also make me inclined to believe she was attacked while sleeping or dozing and that the initial attack was over within seconds.

All the best,
Frank

[Rya]

Welcome to the boards, SHJ.

A few quick thoughts on this topic, which summarize some of the comments made already:

As I understand it, Mary's room was originally part of the large ground floor area of 26 Dorset street; it may have originally been the kitchen area. At the time of the murder, the rest of the ground floor had been turned into a storage shed, so there was nobody living on the other side of the partition who would have heard any thumping against the makeshift barrier. There were people in the immediate vicinity, of course, but they denied hearing such noises.

It is also not clear how closely the bed was butted up against the partition. It was close enough to where the woman's arterial blood had sprayed up against it, but Phillips seems to have noticed the large pool of blood that had run down into the floor below the bed--did they move the bed away from the partition to observe this? The famous photo makes the perspective difficult. The exact position of her body is also unknowable when she was murdered; she may not have been able to reach the partition.

The only reported cuts in the sheeting were on the right top corner of the bed, drenched in the clotted blood from the throat wounds, which Bond makes clear caused the death of the victim. How they occurred (the cuts in the sheeting) could have come about in different ways, and a few have been suggested by different writers.

On the sleep vs awake business, it is possible that she was sleeping when attacked, but a few facts weigh against this. First, she was mostly naked when found, and it is very unlikely she would have decided to sleep nude in a 0 degree Celsius room (Prater didn't). It is more likely that she removed her clothes for sexual relations. Secondly, the defense wounds on her right hand, very typical in knife murders, were inflicted antemortem according to Bond's notes (Extravasation of blood into the surrounding tissues is a common checkpoint for determining ante versus postmortem wounds). Also, barring some idiosyncratic habit on the part of Mary, it is odd she would be found sleeping on the side of the bed by the wall. There are various explanations, but most of them involve someone else already sitting or lying on the left side of the bed.

The cry of "murder" is completely subjective--there is collaboration that it happened, but no certainty that it was Mary that uttered it. I wouldn't use it to support her being awake when she was killed, but then I find the medical evidence as we have it to indicate a much later time of death than 4 am.

Also, I would second Phil's comments about the aural environment in courts, yards, and squares at this time. You can find in virtually every murder in this series questions about the lack of attention residents, night watchmen, etc. were demonstrating while the murders were going on. I have slowly come round to thinking that a couple of these women probably made a lot more noise than we know; people most likely either were used to vocal arguments and violence in their midst and ignored it, or decided not to get involved.

[Phil H]

Good post Rya - in every sense.

Phil H

[Spring heeled Jim]

Thanks for the replies people all very interesting indeed.

Phil again forgive my ignorance but A-Z? I have been reading lot's of the dissertations here which are in the main superb pieces of work I just get side tracked reading too many at once so information tends to not sink in as well as it should.

Very interesting to note the possibility of antemortem wounds and the idea that she was unlikely to sleep in the state of undress in which she was found. This is the kind of stuff that although not an absolute certainty is very interesting to me and helps me try and paint a better mental picture of what may have happened.

The location of the slashes in the bed sheets does seem to suggest the could have been caused when the fatal wound/wounds were inflicted.

The oh murder cry is a strange one to me I know it was heard by at least two seemingly reliable residents of the court but it seems odd that if she was awake when killed hence the antemortem wounds that if that cry did happen and Prater heard it why was there no struggle? I am just trying to paint a mental picture of what could have happened.

And Phil I am at the moment at least trying not to even think of suspects simply to try and figure out or surmise with the information available what happened in each case regarding the circumstances of the death. I think once I have got a much better understanding of what happened and why I personally think certain things happened I can then start to think about whodunnit so to speak. At least then I won't be clouding my appraisal of a crime scene with a need or expectation of who was responsible. I hope that made sense?

As for my usage of the term JTR well its just me being sloppy and lazy I suppose as I should say the perpetrator when theorising about each individual killing.

Again great forum people so interesting!

[Bridewell]

A-Z

Phil again forgive my ignorance but A-Z?

Hi Jim,

I think Phil is alluding to "The Jack the Ripper A-Z" by Paul Begg, Martin Fido & Keith Skinner. Well worth getting, but try to get the latest edition. Philip Sugden's "The Complete History of Jack the Ripper" is another worthwhile purchase.

Regards, Bridewell.

[Phil H]

I was indeed refering to Paul Begg, Martin Fido & Keith Skinner's "The Jack the Ripper A-Z".

It's always difficult to know how much people have read into the subject, and that book is a very helpful (and largely accurate and up to date) quick reference on a whole range of Case issues. If you are not familiar with it it is worth investing in - perhaps with Sugden's book and "The Ultimate JtR Sourcebook" (ed Stewart Evans and Keith Skinner) which effectively inccludes all the official files and other surviving documentation, in full. essential reading really.

The Sugden and the Ultimate are both available in paperback (I have seen the former remaindered in the UK), but I don't think the latest A-Z has yet come out in paperback.

Oh, "Scotland Yard Investigates" by Evans and Rumbelow (soft copy available) is also very good.

Amazon should be able to supply any and all.

If you have other questions please ask.

Phil H

[Cogidubnus]

Hi Spring Heeled Jim

I'd whole-heartedly endorse Colin and Phil's three recommendations...there are others that could be added, but those three are a good start. Be aware though that while the Sugden book and the Sourcebook can be read as narratives, the A-Z is more like an encyclopaedia with entries which whilst sometimes not complete, do point you in the right direction.

All the best

Dave

[Wickerman]

Hi Rya.
Another worthy post..

Welcome to the boards, SHJ.

A few quick thoughts on this topic, which summarize some of the comments made already:

As I understand it, Mary's room was originally part of the large ground floor area of 26 Dorset street; it may have originally been the kitchen area.

Mary's room was described as being originally the parlour for No. 26. The parlour was generally the entertaining room, or best room. Had it been the kitchen we would think her fireplace would have been a complete range.
Also, Mary's room and the one above appear to have been extensions to the original house (No.26), so a kitchen should have already been catered for.

At the time of the murder, the rest of the ground floor had been turned into a storage shed, so there was nobody living on the other side of the partition...

Alternately the staircase to the upper floors was likely directly behind the partition. Prater makes reference to being able to see through a crack? in the partition from the stairs.

On the sleep vs awake business, it is possible that she was sleeping when attacked, but a few facts weigh against this. First, she was mostly naked when found, and it is very unlikely she would have decided to sleep nude in a 0 degree Celsius room (Prater didn't). It is more likely that she removed her clothes for sexual relations.

Agreed, her location on the bed, her clothes laid on a chair?, and her state of undress are all consistent with her entertaining someone in her bed as opposed to her have been asleep alone and suddenly awakened by a burglar, as has been suggested.

Secondly, the defense wounds on her right hand, very typical in knife murders, were inflicted antemortem according to Bond's notes (Extravasation of blood into the surrounding tissues is a common checkpoint for determining ante versus postmortem wounds).

There are also cuts across her left forearm which appear to be pointless from a mutilation point of view.

Regards, Jon S.

[Rya]

Thanks for the info on 26, Wickerman. Do you have a source on No. 13 being an extension to the original? Was 27 modified in a similar way?

On the antemortem injuries, it is quite possible that there were others inflicted on Mary, either to her arms or face. She may also have had stabbing injuries, perhaps to the neck or chest, that were less obvious due to obliteration from the subsequent mutilations. The autopsy report would have noted these, but, alas, we don't have it. Bond noted the injuries to the hand, I assume, because it was relavent to the sequence of events and because as a criminal pathologist (and Bond can deserve to be called such), he would have automatically checked her hands for such things.

A last point about noise: what I know about slums like Miller's Court during Victorian times is that they were frought with nighttime traffic; the residents were mostly prostitutes, and they were in constant circulation during the period between 12 and 6 in the morning. Other homeless people would wander in and out of such places for water, to urinate, or to find temporary shelter from the weather; they could be found sleeping in the corners of such courts and "gardens," as they were also often named. Arguments, reverie, and the noise from sexual encounters went on all the time. Plus, on the night in question, you had heavy rain and wind battering the area. I think a murder could have been committed in the middle of the court outdoors and it's possible nobody would have arisen to look out their door. It was an advantage, in all the murder areas, the killer had in the East End slums.

On the other hand, I don't think the killer felt necessarily more secure in 13 during the murder; he had more time, but it was a very exposed room, and he would have had no idea who might be coming or going (I'd wager he asked such questions to his victim) while he was in there; girls always shared rooms for business, and Mary seems to have been no exception. I think he would have been sensitive to noise, traffic, etc around him, and I don't think he would have lingered there a second longer than he needed to. (and this would be even more true, I think, even if the killer knew the victim, or had stalked the court with the idea of killing the girl in the ground floor room with the broken lock on her door)

Lastly, it takes about thirty seconds on average to lose consciousness from the rupture of a major artery in the neck; between three and seven minutes before all cardiac activity stops. There have even been cases of people in combat or accidents, where, having had catastrophic neck injuries, still managed to run some distance from the scene before collapsing (truly the walking dead). So Mary may have put up a good fight even after the fatal wound was delivered; but if her windpipe was severed, she couldn't have cried out. But the idea that she might have tried to bang on the partition to attract attention isn't that far-fetched at all.

[Wickerman]

Thanks for the info on 26, Wickerman. Do you have a source on No. 13 being an extension to the original?

I'm sorry Rya, I should have posted the pic.



Just by looking at the sketch, a 'lean-too structure', it appears to have been a later addition to the original plan of a typical terrace house.

On the antemortem injuries, it is quite possible that there were others inflicted on Mary, either to her arms or face. She may also have had stabbing injuries, perhaps to the neck or chest, that were less obvious due to obliteration from the subsequent mutilations.

You're quite right, and I think echymosis was evident across her throat, so one possibility is she was strangled first, maybe she came too as the attack began?

On the other hand, I don't think the killer felt necessarily more secure in 13 during the murder; he had more time, but it was a very exposed room, and he would have had no idea who might be coming or going (I'd wager he asked such questions to his victim) while he was in there; girls always shared rooms for business, and Mary seems to have been no exception.

Kelly's state of dress is more consistent with her being undressed for entertaining than for sleep. At this time of year I'm sure she slept in her clothes like anyone else.
This is an indicator to her client that they were not pressed for time.

Regards, Jon S.

[Phil H]

I am not sure that many people in Victorian times made love wholly naked.

Conventionally, husbands and wives would have worn a nightgown (man) and nightdress (woman) which they would not have taken off. I have met people (in their 70s say 25 years ago) who were shocked by late C20th conventions and said that they had never seen their spouse naked in many years of married life.

It might have been different in the east End and for poorer classes, but for most clothing was too difficult to take off or put on without aid - no zip-fastners - but usually many hooks often up the back, or lacings.

I think that Mary may have been prepared to undress for someone close to her - Barnett, Fleming, especially if under the covers. I doubt it would often have happened for a client.

However, I am ready to be told I am wrong. And I would offer this:

It occurs to me that the large fire MIGHT have been to warm the room enough to allow nudity without discomfort. If so, then it assumes/implies (at least for me) a client who could pay more than usual, someone MJK trusted, or intimacy.

Phil H

[Michael W Richards]

Hello all,

Having read the preceding remarks I noticed that there were a few misconceptions about the wall and how sounds might travel to other lodgers upstairs.

The wall was made of old doors, in fact a faded #26 is still visible on one of the doors....,(see old partition threads or Sam Flynn), and the cracks were plastered. It was through some of the cracked plaster that Elizabeth could see into Marys room, which she noted was dark when she went in. The stairs were accessed by a door just inside the "tunnel" leading to Dorset Street, something like 20 or 25 feet in total.

When Elizabeth said she heard the noise after Diddles woke her, she said it was "faint-as if from the court". That, added to Sarah Lewis's comments that the noise was "as if at her door", coupled with the above stats indicates that the cry of "oh-murder" originated in the courtyard and Elizabeth did not hear the noise from inside the house.

On that basis its my belief that one of the windows above Marys room, either over the tunnel opening in the bridge between #27 and 26, or directly above Marys windows, allowed the sound to access Elizabeths room.

Cheers

[Wickerman]

The wall was made of old doors, in fact a faded #26 is still visible on one of the doors....,(see old partition threads or Sam Flynn), and the cracks were plastered.

Michael, it is not possible to determine if the whole partition wall was made up of doors by looking at one photo which shows the impression of only one door. And, incidently, wainscoting panels on either side.

It was through some of the cracked plaster that Elizabeth could see into Marys room, which she noted was dark when she went in.

You can't know that either Michael.
There are options that must be considered, we have no definite answers.
These conclusions by Sam are not supportable.

Regards, Jon S.

[Michael W Richards]

Hi Jon,

To respond to your issues with my post...

Michael, it is not possible to determine if the whole partition wall was made up of doors by looking at one photo which shows the impression of only one door. And, incidently, wainscoting panels on either side.


Perhaps I should have just said that the wall was comprised of old doors Jon, how many and to what extent, is unclear. The "incidental" wainscoting means nothing when discussing the structural components.


You can't know that either Michael.
There are options that must be considered, we have no definite answers.
These conclusions by Sam are not supportable.

From Elizabeths statement at the Inquest;

"I should have seen a glimmer of light in going up the stairs if there had been a light in deceased's room, but I noticed none. The partition was so thin I could have heard Kelly walk about in the room."

That addresses whether she could see into and hear what happened in Marys room from the stairs, inside the house.

Regards, Jon S.

My mentioning Sam Flynn was in conjunction with the faded numbers identified on the partition wall Jon, and I might add its not a matter of debate either. Clearly there.

Best wishes