Was Mary Kelly a Ripper victim?

[c.d.]

I should have added that if anyone is trying to assign some personal significance to her face being mutilated what would be the significance of the slicing of the flesh on her leg or her intestines being ripped out? Do they have some significance as well? If you want to go down the significance road why stop with the face?

Again the simplest explanation is that the killer simply liked cutting on women.

c.d.

[Abby Normal]

I should have added that if anyone is trying to assign some personal significance to her face being mutilated what would be the significance of the slicing of the flesh on her leg or her intestines being ripped out? Do they have some significance as well? If you want to go down the significance road why stop with the face?

Again the simplest explanation is that the killer simply liked cutting on women.

c.d.

Bingo cd.
See my post a couple up. Thats my take on the rippers main motivation also.

[Karl]

Hello Karl,

If this was the only murder of women in Whitechapel that Fall I might be inclined to give the cutting of the face more significance. The autopsy report for Eddowes says "the face was very much mutilated" so if we want to assign significance to Kelly's facial mutilation it would seem we would have to do so for Eddowes as well.

Yes, indeed, but the only real facial mutilation on Eddowes was the nose, which had been cut off. With facial mutilations, the eyes tend to be targeted first, though here is something peculiar about MJK: the eyelids were cut off, but the eyes themselves were left alone. The lips were completely slashed, suggesting frenzy, but the eyes were left alone, suggesting deliberation. No matter how you cut it (no pun intended), MJK is a very odd case.

I think a much simpler explanation is that the Ripper was the killer of both women and that he simply liked cutting female flesh. It doesn't need to get more complicated than that.

c.d.

The reason I don't buy MJK as the work of the same killer is what I have already outlined. Had MJK been a middle-aged woman of average size, like the others, I would not hesitate to agree she was the victim of the same killer. But from all accounts, Mary must have been significantly taller than the killer, and she was young. This is not a trivial difference.

[richardnunweek]

Hi.
I have a hunch that the killer was after one person, that being Kelly.
The others were killed en-route to finding her,
Why so hard? why kill the other women.?
Mary Kelly was not the name he knew her as.
The East end was a vast place, all he had was a description,[ which may be vastly different from the one he knew.]
Once he had accosted the others, and asked if they knew a person of that description.he removed them so they could not warn Kelly, in case they were lying
In the case of Eddowes, she was able to give him a clue, by suggesting that Mary Jane fitted the description, and she heard she [ like herself] was shacking up with a man called Kelly.
Which initially McCarthy said she was ''She came to live with a coal porter named Kelly and posed as his wife, thus the name Mary Jane Kelly''
Eventually he traced her, McCarthy removed him from the premises, but on the morning of the 9th Nov,he came across her whilst about to call on Kelly.
All is forgiven my dear,I will help you out of your predicament, for what I have told you , you're be alright''
''All right my dear , Come on you will be comfortable '' was her reply.
And we know what happened next.
Regards Richard.

[Harry D]

Hi.
I have a hunch that the killer was after one person, that being Kelly.
The others were killed en-route to finding her,
Why so hard? why kill the other women.?
Mary Kelly was not the name he knew her as.
The East end was a vast place, all he had was a description,[ which may be vastly different from the one he knew.]
Once he had accosted the others, and asked if they knew a person of that description.he removed them so they could not warn Kelly, in case they were lying
In the case of Eddowes, she was able to give him a clue, by suggesting that Mary Jane fitted the description, and she heard she [ like herself] was shacking up with a man called Kelly.
Which initially McCarthy said she was ''She came to live with a coal porter named Kelly and posed as his wife, thus the name Mary Jane Kelly''
Eventually he traced her, McCarthy removed him from the premises, but on the morning of the 9th Nov,he came across her whilst about to call on Kelly.
All is forgiven my dear,I will help you out of your predicament, for what I have told you , you're be alright''
''All right my dear , Come on you will be comfortable '' was her reply.
And we know what happened next.
Regards Richard.

...or they could've been a group of destitute women who are the usual pickings for opportunistic serial killers. Seriously, why make a movie out of it?

[Busy Beaver]

I think the Ripper was chancing his luck when he found victims. Unfortunately for four of them, they were in the wrong place at the wrong time. It does look as if JTR was trying to get someone, but I don't think this is the case. Why kill others and possibly get caught before getting to the one you want, which doesn't make sense considering there's a noose at the end of it.
Many young women who walked the streets may have went out early and came back before dark and the fear of meeting the Ripper kept many people of the street, men included. Those who were desperate for doss money after drinking it away were the ones that were caught out.

However, there must have been something going on in Whitechapel or the East End for a serial killer to suddenly come out of the shadows and start to do the horrific murders which occurred. Unless some new material is found in some dusty archive I suppose we may never find out and continue to speculate for another 130 years.

[Sam Flynn]

Those who were desperate for doss money after drinking it away were the ones that were caught out.

Doss money or, in Kelly's case, rent money, which amounts to the same thing - irrespective of age or appearance, it might simply have been a case of her being out looking for customers at the wrong time. Had the timings been slightly different, I suspect that we could be talking about the death of Elizabeth Prater instead.

[Karl]

Hi.
I have a hunch that the killer was after one person, that being Kelly.
The others were killed en-route to finding her,
Why so hard? why kill the other women.?
Mary Kelly was not the name he knew her as.
The East end was a vast place, all he had was a description,[ which may be vastly different from the one he knew.]
Once he had accosted the others, and asked if they knew a person of that description.he removed them so they could not warn Kelly, in case they were lying
In the case of Eddowes, she was able to give him a clue, by suggesting that Mary Jane fitted the description, and she heard she [ like herself] was shacking up with a man called Kelly.
Which initially McCarthy said she was ''She came to live with a coal porter named Kelly and posed as his wife, thus the name Mary Jane Kelly''
Eventually he traced her, McCarthy removed him from the premises, but on the morning of the 9th Nov,he came across her whilst about to call on Kelly.
All is forgiven my dear,I will help you out of your predicament, for what I have told you , you're be alright''
''All right my dear , Come on you will be comfortable '' was her reply.
And we know what happened next.
Regards Richard.

I do not mean to sound impertinent, but where did you divine all that specific information?

[Sam Flynn]

I do not mean to sound impertinent, but where did you divine all that specific information?

The bit about McCarthy saying that she lived with a coal porter named Kelly comes from a press agency report carried by the Star and The Times of 10th November 1888. It's apparently a garbled account of her living with a fish porter named (as we know) Barnett.

[richardnunweek]

Hi Karl.
All of us speculate from time to time., I was using the 'He was after one woman only theory.
As Sam said, apparently a garbled account meaning Fish porter, and assuming that person was named Kelly [ being the deceased name]
Mind you, there is a vast difference in appearance between a Fish porter , and a transporter of coal?
Its possible if Eddowes did reside in the shed in Dorset street , she at least knew the woman we know as Mary Kelly.
So it is possible that the killer was able to trace Mk, by her .
Regards Richard.

[Karl]

Hi Karl.
All of us speculate from time to time., I was using the 'He was after one woman only theory.
As Sam said, apparently a garbled account meaning Fish porter, and assuming that person was named Kelly [ being the deceased name]
Mind you, there is a vast difference in appearance between a Fish porter , and a transporter of coal?
Its possible if Eddowes did reside in the shed in Dorset street , she at least knew the woman we know as Mary Kelly.
So it is possible that the killer was able to trace Mk, by her .
Regards Richard.

I appreciate that, but what I want to know is, what your source is for the following:

In the case of Eddowes, she was able to give him a clue, by suggesting that Mary Jane fitted the description, and she heard she [ like herself] was shacking up with a man called Kelly.
Which initially McCarthy said she was ''She came to live with a coal porter named Kelly and posed as his wife, thus the name Mary Jane Kelly''
Eventually he traced her, McCarthy removed him from the premises, but on the morning of the 9th Nov,he came across her whilst about to call on Kelly.
All is forgiven my dear,I will help you out of your predicament, for what I have told you , you're be alright''
''All right my dear , Come on you will be comfortable '' was her reply.

[Sam Flynn]

I appreciate that, but what I want to know is, what your source is for the following:

The line relating to "Kelly the coal porter" comes from the abovementioned garbled press agency story used by the Star/Times of 10th November 1888; there are also fragments of Hutchinson's testimony ("You'll be alright for what I've told you"... "All right my dear, come along. You will be comfortable".) The rest, I'm guessing, is a speculative reconstruction by Richard Nunweek; he'll correct me if I'm wrong.

[richardnunweek]

Hi Sam.
Speculative reconstruction indeed .
And don't forget the Shed where Eddowes allegedly stayed. at one time.
Purely tongue in cheek .
Regards Richard.

[richardnunweek]

Hi ,
After being on Casebook some 19 years. and realising that not a lot has been achieved, on conventional study.clearly different ideas, albeit speculation, mixed with facts that we know. may enable us to approach the case with freshness.
Regards Richard.

[AuroraSarintacos]

. . .are you serious?

The most simplest explanation is the one, I feel, closest to the truth: these were desperate women in dire circumstances who, like many prostitutes today, belong in a class high-risk for violence.

Kelly was no seemingly different than the other women. She was at the wrong place at the wrong time for an opportunistic killer who enjoyed mutilating women.

Other than her supposed youth there is nothing that differs this poor woman from the rest. This opinion is of seemingly extreme sexism and it makes me quite upset that this seems to be a continuing opinion because the underlining assumption is that she must have done something to deserve that.

Jack, whoever he was, was a little bloke who hated women and enjoyed mutilating them. The violence escalates, as it tends to do in most serial killers who lose the first initial "high" of their first killings, and I really do not know how one could be of the opinion that that was not the case or how the mutilation of his victims didn't really match all together and therefore must have been a copy-cat killer or what have you.

Once again, and last time, focus on the proof. There is no empirical evidence that suggest any of these fantastical suggestions. Stop blaming the victims. Seriously.

Stop.