Was Mary Kelly a Ripper victim?

[Michael W Richards]

Sexual fulfilment (or satisfying one's "lust") can be obtained by means other than the obvious - e.g. the act of cutting out organs gave the Ripper a sexual thrill. Ultimately, labelling the Ripper as a "lust murderer" is somewhat subjective, albeit no less subjective than discerning "anger" or "emotion" in the Kelly murder and, personally, I'm not sure such labels help us much at all.

Sam, the circumstantial evidence is like a breadcrumb trail to the motive, which in turn helps to isolate the probable culprit. Kellys face was slashed by someone. Her arms tell a story of self defense. That's an emotionally charged event. Applying some kind of choke hold that quickly subdues the victim and then slicing them open quietly and somewhat deftly suggests dispassionate behavior.

Surely the particular character of the individual should be of paramount importance when seeking him in a haystack of bad men.

Mary said that the other Joe "treated her poorly", which might indicate we had someone there that could get some thrill by being cruel and/or violent.

There is no evidence at any murder scene that the killer achieved some gratification to sate his "lustful" mind. In the case of the murdered women outdoors, the thrill could just be the stranger and the danger.

[Sam Flynn]

Lets take then Lust element you stated, can you cite some evidence from either Annie's or Polly's murder that shows us that Lust played any factor?

Sexual fulfilment (or satisfying one's "lust") can be obtained by means other than the obvious - e.g. the act of cutting out organs gave the Ripper a sexual thrill. Ultimately, labelling the Ripper as a "lust murderer" is somewhat subjective, albeit no less subjective than discerning "anger" or "emotion" in the Kelly murder and, personally, I'm not sure such labels help us much at all.

[Michael W Richards]

There are more problems assuming it was someone else. The copycat hypothesis has a number of issues.

MJK is entirely explained by an escalating Lust murderer. There is nothing about the crime that isn't. In escalation, there are no age barriers, no location barriers, no barriers except for the loose condition that the violence inflicted be more emphasized than the last. Meaning in the case of a lust murderer, that the sexual areas will be violated more. Also, in escalation, the violence may sometimes need not to be more emphasized but the rate of murders increases. This is still escalation.

So being indoors or outdoors, young or old, isn't how to rule out the same hand at all. It is entirely consistent with even examples we have today. We have repeats of this happening with other offenders (same hand each time). It might simply be newish grounds, but it's still Whitechapel and it might be a different age but it's still the same victimology.

More importantly, a copycat, copies what they read in the news, in this case, it would be papers reporting on the inquests and mimic those. Yet there is no evidence of this. Consider the following.

- The option of murdering MJK in Miller's court rather than her room.
- To not completely eviscerated her but match what was done to Eddowes (even Chapman or Nichols would have sufficed given Stride was considered a JtR victim).

You only have to ask one question... "Would JtR if alone with a prostitute in her room and free from intrusion, murder her like MJK was murdered?"

There we have it. No barrier to JtR at all.

MJK was posed like many of the other victims. The fact her breast was left under her head and other body parts hidden about her body was something new not seen in the other victims. A copycat would have not have done these.

All the deviations you are seeing as another hand are in fact a standard lust murderers escalation combined with opportunism.

I would agree that you stated your argument well, of course I add up the variables differently than you do. Lets take then Lust element you stated, can you cite some evidence from either Annie's or Polly's murder that shows us that Lust played any factor? From my point of view, their killer....the only 2murders I am about 100% certain were by the same man, was dispassionate. Clinical, or at least methodical.. in Annies case in particular. And Im also sure that they met their killer when they were at their weakest...alone, tired, hungover, and still having to solicit to get doss money. And that they likely did not know him.

Its almost a certainty that the killer of Mary Kelly was in her room with her agreement when she is killed, and there is no evidence at all that she ever brought clients into that room. She only could have done so since the previous Tuesday anyway,(Maria moved out), and we know she was seen out Wednesday. She sang to Blotchy for over an hour, off and on. That's not your typical street sex scenario in the Victorian era.

I would argue that almost anyone is capable of doing the things we see done in that room, and to the other women. There is darkness. We see the proof every day in the news. That's why I believe its unreasonable to simply imagine a single killer who dramatically changes all the pertinent aspects of his behaviors in just 2 months, and that he performs these acts with a variety of weapons and shows varying degrees of skill with them.

I do see the Lust in the Kelly killing quite clearly, because there is anger evidence there for one. But I don't see Annie and Pollys killer as particularly emotional at all.

[Sam Flynn]

absolutely bang on batman

Agreed.

[Abby Normal]

There are more problems assuming it was someone else. The copycat hypothesis has a number of issues.

MJK is entirely explained by an escalating Lust murderer. There is nothing about the crime that isn't. In escalation, there are no age barriers, no location barriers, no barriers except for the loose condition that the violence inflicted be more emphasized than the last. Meaning in the case of a lust murderer, that the sexual areas will be violated more. Also, in escalation, the violence may sometimes need not to be more emphasized but the rate of murders increases. This is still escalation.

So being indoors or outdoors, young or old, isn't how to rule out the same hand at all. It is entirely consistent with even examples we have today. We have repeats of this happening with other offenders (same hand each time). It might simply be newish grounds, but it's still Whitechapel and it might be a different age but it's still the same victimology.

More importantly, a copycat, copies what they read in the news, in this case, it would be papers reporting on the inquests and mimic those. Yet there is no evidence of this. Consider the following.

- The option of murdering MJK in Miller's court rather than her room.
- To not completely eviscerated her but match what was done to Eddowes (even Chapman or Nichols would have sufficed given Stride was considered a JtR victim).

You only have to ask one question... "Would JtR if alone with a prostitute in her room and free from intrusion, murder her like MJK was murdered?"

There we have it. No barrier to JtR at all.

MJK was posed like many of the other victims. The fact her breast was left under her head and other body parts hidden about her body was something new not seen in the other victims. A copycat would have not have done these.

All the deviations you are seeing as another hand are in fact a standard lust murderers escalation combined with opportunism.

absolutely bang on batman

[Batman]

There are a few problems with assuming that same man killed Kelly though.

There are more problems assuming it was someone else. The copycat hypothesis has a number of issues.

MJK is entirely explained by an escalating Lust murderer. There is nothing about the crime that isn't. In escalation, there are no age barriers, no location barriers, no barriers except for the loose condition that the violence inflicted be more emphasized than the last. Meaning in the case of a lust murderer, that the sexual areas will be violated more. Also, in escalation, the violence may sometimes need not to be more emphasized but the rate of murders increases. This is still escalation.

So being indoors or outdoors, young or old, isn't how to rule out the same hand at all. It is entirely consistent with even examples we have today. We have repeats of this happening with other offenders (same hand each time). It might simply be newish grounds, but it's still Whitechapel and it might be a different age but it's still the same victimology.

More importantly, a copycat, copies what they read in the news, in this case, it would be papers reporting on the inquests and mimic those. Yet there is no evidence of this. Consider the following.

- The option of murdering MJK in Miller's court rather than her room.
- To not completely eviscerated her but match what was done to Eddowes (even Chapman or Nichols would have sufficed given Stride was considered a JtR victim).

You only have to ask one question... "Would JtR if alone with a prostitute in her room and free from intrusion, murder her like MJK was murdered?"

There we have it. No barrier to JtR at all.

MJK was posed like many of the other victims. The fact her breast was left under her head and other body parts hidden about her body was something new not seen in the other victims. A copycat would have not have done these.

All the deviations you are seeing as another hand are in fact a standard lust murderers escalation combined with opportunism.

[Michael W Richards]

Chapman's abdomen, "was entirely laid open", according to The Lancet.
This could mean the same lengthwise abdominal cut we see on Eddowes was inflicted on Chapman.

Even the "flaps" mentioned by Dr Bond in his report could have been removed from Kelly after the same type of surgical wound, we simply do not know.

There are a few reasons Im inclined to include Kate in a spree, of 3, to me it seems some of the similarities are either mimicked or genuine characteristics.

There are a few problems with assuming that same man killed Kelly though. There is anger evident. There is a dramatic pattern change. The evidence suggests that she knew her attacker. She is much younger than all the preceding victims. And the mutilations do not seem to have a traditional approach or a focus, nor are they without much in the way of superfluous injuries. He took the time to de-flesh bone. Its my opinion that Mary was in some way being punished. I don't see that in Annies case, nor do I in Pollys case.

I think the evidence that she knew her attacker may be the key to solving this murder.

[Wickerman]

Why would Annie's killer decide to first remove flaps Sam, if he was just some "hack" why bother taking that step? Why not just one long cut and pull the skin and tissues back and cut out what you want? Why did Kates killer trace around the navel, not much time lost, agreed, but some. Why take any actions that do not achieve objectives and use up precious seconds?

Chapman's abdomen, "was entirely laid open", according to The Lancet.
This could mean the same lengthwise abdominal cut we see on Eddowes was inflicted on Chapman.

Even the "flaps" mentioned by Dr Bond in his report could have been removed from Kelly after the same type of surgical wound, we simply do not know.

[Michael W Richards]

Michael, I really would urge you to look up the case of Robert Napper, and particularly his murders of Rachel Nickell in 1992 [outdoors, overkill, stabbed forty-nine times] and Samantha Bisset in 1993 [indoors, stabbed in the neck and chest, mutilated, body parts taken away as trophies]. You may think one 'does not equate' with the other, but Napper evidently didn't give a rat's arse what others might think. And ask yourself what 'purpose' he had for any of it. At least you have his identity and he is still alive so you'd have a better shot at your own question than trying to fathom the mind of the man who killed Kelly and took her apart.

I doubt very much that Napper had read about Martha Tabram and Mary Kelly, considered the differences in the handiwork and decided to do something similar himself. And it's a dead cert that whoever killed Tabram and Kelly did not see into the future and decide to beat Napper to it.

So how can we easily dismiss the possibility that a man with a mind similar to Napper's was active in London a century before him, and could therefore have been responsible for both ?

Love,

Caz
X

Its never been that I dismiss the possibility that seemingly disparate acts could be the result of one mans actions Caz, its that both the nature of the acts and the skill used to perform them changes within just the Canonical Group. You know people seem to accept this fictional gang of Five as gospel then tag on a few extra unsolved cases "just for the jolly". The referenced case above seems interesting, I will look into it a bit to see the patterns, but one that stands out right now is "stabbing". After Martha Tabram's murder which other Canonical murder has repeated stabbing as an element? In Kelly case we see just about everything, so stabbing might have been a part of that...there is evidence of slashing. I understand that you and many others study lots of these kinds of murder cases and try to analyze the Ripper crimes using a serial viewpoint. The reason I object to that is because as of this moment in time, all these years later, there is no definite proof that any one of just the Canonical murders were connected to another by the killer. We may have a mix of multiple murders and merely singular events...like Mr Browns cutting of his wifes throat on the Triple Event night.

I don't see any real evidence in some cases that there was any anger that could be interpreted as directed towards women in general, or the victim specifically, nor do I see rage. I see a sneaky little mentally ill miscreant who was handy with a knife and knew something of anatomy seeking thrills. But without any screaming, or prolonged kill. Just quickly and quietly.

[Sam Flynn]

Why would Annie's killer decide to first remove flaps Sam, if he was just some "hack" why bother taking that step? Why not just one long cut and pull the skin and tissues back and cut out what you want?

I'd have thought the answer was obvious: he didn't know what he was doing and was improvising. Organ excision aside, there wasn't even much consistency between victims in respect of how their abdomens were opened. Indeed, the extent and number of throat wounds differed in some degree from case to case. I see little evidence of a skilled hand at work.

[Michael W Richards]

The point is that this isn't a particularlyl medical question - it's a question of how quickly one can detach one piece of flesh from another. It's not as if the uterus is entangled in a complex nest of intertwined ligaments, muscles, bone and connective tissue.

Why would Annie's killer decide to first remove flaps Sam, if he was just some "hack" why bother taking that step? Why not just one long cut and pull the skin and tissues back and cut out what you want? Why did Kates killer trace around the navel, not much time lost, agreed, but some. Why take any actions that do not achieve objectives and use up precious seconds?

I think in Annies case some skill is present, to what degree, that's our dilemma,... that also seems to be the belief of the contemporary investigators who in September contacted Medical Schools and Hospitals looking for problematic people. In Kates case I believe its more likely inexperience...severs the colon when it wasn't necessary, nicks the face when trying to..unsuccessfully I might add,..remove her nose, needs to take an apron piece from the victim to carry away his loot, even Phillips didn't see the previous traits to the same degree.

[J6123]

Might I suggest you take time to read the chapter on Eddowes murder which is in my book Jack the Ripper-The real truth" in which I have set out in great detail a time line regarding Eddowes murder in Mitre Square.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Jack-Ripper-Truth-Trevor-Marriott/dp/1728912997/ref=tmm_pap_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=1543046190&sr=1-1

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Congratulations on your new book Trevor, yes I will definitely give that a read.

[Sam Flynn]

Well medical experts then and now would disagree with you

The point is that this isn't a particularlyl medical question - it's a question of how quickly one can detach one piece of flesh from another. It's not as if the uterus is entangled in a complex nest of intertwined ligaments, muscles, bone and connective tissue.

[Trevor Marriott]

No bias, Trevor, just my reading of the situation.

Whether the uterus was "hacked" out or "cut" out, it would still only have needed a few seconds once located. And it wouldn't have taken long to locate it.

Well medical experts then and now would disagree with you

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Sam Flynn]

Your term "hacking" no one else has used that term, I think you are a little biased towards to the old accepted theory.

No bias, Trevor, just my reading of the situation.

Whether the uterus was "hacked" out or "cut" out, it would still only have needed a few seconds once located. And it wouldn't have taken long to locate it.