Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Did Mary know her killer?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • elleryqueen74
    replied
    Originally posted by Michael W Richards View Post
    Considering that there is no evidence that the killer entered the room from any other access point than the door, and that we hear of a cry from the "courtyard" that 2 people hear at 3:45 that is claimed by no living person, and since Mary is attacked while on the right side of the bed...on her right side... facing the wall, ..I would think that its almost a certainty that the killer was granted access to the room.

    Making him a known person to Mary.

    The only possible other access via the door is one that pre-supposes that the killer could open the door, walk across creaky floorboards that Mrs Prater stated allowed her to hear whenever Mary moved about in the room, sneak up onto the bed behind Mary, before she wakes,...and that possibility doesn't address who called out at 3:45 from the court. The windows are a non starter, I don't imagine that anyone could have seen the opportunity to open the door via the latch at almost 4am, Barnett seems to have an accepted alibi,..and even if they figured out the window method you still have the issue of egress without waking Mary. The call, as we know, didn't come from her room specifically...and the witness in the courtyard heard it "as if at her door", while Mrs Prater heard it "as if from the court". Which substantiates a person calling out from her room in the courtyard via the open door.

    The safe money is on a scenario that the killer was either granted access to the room with her at 11:45, or she later granted him access.

    Cheers
    Just because she granted some person access to her room does not automatically mean the killer was known to her. It's Certianly a possibility but far from a drawn out conclusion.

    Leave a comment:


  • Abby Normal
    replied
    Originally posted by Batman View Post
    Maxwell, like Kennedy, like Hutchinson, like Paker is just yet another of many attention seekers who contribute nothing and can't be corroborated by anybody else, of which the Whitechapel investigators had hoards to deal with.

    The fact is Mary could only be identified by her eyes and ears by Barnett because her face was so destroyed that it appears no other identification was made so we are just accepting these witnesses know who they are talking about. Maxwell might have been talking about someone else.
    good point and agree.

    Leave a comment:


  • Abby Normal
    replied
    Not only did mary not venture out again after blotchy, she was never planning to.

    And she knew her killer.

    Leave a comment:


  • Batman
    replied
    Originally posted by RockySullivan View Post
    Hi batboy, Was mary a pretty seasoned drinker? What do you make of Maxwell seeing MK throwing up in the am?
    Maxwell, like Kennedy, like Hutchinson, like Paker is just yet another of many attention seekers who contribute nothing and can't be corroborated by anybody else, of which the Whitechapel investigators had hoards to deal with.

    The fact is Mary could only be identified by her eyes and ears by Barnett because her face was so destroyed that it appears no other identification was made so we are just accepting these witnesses know who they are talking about. Maxwell might have been talking about someone else.

    Leave a comment:


  • RockySullivan
    replied
    Hi batboy, Was mary a pretty seasoned drinker? What do you make of Maxwell seeing MK throwing up in the am?

    Leave a comment:


  • Batman
    replied
    After coming home drunk and drinking up a portion of Blotchy's Ale tank, I think even she could have slept through a racket in her room. At best mumble something or in a body's last ditch effort to survive cry murder.

    Leave a comment:


  • RockySullivan
    replied
    Before midnight seems early for a girl like MK
    If she was passed out someone breaking in the window might not wake her

    Leave a comment:


  • Michael W Richards
    replied
    Originally posted by Errata View Post
    I think there is little to no evidence that Mary knew her killer well, if at all. But I think there may be quite a bit of evidence that the killer knew Mary well. Or at least thought he did.
    Considering that there is no evidence that the killer entered the room from any other access point than the door, and that we hear of a cry from the "courtyard" that 2 people hear at 3:45 that is claimed by no living person, and since Mary is attacked while on the right side of the bed...on her right side... facing the wall, ..I would think that its almost a certainty that the killer was granted access to the room.

    Making him a known person to Mary.

    The only possible other access via the door is one that pre-supposes that the killer could open the door, walk across creaky floorboards that Mrs Prater stated allowed her to hear whenever Mary moved about in the room, sneak up onto the bed behind Mary, before she wakes,...and that possibility doesn't address who called out at 3:45 from the court. The windows are a non starter, I don't imagine that anyone could have seen the opportunity to open the door via the latch at almost 4am, Barnett seems to have an accepted alibi,..and even if they figured out the window method you still have the issue of egress without waking Mary. The call, as we know, didn't come from her room specifically...and the witness in the courtyard heard it "as if at her door", while Mrs Prater heard it "as if from the court". Which substantiates a person calling out from her room in the courtyard via the open door.

    The safe money is on a scenario that the killer was either granted access to the room with her at 11:45, or she later granted him access.

    Cheers

    Leave a comment:


  • Robert
    replied
    Could you expand, Errata?

    Leave a comment:


  • Errata
    replied
    I think there is little to no evidence that Mary knew her killer well, if at all. But I think there may be quite a bit of evidence that the killer knew Mary well. Or at least thought he did.

    Leave a comment:


  • Batman
    replied
    An alcoholic goes to her room at 11:45am with a man carrying a pail of ale. We are to believe she didn't have any and left the room in a walking state after? She's got ger client. She's got her drink. She even has fish and pototoes to wash it down.

    For Hutchinson to be true we need an alcoholic to be able to use fish and potatoes to sober up considerably, abstain from her clients drink, sing and walk out again with the capacity to find another punter and go back home.

    All her factors without going out are optimal, except she doesn't know who she is really with.

    Food - Yep
    Booze - Yep
    Client - Yep
    Sing Song - Yep

    What more does she want? Invite people down for a house party?

    Leave a comment:


  • DVV
    replied
    Hi Robert

    In other words, Kelly was walking steadily.
    She was like these young boys in Under the Volcano's first chapter : the more she drank, the more steadily she walked.

    Some people can handle drink better than others. We don't really know what was Kelly's tolerance for alcohol.
    True. But I tend to agree with Batman on this one. I don't think she went out again after having entretained Mr PetiteVérole. Nobody saw her, no bartender remembered her that night... nobody, except Hutch.

    Leave a comment:


  • Michael W Richards
    replied
    Originally posted by Paddy Goose View Post
    So one of the soap opera cast knocks on Mary's door, she opens it and screams Oh Murder. And that's how we know she knew her killer? No I don't understand that.

    But let me ask you this Michael - When somebody you know knocks on your door do you open it and scream Oh Murder? Often, or just sometimes
    If you think of this situation in modern terms, sure, it wont make sense. The reality is that calls of "oh-murder", or "murder", in the LVP....often meant "oh-murder, Ive got dung on my shoes", or "oh-murder...I forgot my money purse",...in other words..it was more often used as an exclamation of annoyance rather than to alert people to an assault of some kind.

    And to Jon, Mary was barely able to say hello to Mary Ann, then she sings off and on for over an hour before the lights went out....its eminently feasible to imagine she retired at that point.

    Yes, she ate fish and chips, but there is no evidence that would contradict her eating that on the way home.

    Cheers

    Leave a comment:


  • DVV
    replied
    Originally posted by Batman View Post
    The only person who is likely to have gone out and back again checking for possible witnesses is Blotchy who matches Lewis description of the man on Dorset street.
    True.
    Lewis saw a man, and Blotchy was a man.
    Problem is that if Lewis saw Blotchy, she can't have seen Hutch.
    Unless Hutch was Blotchy.
    But he wasn't.

    Leave a comment:


  • Robert
    replied
    Hi Batman

    Eddowes was so drunk at 8.30 PM that she couldn't stand up, but she was released, sober, at 1 AM and probably could have been released at least half an hour earlier. Cox said Mary was very much intoxicated but also said this :

    [Coroner] You say she was drunk ? - I did not notice she was drunk until she said good night.

    In other words, Kelly was walking steadily.

    Some people can handle drink better than others. We don't really know what was Kelly's tolerance for alcohol.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X