Did Mary know her killer?

[Michael W Richards]

There is no evidence she had sex with any clients...inside or outside. Just because she was named as a prostitute by so many people, doesn't mean she actually had sex ever. She may have been a virgin. In fact, her husband's death might have come before consummation. On the other hand, had she actually taken money for sex, I'm sure she preferred doing it up against a cold wall on a rainy night more than bringing someone to her warm, private room because she earned more money that way...if she was an actual prostitute I mean. Come to think of it, there's really no evidence she ever used a toilet either. You might be on to something..or simply ON something.

Mike

Obviously you and cd are missing my point, or just having fun twisting it around, but simply put...we have witness evidence that Mary did engage in prostitution at times, and we do have witness evidence that she admitted as much...however, what we do not have is any credible evidence, witness or otherwise, that Mary ever at any time brought a client to her room. A room in her own name,...which in and of itself is a clue to the answer here...its not unusual for prostitutes to use fake names when plying their trade. I believe Marie Jeanette might be one that Mary used at one time.

You can believe anything you want, so can cd... Ive no issues with anyone doing that...I just have issues when their beliefs hit these threads posing as facts, or probabilities. Like Mary was soliciting her last night...or that Liz was...or that Kate was.

We have no proof of any of those "facts" you seem more willing to accept than the face value evidence we do have. It seems easier and more palatable for you to assume the lowest in behaviours.

The truth is that its possible that Mary entertained someone who was nice to her by singing to him...its possible Liz Stride went to Berner Street for some additional work among the Jews, or for a date, and its possible that Kate Eddowes planned to meet someone rather than happened to meet up with someone while soliciting immediately after being released from jail hung over....all of those are within accepted evidence parameters...which is...that there is some evidence that would support the conclusion.

Cheers

[DRoy]

DRoy.
What evidence?
No-one knows what Mary was doing between 1:00 am and 2:00, nor between 2:30 am and 10:45 am, when she was found by Bowyer.
There is no evidence, and the only other evidence that does exist is rejected (Hutchinson & Kennedy).
Remember Nelson, and his "I see no ships!" - That is what we have here, so of course you only see what you want to see.

Two witnesses exist that saw her out after 1:00 am, but you choose to ignore them so you can improperly claim she never went out again.

This is a prime example of a horse race that is clearly fixed.

Jon,

You misunderstood me. The evidence I was referring to was in regards to what we know of MJK from Barnett and other witnesses, not just her actions that night.

Cheers
DRoy

[The Good Michael]

Hey Maybe mary charged her clients more to sing to them while she was having sex with them! kind of like chapmans "musical shaves".

Maybe you really are on to something!!!

Come to think of it, maybe she charged Barnett to have sex with her when they were together. I mean come on-she was a prostitute.

And charged Bowyer and McCarthy whenever they came to collect the rent-come on she was a prostitute.

And charged Maxwell the price of admission for viewing her Vomit-I mean she was a prostitute.

And Im sure she got a boat load from the ripper for letting him kill her-come on she was a prostitute.

Im sure every single time she had any kind of inter personal relationship with someone she charged them for it-she was a freaking prostitute after all!!!

I can't disagree with any of this. Maybes are all possible. Maybe she wasn't a prostitute at all. She was different from the other victims, or some would have us believe.

Mike

[Abby Normal]

OK-back to the original point of the thread-Did she know her killer?

Even IF (big if IMHO)Mary was actively prostituting herself that night, with Blotchy or anyone else---as a young attractive woman with her own place-Im sure she probably had a line of interested men wanting and waiting for the opportunity to use her services. And/or be her next boyfriend. Men she would have known from the pubs or from daily life. Like hutch. Like Barnett. like Flemming.

Someone like mary DID NOT have to resort to prostituting herself to random strange men. Men she had to go out proactively accosting. So again, prostituting or not, she more than likely knew the men she was with. And they knew her. She knew her killer.

[Abby Normal]

Well y'all, if Blotchy was the Ripper maybe his MO was to get in good with MJK to eventually have access to that horrific hovel. Hang out with her several times, ply her with booze and fish and chips etc. Sex, who knows?, maybe optional like in Seinfeld......but once the trust was established, then he could get in there, door locked, and finally fulfill his evil fantasies...

It seems a similar method may have been at work with Eddowes..she was drinking with somebody and later, after jail, off to see the Ripper...

As the scare went on, maybe he realized a buttering up period was the best new MO...

A bit off thread, sorry, but if one starts thinking of "friend" Blotchy as the Ripper then it lends itself to some backtracking...


Greg

Hi Greg
That's actually a great point.

[Abby Normal]

There is no evidence she had sex with any clients...inside or outside. Just because she was named as a prostitute by so many people, doesn't mean she actually had sex ever. She may have been a virgin. In fact, her husband's death might have come before consummation. On the other hand, had she actually taken money for sex, I'm sure she preferred doing it up against a cold wall on a rainy night more than bringing someone to her warm, private room because she earned more money that way...if she was an actual prostitute I mean. Come to think of it, there's really no evidence she ever used a toilet either. You might be on to something..or simply ON something.

Mike

Hey Maybe mary charged her clients more to sing to them while she was having sex with them! kind of like chapmans "musical shaves".

Maybe you really are on to something!!!

Come to think of it, maybe she charged Barnett to have sex with her when they were together. I mean come on-she was a prostitute.

And charged Bowyer and McCarthy whenever they came to collect the rent-come on she was a prostitute.

And charged Maxwell the price of admission for viewing her Vomit-I mean she was a prostitute.

And Im sure she got a boat load from the ripper for letting him kill her-come on she was a prostitute.

Im sure every single time she had any kind of inter personal relationship with someone she charged them for it-she was a freaking prostitute after all!!!

[The Good Michael]

we have zero evidence that Mary ever took anyone to her room to perform sex acts for money.

There is no evidence she had sex with any clients...inside or outside. Just because she was named as a prostitute by so many people, doesn't mean she actually had sex ever. She may have been a virgin. In fact, her husband's death might have come before consummation. On the other hand, had she actually taken money for sex, I'm sure she preferred doing it up against a cold wall on a rainy night more than bringing someone to her warm, private room because she earned more money that way...if she was an actual prostitute I mean. Come to think of it, there's really no evidence she ever used a toilet either. You might be on to something..or simply ON something.

Mike

[Pcdunn]

Was the sighting of Mary leaving really someone else?

Pc, there was a woman seen leaving Kelly's apartment?

I was thinking of a witness claiming Mary Kelly had left her home again. I'm not sure if the time line fits, as I am a dabbler in the WC cases, just returning to them after a long absence. So feel free to tell me I'm wrong, I won't mind.

But consider... If "blotchy" wasn't seen leaving the Kelly hovel... Could he have disguised himself in some of Mary's garments? (Hey, if it's good enough for Sherlock Holmes...!)

[c.d.]

"To correct the above, yes, there is evidence that Mary brought someone home before midnight, however, there is also evidence that she was heard to sing songs until shortly after 1am. Not a "trick" that any prostitute would be called upon to perform."

I don't think it is at all uncommon for a customer availing himself of a prostitute's services to try to delude himself that the lady in question has some physical or emotional attraction to him and is therefore willing to pay a little extra to encourage that fantasy.

c.d.

[c.d.]

Jon,

That's the notorious Dorset Street though, it can be somewhat expected. Once again, some were in dire need, others weren't (including some living in the court). I don't see Mary as being one of those in dire need and believe the evidence supports that view.

Cheers
DRoy

Dire need? Maybe not but there was still the question of money for rent, food and drink.

c.d.

[c.d.]

"we have zero evidence that Mary ever took anyone to her room to perform sex acts for money."


Hello Michael,

Why does this have to be taken as the word of God himself? Are we to assume that Mary's neighbors held some sort of bizarre fixation with her so that they camped out near their door and watched her door in 24 hour vigils recording Mary's every coming and going on some sort of Victorian Excel spreadsheet recording times, her manner of dress, her demeanor and who she was with? That seems quite unlikely.

And even if she was not in the habit of bringing back men to her room, how much of that could be attributable to not wanting to upset Barnett? In other words, don't bite the hand that feeds you. Now that he was out of the picture would that change things?

And finally, is there anything that would prevent her from bringing back a client to her room? Isn't there a first time for everything?

I am not saying that this is what she did but asking questions, putting facts in perspective and assigning weight to those "facts" seems to me to be a much better approach.

c.d.

[Wickerman]

Jon,

That's the notorious Dorset Street though, it can be somewhat expected. Once again, some were in dire need, others weren't (including some living in the court). I don't see Mary as being one of those in dire need and believe the evidence supports that view.

Cheers
DRoy

DRoy.
What evidence?
No-one knows what Mary was doing between 1:00 am and 2:00, nor between 2:30 am and 10:45 am, when she was found by Bowyer.
There is no evidence, and the only other evidence that does exist is rejected (Hutchinson & Kennedy).
Remember Nelson, and his "I see no ships!" - That is what we have here, so of course you only see what you want to see.

Two witnesses exist that saw her out after 1:00 am, but you choose to ignore them so you can improperly claim she never went out again.

This is a prime example of a horse race that is clearly fixed.

[GregBaron]

Butter, baste then carve...

Well y'all, if Blotchy was the Ripper maybe his MO was to get in good with MJK to eventually have access to that horrific hovel. Hang out with her several times, ply her with booze and fish and chips etc. Sex, who knows?, maybe optional like in Seinfeld......but once the trust was established, then he could get in there, door locked, and finally fulfill his evil fantasies...

It seems a similar method may have been at work with Eddowes..she was drinking with somebody and later, after jail, off to see the Ripper...

As the scare went on, maybe he realized a buttering up period was the best new MO...

A bit off thread, sorry, but if one starts thinking of "friend" Blotchy as the Ripper then it lends itself to some backtracking...


Greg

[RockySullivan]

Singing is very popular among the Irish, any time two or more get together, whether in a family home, or down at the pub.

I have finally just voted "yes", because it does seem to me that someone who knew Mary and really wanted to send a message about how much he hated her was responsible for slicing away her face.
But... if she knew a close male friend or ex-husband wanted to threaten her, why let him in? Either she wasn't aware of it in any measure...

OR was it a woman friend? We know she often had visitors, and a woman will open a door more readily to a woman she knows than to a stranger of either sex. The singing indicating she, or "they", were awake very late isn't too uncommon. I've read that in the past people tended to sleep in shifts, waking in the middle of the night, doing work or even visiting, and then returning to bed until dawn. More common in the eras before the electric light, of course, but Whitechapel could well have qualified in places, perhaps.

I know, no woman was seen entering the apartment. But a woman was seen leaving it-- possibly "Jill the Ripper"? Hmmm. The plot thickens...

Pc, there was a woman seen leaving Kelly's apartment?

[RockySullivan]

Was blotchy thought to be Irish? Was Kelly singing Irish songs? It makes sense Kelly might sing Irish songs to an Irish visitor