Mary Jane was murdered between 09.00 and 10.30 am

[Wickerman]

The article went on to say the police believed it to have ben a daylight murder.., Maybe Kelly was wearing those articles when attacked ? and the killer did not wish the authorities to think that , according to Prater Kelly was wearing a jacket and bonnet at 9pm Thursday evening,?
Regards Richard

The convention for young prostitutes was to wear a bonnet when they are not 'available', to walk around bare headed at night was 'open for business'.
This, for some reason was not observed by the more casual prostitutes, usually older women.

[The Rookie Detective]

Thats right, it doesn't produce a steady light to work with, it's like a sudden flareup then it's gone.

Precisely. Which would indicate the killer was trying to destroy evidence rather than use the light to kill. He worked in relative darkness for previous murders, so why need a light now? If anything, he may have tried to STOP the flames because the light may have drawn attention to the room.

I don't buy the idea that he needed light to work with. It's more likely that the killer discarded items into the fire for destruction purposes. But it had to be something that he felt he couldn't take WITH him when he left.

What would he need to destroy that he couldn't take with him?

Perhaps her heart or her unborn fetus?

No evidence for either of those, but my point is that IF he did discard clothing into the fire, there had to be a good reason to do so.

Perhaps there was evidence on the clothing that may have linked him to the murder and he needed to destroy the items to cover his back.


RD

[Wickerman]

I disagree and think you should take a careful look at William Henry Bury. I'm not saying he was definitely the Ripper but he's the best suspect by a country mile.

I've never understood that conclusion.

[Wickerman]

... Abberline and a few other men went back to that room Saturday morning to sieve the ashes again. One wonders whether they thought some trace evidence of something other than what was already found might still be there. Makes me think it would be a small sample of something if there, so what sort of things might still be recognizable when in smallish, partial form?

If I recall, it was Abberline & Phillips, or McDonald, but as a medical man was with Abberline it is reasonable to assume they were looking for body parts. A burned organ is a very difficult thing to recognise within ashes.

[Darryl Kenyon]

The killer may have worked in relative darkness at the other murder sites but that doesn't mean he wouldn't take an opportunity of light if given. Regarding any illumination which may have been visible inside Mary's room from the fire, if Mary was killed around four in the morning and that's when the killer enhanced the flames, so to speak by throwing clothing on it, who would notice ? The court wouldn't exactly be bustling with people . And this is before central heating etc A fire in a grate was probably the only way to stay warm on a cold November night especially since some chill would inevitably find its way through the broken window despite the stuffed rag.

Also Mary was wearing just a chemise when she was murdered , which suggests to me that it is likely at the moment of kill Jack was at least semi naked. Perhaps the fire was for warmth as well, being the fact that he may not have got fully dressed until after he had finished his dreadful mutilations thus lowering the risk of bloodstains being observed on his clothing as he made his escape along Dorset st.

Regards Darryl

[richardnunweek]

The convention for young prostitutes was to wear a bonnet when they are not 'available', to walk around bare headed at night was 'open for business'.
This, for some reason was not observed by the more casual prostitutes, usually older women.

Clearly not observed by Nichols , Stride i doubt if any prostitute in that area followed that pattern , a Bonnet increased the chance of a client,.

[Fleetwood Mac]

A fire in a grate was probably the only way to stay warm on a cold November night especially since some chill would inevitably find its way through the broken window despite the stuffed rag.

They did have blankets to keep them warm through the night. Generally, the fire was kept going all day and was allowed to smoulder at night, making it easier to light on the morning. Lighting a fire was a real chore, particularly without coal and so it was expedient to let it smoulder during the night.

Anyway, this is all predicated on one thing: did Mary have the means to keep a fire going all day and night? It wasn't so easy to keep a fire going without coal.

[Fleetwood Mac]

The convention for young prostitutes was to wear a bonnet when they are not 'available', to walk around bare headed at night was 'open for business'.
This, for some reason was not observed by the more casual prostitutes, usually older women.

They used to whistle also to let other working lasses know they were with a client. It was a dangerous occupation.

Was Mary's singing her indoor version of whistling to let the other lasses know?

[Abby Normal]

Thats right, it doesn't produce a steady light to work with, it's like a sudden flareup then it's gone.

It does if it helps stoke up the wood and embers, like why you use lighter fuel to help stoke a fire back up. look obviously the ripper burnt the clothes, either for light and or warmth and or spite. If I had to pick the main reason, it would be light so he could see better what he was doing. The ripper was a post mortem type serial killer who got off on what his knife could do to the female body, so the extra light to see his handiwork is the obvious conclusion.And he took away body parts for trophys-things he can LOOK at and relive the fantasy. He was stoking that fire up more likely to see better.

[Aethelwulf]

Also Mary was wearing just a chemise when she was murdered , which suggests to me that it is likely at the moment of kill Jack was at least semi naked.

Personally, I think that's very unlikely. The ripper had no idea how things would play out with each victim. We assume this was his first indoors attempt. What if something went wrong - in fact it probably nearly did - the cries of murder. What if something more happened, more screaming. The ripper could have found himself half naked desperately trying to get dressed with someone at the door to see what was happening. My guess is the only thing he took off was his coat. I think the reason Kelly was on the far side of the bed was because she was anticipating her fellow getting in and she was leaving room for him. This is exactly what the man that attacked farmer did. He let he get into bed and said he'd stay up, then sometime later tried to cut her throat. I would bet a fair bit this is what happened with kelly. He said he'd stay up - mind if I ahem 'stoke the fire' a bit. Once Kelly was settled I suspect he sat watching her (sketches of the room show a chair) and waiting until he thought she was sound asleep, then made his move, she woke, he chucked the sheet over her face.

[John Wheat]

I've never understood that conclusion.

Why not though?

[Michael W Richards]

If I recall, it was Abberline & Phillips, or McDonald, but as a medical man was with Abberline it is reasonable to assume they were looking for body parts. A burned organ is a very difficult thing to recognise within ashes.

Actually I think it may have included Reid and Pearce if Im not mistaken, a few other familiars as I recall. Apparently Abberline traveled with a few men during these investigations, he sort of ran his own "from the soil" investigation because he had friends there, and they were to thank for his new job and future. I believe he desperately wanted to get to the bottom of these crimes, to me his face value acceptance of some statements made by dubious people shows his desperation rather than just his inclination.

Thing is... they went through those ashes and thoroughly Im sure, the day before. One would think that the ash would be too fine to offer any real clues at that point. But I wonder about something printed, a bank note, envelope, letter, message,...perhaps there would be a small chance that some piece might be identifiable. I say this because I believe organ refuse would have been caught the day before. Not that they knew necessarily while she was still in the room that anything had been taken, I believe until Bonds notes that wasnt common knowledge.

[Wickerman]

Why not though?

I went through the case from beginning to end, all what he did to his wife and we all debated the mutilations, I came to the conclusion it's a stretch to see this man responsible for the Whitechapel Murders.

[John Wheat]

I went through the case from beginning to end, all what he did to his wife and we all debated the mutilations, I came to the conclusion it's a stretch to see this man responsible for the Whitechapel Murders.

Fair enough but I'd say Bury is just the type of man we would expect the Ripper to be. He generally matches the psych profiles. Was abusive to his wife. Was known to use prostitutes. Was a known violent murderer and performed post mortem mutilations like the Ripper did in the C5. He also went to Dundee shortly after the murder of Mary Jane Kelly. There are also the chalkings which reportedly predated Ellen's murder and I find the argument that Bury didn't write them a non starter.

Cheers John

[GBinOz]

I went through the case from beginning to end, all what he did to his wife and we all debated the mutilations, I came to the conclusion it's a stretch to see this man responsible for the Whitechapel Murders.

I agree with you Jon. Bury is what I would call a "would be if he could be". I think the chalk messages at his home in Dundee were written by him as his attempts at a fifteen minutes of fame. He even insinuated to his hangman that he should be honoured to be involved with someone of his renown. A petty thief with delusions of grandeur in his belief that masquerading as someone who murdered desperate pathetic women somehow earned him some notoriety in history.