Was Mary Kelly a Ripper victim?

[Harry D]

MJK is generally accepted as Jack the Ripper's gruesome masterpiece. It's generally accepted that this is because Jack finally had the 'alone time' needed to fulfill his depraved fantasies. And while there's certainly some merit to that argument, I'm beginning to feel that Mary Kelly shouldn't be taken for granted as a Ripper victim.

There is obviously a discrepancy between Kelly's murder and the other 'canonical' four, the others 'only' suffered slight mutilations in comparison to Kelly's utter annihilation. For one, there is the notable change in modus operandi which seems to be handwaved because Kelly was killed indoors. WHY did Jack take to killing indoors when before he was targeting prostitutes on the backstreets? WHY did Jack leave behind the uterus when he had removed Chapman's, Eddowe's (and was probably going for Nichols' until he was put off)? WHY did such a clean killer who was able to disembowel his victims in the dark without damaging any other organs and avoid blood splatter then create such a wild bloodbath with Kelly? If Jack had such an insatiable bloodlust you'd have thought it would've reflected itself in the other canonical victims.

Anyway, I look forward to your responses and hope everyone can approach this topic with an open mind at least.

[Natasha]

I definitely believe that Eddowes and Kelly are closely linked

I don't think Liz Stride was a JTR vic'

As for Chapman and Nichols well I'm not completely sure at the mo, will need to re read the details about their demise

[DVV]

That's the kind of question I would call a piège à cons.
MJK isn't a Ripper victim.
Botticelli has painted the Mona Lisa.
The Pickwick Club is Shakespeare's masterpiece.

[DVV]

I definitely believe that Eddowes and Kelly are closely linked

Agreed. As much as number 4 is closely linked to number 5.

[MrBarnett]

[QUOTE=Harry D;297875]For one, there1 is the notable change in modus operandi which seems to be handwaved because Kelly was killed indoors. WHY did Jack take to killing indoors when before he was targeting prostitutes on the backstreets? [QUOTE]

That one seems to me the easiest to answer: he didn't change his MO . His MO was to find a prostitute and allow her to use her local knowledge to take him to a secluded spot to transact their business. In MJK's case he struck lucky and found himself in a location where he didn't have to keep an ear open for the sound of approaching footsteps.

MrB

[DVV]

[QUOTE=MrBarnett;297901]

In MJK's case he struck lucky and found himself in a location where he didn't have to keep an ear open for the sound of approaching footsteps.

MrB

Hi MrB

It's indeed easier to butcher a woman home. So why only one butchered indoors ? Was she the only prostitute in London with a roof over her head ? - Oh, and what a luck, Barnett had just gone away.

JtR is Lucky Luke.

Cheers

[lynn cates]

finally

Hello Harry. Thanks for starting this poll.

I've never understood the "finally"--although many believe that. Interesting to see the replies.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

French

Hello David. What of "Frenchmen are celibate teetotallers"? (heh-heh)

Cheers.
LC

[DVV]

Hello David. What of "Frenchmen are celibate teetotallers"? (heh-heh)

Cheers.
LC

Hi Lynn;

Please explain ! I'm a bloody Viet-Corsican catholic sinner.
Talking of Corsica, you'll soon be independent (heh-heh)

[MrBarnett]

Hi DVV,

I would imagine that MJK was, if not unique, then extremely unusual as a Spitalfields prossy living on her own.

Jack was indeed lucky that morning, or perhaps he already knew of Kelly's domestic situation.

MrB

[DVV]

or perhaps he already knew of Kelly's domestic situation.

MrB

Come on, you'll soon understand what it's all about.
The last one. The heart taken. The most butchered. The youngest.
And please, don't tell me she was a unique case.
Prostitutes with a cheap little room like this must have been plenty in London - at least, more than all JtR victims. So ?

[MrBarnett]

Hi DVV,

Not unique in London, but pretty unusual in Spitalfields, I would suggest.

Youngest? Someone had to be. Most mutilated? Ditto, and not surprising that it was the one who provided the most seclusion.

MrB

[DVV]

Not unique in London, but pretty unusual in Spitalfields, I would suggest.

Don't get stubborn. Unsusual doesn't mean unique. See the time gap between Eddowes and Kelly. And couldn't the killer move out of Spitalfields ?

Youngest? Someone had to be. Most mutilated? Ditto, and not surprising that it was the one who provided the most seclusion.

Not only youngest.
Definitely younger than the other victims.
Very fond of a man who spent 28 years in the loony bin and died there.

[MrBarnett]

DVV,

I agree unsusual doesn't mean unique - it doesn't even mean unusual!

And unusual it was for a young single woman to have a room of her own in Spitalfields at that time. The killer may have had a better chance of finding a prostitute with her own room in Mayfair, or the Isle of Skye for that matter, but how is that relevant to a discussion about one of the Whitechapel murders?

Re. the age difference, perhaps Jack should have insisted on ID to endure he wasn't acting outside his MO.

MrB

[DVV]

Quite a poor reply, MrB.
I've precisely adressed your post, you keep repeating the same thing.

Cheers