Was Mary Kelly a Ripper victim?

[Karl]

If you think that flaps being cut away from the abdominal wall is something that will "just happen to be done" every now and then, you may want to produce examples of other cases where this happened?

How about we reverse-engineer your argument and use Kelly's facial mutilations as something which excludes her from comparison with Chapman? I'm sorry, I just fail to see the significance of a characteristic which applies to exactly one victim. Why the second mutilated victim, and not the first or the third of the mutilated victims? What case have you that "cutting away in flaps is something only the Ripper would do"? Especially when - if we accept them all as Ripper murders - it isn't something the Ripper even tends to do?

And while you are at it, perhaps you can exemplify other outbreaks of copy-cat killings involving severe eviscerations and organ taking?

Why so specific? How about acid attacks? The name Jack the Ripper was coined right before the Stride murder, meaning two mutilations so far. Mutilations, including the removal of organs, was on everybody's lips. That's not usually the case, you know.

[Sam Flynn]

Eddowes's face was mutilated, but not beyond recognition.

True, but Eddowes' killer only had a handful of minutes to do what he did, whereas Kelly's killer had much more time available to him.

[Fisherman]

How about we reverse-engineer your argument and use Kelly's facial mutilations as something which excludes her from comparison with Chapman? I'm sorry, I just fail to see the significance of a characteristic which applies to exactly one victim. Why the second mutilated victim, and not the first or the third of the mutilated victims? What case have you that "cutting away in flaps is something only the Ripper would do"? Especially when - if we accept them all as Ripper murders - it isn't something the Ripper even tends to do?



Why so specific? How about acid attacks? The name Jack the Ripper was coined right before the Stride murder, meaning two mutilations so far. Mutilations, including the removal of organs, was on everybody's lips. That's not usually the case, you know.

No, we will not reverse the argument, and for a good reason: differences are not as telling as similarities. If we have a woman beaten to death in Belfast and a man shot in Edinburgh, they seem to be worlds (well) apart - but if they are both found with the text "God save the Queen" scribbled on their bums, all dissimilarities go out the wondow in terms of importance. The abdominal flaps are extremely rare and they represent the bum-scribbling in these cases. However, we must not make the assumption that the scribbling must be there in all the killers cases - but when it IS, no doubt can be entertained. Same killer. Guaranteed.

Why so specific? Because eviscerations and organ procurement IS highly specific and extremely rare. And although it was on everyones lips in Milwaukee, nobody copycatted Dahmer there. Although it was on everyones lips in Rostov-on-Don, noone copycatted Chikatilo there. It just don´t happen. And thats´not to say that it CAN not happen, only that it doesn´t. It´s fiction stuff, I´m afraid.

[c.d.]

Well there is only so much flesh on a human body and if someone has the time and motivation they will eventually get to the face. There doesn't need to be anything personal about it. What is it about the face that would be off limits to someone who cuts throats and takes out internal organs?

c.d.

[richardnunweek]

Hi
I reckon there is a good chance that Jack was caught not long after Millers court, and that the killer was known to the last victim, and was traced upon information received.
This would eliminate without doubt Barnett.
Fleming appears to have been around two three years after Millers court before being certified,, so him too.
Was there another Joe around.quite possible of course,.?
I believe it is possible that Kelly's landlord McCarthy saw her killer prior to the murder, and his description led to the arrest,
The killer was apprehended, and put away in an institution, and his name has never been revealed, and McCarthy was sworn to secrecy.
Reason for this .
Fiona Kendall stated on Casebook , some years ago, that her great grandfather McCarthy [ Kelly's landlord] knew the identity of the killer, knew his motive, and this has been in the family ever since.
She also stated that prior to the death of Mary Kelly. a man called on McCarthy asking where Kelly lived, she had stolen some item from him and he wanted it back.
Fiona said that her great grandfather sent him packing in ''True McCarthy style''.
My suggestion although reliant heavily on oral history, is ''Was this her killer''? was this the man who accosted Kelly , seen by Hutchinson.?
It is possible to link Eddowes , and Mary Kelly together by the name ''Kelly''
McCarthy said initially [ referring to Kelly] ''The deceased came to live with a man called Kelly''.
Eddowes lived with a man called Kelly.
Of course we know that referred to Barnett [ apparently] but her killer did not know that, he was looking for her living with a Kelly. maybe he asked Eddowes if she knew a woman of Kelly's description,., and she replied 'yes' living with a man called Kelly.'
That would have narrowed down the search and I should say now , that I doubt if Mary was her name.
So it would have taken time to trace a woman from a description [ that may have altered somewhat..by the surname of Kelly] when Kelly was living with a Barnett.
So having traced Mary to Millers court, and despite McCarthy's refusal to cooperate, her killer went through with his actions anyway.
Regards Richard.

[Wickerman]

There are too many old accounts from the early 20th century in the East End where someone knew someone who knew the killer, or saw the killer, or knew the reason he killed.
At best one of them may be true, but only one, the trouble is, which one?

[richardnunweek]

Hi Jon,
The one that lived yards from Kelly's room, that had the back of the shop looking out on the court.
A person that knew Kelly, a person who helped police enter the room.
Not just anyone.?
Regards Richard,

[Varqm]

So McCarthy knew the killer and just kept silent.For what reason?

--

[packers stem]

So McCarthy knew the killer and just kept silent.For what reason?

--

Threat
Money
Official secrets act

Take your pick

[Michael W Richards]

If it was one killer who did all the murders, he isn't really evolving in a straight line. Nichols, mutilation, no flaps. Chapman, worse mutilation, flaps. Stride, no mutilation. Eddowes, severe mutilation, but no flaps. Kelly, unprecedented mutilation, flaps. Clearly, if all murders were committed by the same person, whether or not the abdominal wall was cut away in large flaps is irrelevant, as it cannot be used as a tell-tale sign that X is a Ripper victim. It clearly is not part of the MO, just happened to be done on one or two of the victims.

By the way, I don't believe Stride was a Ripper victim, either. And indeed, I wouldn't be at all surprised if each victim had a different killer. Remember how after the Nice terror attack, there seemed to be a spree of similar terror attacks using a truck as the primary weapon several other places, too? As if the Nice attack made them realise, "hey, trucks can be really effective." Completely unrelated perpetrators, but certain acts of notoriety will always inspire copy-cats.

Here in Toronto 2 summers ago we had a few murders within a short time that involved dismemberment..then suddenly 2 more cases, 1 in Buffalo, presently we have in custody a killer who killed and dismembered 8 victims during that same period up to present time. All 3 instances had the murder details well publicized.

The current killer didn't kill the first 2, he was arrested and sentenced, and neither of them killed the Buffalo victim. So did we have 3 individuals that all apparently felt the compulsive need to dismember...something that is very rare in the recorded history of murder...or can we safely assume that one or more of them was influenced by prior publicized events?

You make a great point here. I wouldn't hesitate to say that latter unsolved murders that bear any resemblance to the priors...like Alice Mackenzie maybe..were almost certainly imitations of the original.

[Varqm]

Threat
Money
Official secrets act

Take your pick

Anything realistic though?


----

[richardnunweek]

Hi.
If the Ripper was caught, and the authorities decided to simply incarcerate that person, and spare his family any repercussions should he be named. it would be suggested to McCarthy that he should remain tight lipped .
He would not want to fall foul of the police would he?
Realistic. to me possible.
Regards Richard.

[Varqm]

Not realistic/possible.Nobody knew who the killer was.Everybody was after him and he got caught and not named? So Mcnaughten and Abberline,etc. were left groping for answers?

---

[packers stem]

Anything realistic though?


----

I'm completely at ease with the level of realism
Everyday occurrences
You asked for reasons why someone would keep quiet .
Are you suggesting that those potential reasons have never been applied at any point through history ?

[Wickerman]

Richard, are you suggesting the British police would lock a suspect up without a trial?