was her killer really a local

[richardnunweek]

Hi,
The majority of us on Casebook, and I would assume that viewers also,would suggest that Jack was a local person, for apparent knowledge of the area, but there are doubts in my mind.
The killer of these women had to be ignorant of east end culture, and appeared to have been oblivious of the many dangers that engulfed that society.
It is widely assumed that the killer was led by the women to secluded spots, for servicing, and met their ends precisely there, but would a local , or streetwise person, allow the prostitute to dictate such a spot, it surely would be one almighty risk to venture into one, with the increased risk of being attacked and robbed by a lurking gang.
I am not stating that this did not happen, but a outsider may have not considered that risk, where as a local man would surely have found his own spot either by chance ,or preplanned...
Take for example.
If we believe that Mr A existed, it surely would not be plausible for a localized person who would have had knowledge of the unsavoury Dorset street, to venture down there with Kelly. dressed at the very least affluent .
It would have been extremely risky for a local man to have entered any private room with a pick up, who suggested that very thing., so the explanation has a two fold answer,
1] He was not a local man , and did not have prior knowledge of Dorset street, and its horrid reputation.
2] He knew he would be safe from harm , as he was confident that Kelly was safe to accompany.
The latter suggests that Mary was not a stranger,
The former that he was , either out of area , or out of area , but still possibly known to Kelly.
If we consider the whole alleged meeting with Mr A , and unless we dismiss the entire tale as bogus , we have to ask the obvious.
Why would a young female allow herself to be accosted in the early hours of the morning by a well dressed stranger, and invite him back to her room, without reservation, when only a day previous remarked to Mrs McCarthy..''He is a concern, I hear he is ripe in this area.''
It does not seem likely, unless she knew the man well enough to trust him?.
However there is another alternative.
If she was approached after Maxwell spoke to her, and the killer was observing her, even if he was local, he would feel safer in the active street, and would feel less threatened entered her room when no preplanned attack was likely.
Hopefully a few points raised for discussion.
Regards Richard.

[Digalittledeeperwatson]

Hullo

Ignorant of the culture? Perhaps intimate instead. Possibly the killer knew where to avoid and had certain areas he hunted in. Also a big sharp knife and maybe a real nasty streak in him. Perhaps she was known to him but not the other way around. Why would she bring him back to her place? Alcohol money and rain pop in my head rather quickly. If he was in some way familiar with her he might have felt quite safe in her room. Maybe he also cared less about the risk and more that he wanted to kill her. If it was the same perpetrator as the previous murders, he had been acting with almost impunity. Or some similar notion. Also the weather. Thank you. Interesting post. It had the effect you were hoping for.

[lynn cates]

acquaintance

Hello Richard. A fine question, thanks.

Stranger? Hardly. Let's remember, too, that Miller's Court was not easy to find. The archway leading in was not exactly huge or well marked.

Cheers.
LC

[Abby Normal]

Hi,
The majority of us on Casebook, and I would assume that viewers also,would suggest that Jack was a local person, for apparent knowledge of the area, but there are doubts in my mind.
The killer of these women had to be ignorant of east end culture, and appeared to have been oblivious of the many dangers that engulfed that society.
It is widely assumed that the killer was led by the women to secluded spots, for servicing, and met their ends precisely there, but would a local , or streetwise person, allow the prostitute to dictate such a spot, it surely would be one almighty risk to venture into one, with the increased risk of being attacked and robbed by a lurking gang.
I am not stating that this did not happen, but a outsider may have not considered that risk, where as a local man would surely have found his own spot either by chance ,or preplanned...
Take for example.
If we believe that Mr A existed, it surely would not be plausible for a localized person who would have had knowledge of the unsavoury Dorset street, to venture down there with Kelly. dressed at the very least affluent .
It would have been extremely risky for a local man to have entered any private room with a pick up, who suggested that very thing., so the explanation has a two fold answer,
1] He was not a local man , and did not have prior knowledge of Dorset street, and its horrid reputation.
2] He knew he would be safe from harm , as he was confident that Kelly was safe to accompany.
The latter suggests that Mary was not a stranger,
The former that he was , either out of area , or out of area , but still possibly known to Kelly.
If we consider the whole alleged meeting with Mr A , and unless we dismiss the entire tale as bogus , we have to ask the obvious.
Why would a young female allow herself to be accosted in the early hours of the morning by a well dressed stranger, and invite him back to her room, without reservation, when only a day previous remarked to Mrs McCarthy..''He is a concern, I hear he is ripe in this area.''
It does not seem likely, unless she knew the man well enough to trust him?.
However there is another alternative.
If she was approached after Maxwell spoke to her, and the killer was observing her, even if he was local, he would feel safer in the active street, and would feel less threatened entered her room when no preplanned attack was likely.
Hopefully a few points raised for discussion.
Regards Richard.

First of all I do not believe maxwell described a well dressed man and in any event even if maxwell sighting of MK is accurate which I doubt I really do not think someone who was so sick from drinking that they were vomiting in the street would be in the mood for sex/prostitution.

And to your first point. It does seem odd that someone dripping with bling would be in that area at that time of night (Aman), but then again Sarah Lewis did see the bethnel green man that night and I believe he was described as well dressed.

[Wickerman]

Take for example.
If we believe that Mr A existed, it surely would not be plausible for a localized person who would have had knowledge of the unsavoury Dorset street, to venture down there with Kelly. dressed at the very least affluent .
It would have been extremely risky for a local man to have entered any private room with a pick up, who suggested that very thing., so the explanation has a two fold answer,
1] He was not a local man , and did not have prior knowledge of Dorset street, and its horrid reputation.
2] He knew he would be safe from harm , as he was confident that Kelly was safe to accompany.
The latter suggests that Mary was not a stranger,
The former that he was , either out of area , or out of area , but still possibly known to Kelly.
If we consider the whole alleged meeting with Mr A , and unless we dismiss the entire tale as bogus , we have to ask the obvious.
Why would a young female allow herself to be accosted in the early hours of the morning by a well dressed stranger, and invite him back to her room, without reservation, when only a day previous remarked to Mrs McCarthy..''He is a concern, I hear he is ripe in this area.''
It does not seem likely, unless she knew the man well enough to trust him?.

Hello Richard.
A few points in opposition.

If, as is quite possible, this Astrachan was a local man, an eccentric, who lived around the corner from Kelly, like Joseph Isaacs, then this would answer why he felt safe among his neighbors dressed the way he was.

Kelly has no problem, she knew him, at least by sight.

But, there is no need to view Astrachan as the killer.

Hutchinson did claim to leave Dorset St. about 3:00am.
Mrs Kennedy, on the other hand, timed her arrival at Dorset St. by the Britannia, also at about 3:00am. By our experience we know that in most cases the stated times given by witnesses are nothing more than approximations.

Hutchinson could have left the west end of Dorset St. as the Spitalfields clock turned 3:00, Astrachan emerged from Millers Court and went home to Paternoster Row, following some distance behind Hutchinson. While Kelly turned out of Millers Court and arrived at the Britannia just as Mrs Kennedy was about to turn into Dorset St.

So, what we read below, is quite possible.

"Mrs. Kennedy is confident that the man whom she noticed speaking to the woman Kelly at three o'clock on Friday morning is identical with the person who accosted her on the previous Wednesday."

The Britannia-man, apparently a local man, now becomes a Person of Interest.

[Abby Normal]

Hello Richard.
A few points in opposition.

If, as is quite possible, this Astrachan was a local man, an eccentric, who lived around the corner from Kelly, like Joseph Isaacs, then this would answer why he felt safe among his neighbors dressed the way he was.

Kelly has no problem, she knew him, at least by sight.

But, there is no need to view Astrachan as the killer.

Hutchinson did claim to leave Dorset St. about 3:00am.
Mrs Kennedy, on the other hand, timed her arrival at Dorset St. by the Britannia, also at about 3:00am. By our experience we know that in most cases the stated times given by witnesses are nothing more than approximations.

Hutchinson could have left the west end of Dorset St. as the Spitalfields clock turned 3:00, Astrachan emerged from Millers Court and went home to Paternoster Row, following some distance behind Hutchinson. While Kelly turned out of Millers Court and arrived at the Britannia just as Mrs Kennedy was about to turn into Dorset St.

So, what we read below, is quite possible.

"Mrs. Kennedy is confident that the man whom she noticed speaking to the woman Kelly at three o'clock on Friday morning is identical with the person who accosted her on the previous Wednesday."

The Britannia-man, apparently a local man, now becomes a Person of Interest.

Hey wicker
Any name in mind for the well dressed ripper? Is it the britannia man and/or bethnel green man? Isaacs? Who is it???

[Wickerman]

Hey wicker
Any name in mind for the well dressed ripper? Is it the britannia man and/or bethnel green man? Isaacs? Who is it???

The Britannia-man (AKA Bethnal Green Man) is the last male to see her alive that we read of.

Isaacs?, no, he's just a small time thief.

[Abby Normal]

The Britannia-man (AKA Bethnal Green Man) is the last male to see her alive that we read of.

Isaacs?, no, he's just a small time thief.

Any name in mind and/or any other details about him you would care to expound on?

[moonbegger]

It seems Mrs Phoenix had a fairly good grasp on who Kelly was ! Is there anything more on this Lizzie Williams chick ?

She had two false teeth which projected very much from the lips. When living at Breezers-hill, she stated to Mrs. Phœnix that she had a child aged two years, but Mrs. Phœnix never saw it. At that time the deceased had a friend known as Lizzie Williams. Mrs. Phœnix is confident the deceased is the woman to whom she refers, although she has not seen her since she left the neighbourhood of the London Docks, where she was well known.

moonbegger

[moonbegger]

Sorry .. Wrong thread .

[Wickerman]

Any name in mind and/or any other details about him you would care to expound on?

No name, though the police may have had it and not realized.

There appears to be a slender thread concerning someone who may be this same person.

Paumier mentions a man who accosted some women on the Thursday night (8th), and then in the press on the 10th (below) we read of a similar man being handed over to police on a similar charge.
No doubt the police had to get a name from him.

A man was arrested last night in Whitechapel on suspicion of having committed the Dorset-street crime. He was pointed out to the police by some women as a man who had accosted them on Thursday night and whose movements excited suspicion. He was taken to Commercial-street police-station, followed by an immense crowd.
The Northern Echo, 10 Nov. 1888.

We have to wonder how many similarly dressed men were accosting groups of women (recall Lewis & Kennedy?), in the same area, on the same night, and on successive nights.

[Ben]

"Mrs. Kennedy" was not a genuine witness, but rather a women who had learned about Sarah Lewis' evidence and attempted to pass it off as her own experience, which is why her account is suspiciously near-identical to that of Lewis. Fortunately, both police and press cottoned on to this, and she was promptly discredited, hence her non-appearance at the inquest. Had she been a genuine, non-plagiarizing witness, her claim to have seen a man talking to Mary Kelly at 3.00am would have been extremely significant and she would have been the most crucial inquest witness.

But that didn't happen.

Britannia man was mentioned by Sarah Lewis, and there is not the slightest suggestion that the woman she saw talking to him was Mary Kelly. Indeed, we can be pretty confident that it was not.

As for Astrakhan man, it is even less likely that he'd dress up in his finery and bling if he was local to the area, since a local would know full well what a bad area it was for both petty and serious crime, and that there were inevitable consequences to be expected for those imprudent enough or insane enough to advertise their wealth in such an area.

While there may have been a few tall tales doing the rounds involving well-dressed men with black bags and shiny top hats, there is very little reason to take them seriously, especially as most of them appeared only in the early pre-inquest press reports and amounted to second hand hearsay or worse. If some of these were similar, it was only because certain sensationalist perceptions of the ripper's appearance were popular at the time, and a posh, upper-class ripper was - and is! - so much more interesting than the likely reality that he was an impoverished, relatively shabby local. Hence, this image was pandered to by those who wanted to sell bogus "ripper encounters" to the press.

[Abby Normal]

No name, though the police may have had it and not realized.

There appears to be a slender thread concerning someone who may be this same person.

Paumier mentions a man who accosted some women on the Thursday night (8th), and then in the press on the 10th (below) we read of a similar man being handed over to police on a similar charge.
No doubt the police had to get a name from him.

A man was arrested last night in Whitechapel on suspicion of having committed the Dorset-street crime. He was pointed out to the police by some women as a man who had accosted them on Thursday night and whose movements excited suspicion. He was taken to Commercial-street police-station, followed by an immense crowd.
The Northern Echo, 10 Nov. 1888.

We have to wonder how many similarly dressed men were accosting groups of women (recall Lewis & Kennedy?), in the same area, on the same night, and on successive nights.

Hi wicker
Thanks.
Why have you latched onto such an ambiguous "suspect" then for jack the ripper? I don't understand how you can argue so passionately (and with such detail and research)for this ,and against other more specific suspects, when you don't have anything really more concrete than a well dressed suspect?
Why a well dressed ripper , wick why!?!

[RivkahChaya]

Ignorant of the culture? Perhaps intimate instead. Possibly the killer knew where to avoid and had certain areas he hunted in. Also a big sharp knife and maybe a real nasty streak in him. Perhaps she was known to him but not the other way around. Why would she bring him back to her place? Alcohol money and rain pop in my head rather quickly. If he was in some way familiar with her he might have felt quite safe in her room. Maybe he also cared less about the risk and more that he wanted to kill her. If it was the same perpetrator as the previous murders, he had been acting with almost impunity.

That, plus he, and others like him, were the reason such areas were dangerous. The knife he carried to murder women could also be used defensively if he were mugged. Or for all we know, offensively to mug other men, or to cut purses or wallet pockets. Most serial killers who have been caught turned out to earn their livings honesty, but not all of them did, and we don't know about the ones who were never caught. Thieves can be more transient than people with steady jobs, so it's at least possible that uncaught killers may have on the whole earned their livings dishonestly-- or at least in much greater numbers than the ones who were caught.

The "well-dressed" description has to be taken in context. He was probably just well-dressed for the area, and wouldn't be described that way in Belgravia.

[Abby Normal]

Hi wicker
Thanks.
Why have you latched onto such an ambiguous "suspect" then for jack the ripper? I don't understand how you can argue so passionately (and with such detail and research)for this ,and against other more specific suspects, when you don't have anything really more concrete than a well dressed suspect?
Why a well dressed ripper , wick why!?!

Bumping for wicker