the last one

[Edward]

Always Up Front

Hello All -

In these transactions, the money is always up front. It's the woman's only way to be sure she gets paid.

Best Regards

[Wickerman]

More likely about 6d

Kelly may have charged 6d due to her having a bed, but these women of the streets like Nichols, Chapman, Eddowes, etc. were nicknamed, 4d Kates (Fourp'ny Kates).

[GUT]

Kelly may have charged 6d due to her having a bed, but these women of the streets like Nichols, Chapman, Eddowes, etc. were nicknamed, 4d Kates (Fourp'ny Kates).

No doubt 4d was pretty much the rate I a gave MJK 6d because of her age and having a bed.

[pinkmoon]

No doubt 4d was pretty much the rate I a gave MJK 6d because of her age and having a bed.

Maybe more not much competition so market forces could dictate a very high price.

[Rosella]

I don't think it could have been too much higher otherwise the men concerned could have gone to the West End. There they could have found any number of pretty, quite well dressed prostitutes who may well have had comfortable quarters, not a cold, dark grubby room off one of the worst streets in the East End. Mary was probably no great beauty. She was younger and more attractive than Jack's other victims, but we're starting from a low base!

[Wickerman]

Most of her customers likely couldn't afford to go to the West End, never mind being too drunk to know where it was.

[Rosella]

I think we could say that Mary would have been content with sixpence.

[miss marple]

Bridewell,

We can rule a pimp out because Mary and Joe had been living together for at leat 15 months and he had a good job earning about 2 pounds a week and perks as a fish porter and Mary was not on the game. When Joe lost his job and earnings, he was no use to Mary, they he left her because he could not supporther and they rowed about her going on the game. They rang up rent arrears and drank too much. 4/6 a week is lot if you are earning nothing or 5 shillings a week.

Joe finally left on the 30th October because he was fed up with prostitutes staying with them and Mary going back on the game. She was murdered nine days later. There is no indication of a pimp. Mary seemed to like her own way, she never had a real job unlike the others, and could get stroppy when drunk although McCarthy puts it more tactfully.
She was too found of her own way to be controlled by a pimp, who would have forced her to work. Ant way why would she? All she had to do was go into the Ten Bells or walk the streets and pick someone up. The Ten Bells had been her stomping ground where she met Joe, now she had a room so she could charge more. McCarthy was probably hoping she would generate some income. He seemed tolerant of the casual prostitution in his rooms. McCarthy made money in lots of ways, illegal fights etc, betting etc. Don't think he was dependant on the income from a couple of slums. His wife seemed to deal with that side of the business.

Pimping was a harsh game with girls being beaten and forced to deliver a certain sum every day, and controlled in their dress and beats, certainly not spending money on drinking. The fourpennys and maybe the odd shilling earned by the casuals would not have been viable. Fresh young girls from the country were usually targetted by thr pimps and madams.

Miss Marple

[Karl]

I suppose this will be my first post on these boards.

Besides the very good reasons already mentioned for MJK not having a pimp, I think the main thing is the fact that this pimp would constitute a prime witness. And the killer would know this, and it would be exceedingly reckless of him to rely on a pimp's reluctance to talk to the police. The other prostitutes working for the pimp would certainly go to the police if the pimp didn't, as naturally they want the pimp to take his job (the girls' safety) seriously.

Mostly, though, I find it very hard to believe that the killer would be so foolish as to go through a pimp to find victims.

As to the original post, I am not sold on MJK being a Ripper victim, either. Mainly because she was nude, and by all appearances she had undressed herself (clothes neatly folded, and not torn as far as I know). The time of death is also in question, as two different witnesses claim to have seen her (and in Maxwell's case, spoken with her) several hours after Dr. Phillip's estimated time of death, at 08:30 and 10:00. If that is the case - and I see no reason to doubt the testimonies - MJK was murdered in the late morning, in broad daylight. I do not think Jack the Ripper went out looking for victims at such conspicuous hours.

The fact that Mary Jean was an indoor prostitute rather than an outdoor one is not something I find significant. She still hooked from the streets, same as the outdoor girls, the only difference essentially being "let's go around the corner and have some fun"/"come on in, and we'll have some fun".

The locked door can easily be explained if the door was self-locking, as I saw someone claim in a thread elsewhere. If that was indeed the case, then the locked door is a non-issue. If not, then the killer must have locked the door, with Mary's key or his own (dun dun dun...). Was there not a question as to the presence or absence of Mary's own key?

There is still a lot to speak for Mary Jean Kelly being a Ripper victim, but the victim profile (taller than the killer; young rather than middle-aged), nudity and the time of death are the three main hang-ups I have to the contrary.

[Pierre]

Hullo all,

I hope I'm not hauling coals to Newcastle here, but looking over the murders I am unable to fully convince myself that MJ was a victim of our subject. Harry D has a poll and a very long thread on this point, but skimming through the posts I didn't find many answers, and often it seemed that we weren't talking about Mary or even the Ripper at all.

The canonical victims ranged from 5' to 5'2" and were aged 43 to 47. MJ was 5'7'' and 25 years old, as well as the only victim who was killed indoors and who could apparently be considered attractive. Now I'm new to the case and the boards, too, but it seems to me that the only tie Mary might have with the first four is being a heavy-drinking prostitute in the East End. Honestly, she might not have even had dark brown hair like the others did.

MJ was the only victim undressed and killed indoors, and those points go hand in hand, but was the privacy the sole reason behind the unmatched savageness of the crime? I don't suppose I need to open that file. Was Jack lucky killing her in the privacy of her own lodge room? Are her personal details other than occupation relevant to the victimology? Am I looking at this all wrong?

Any thoughts on these points are appreciated.


Cheers,
somerset

Hi Somerset,

I understand why you become puzzled if you go by age, height, crime scene and supposed "attractiveness". But those parameters is totally meaningless in this case.

I will try to give you some answers on your questions - and I really think your questions are great - but my problem is that right now I cannot reveal certain details in my data sources so the anwers will be not as good as I would like them to be, and they will lack explanations.

You are asking the following questions:

Was the privacy the sole reason behind the unmatched savageness of the crime?

No, he had a very good reason for comitting this crime indoors apart from wanting to perform more elaborate mutilations. As a matter of fact, the reason he choosed this victim was not the parameters above but the opportunity to work indoors.

Was Jack lucky killing her in the privacy of her own lodge room?

No, it wasn´t a matter of luck.

Are her personal details other than occupation relevant to the victimology?

No.

Am I looking at this all wrong?

I don´t know how you are looking at it, but I think you posed very good questions. Mary Jane Kelly was the victim of Jack the Ripper. And it was the murder he was most proud of.

Regards Pierre

[Karl]

Hi Somerset,

I understand why you become puzzled if you go by age, height, crime scene and supposed "attractiveness". But those parameters is totally meaningless in this case.

Meaningless, why?

[Pcdunn]

Are you saying that the Ripper is the killer who cannot be profiled? Then did he kill simply to be killing?

[c.d.]

Hello Somerset,

First of all welcome to the boards.

If you eliminate Mary Kelly from the C5 you still have a group of women with different ages and different heights. So unless there was a distinct pattern where every woman was exactly the same height and same age and same hair color, it would seem that the characteristics that Mary Kelly possessed, although different from the others, are insignificant.

As for the extent of Mary's injuries, if they seem different than the others, we would have to believe that a killer who cuts throats, rips out internal organs, and in the case of Kate mutilates faces, would never think of doing what was done to Mary because that somehow would just be icky.

Mary's injuries can easily be attributed to the killer having more time alone with the victim and more privacy in which to do his thing.

c.d.

[curious4]

Hullo all,

I hope I'm not hauling coals to Newcastle here, but looking over the murders I am unable to fully convince myself that MJ was a victim of our subject. Harry D has a poll and a very long thread on this point, but skimming through the posts I didn't find many answers, and often it seemed that we weren't talking about Mary or even the Ripper at all.

The canonical victims ranged from 5' to 5'2" and were aged 43 to 47. MJ was 5'7'' and 25 years old, as well as the only victim who was killed indoors and who could apparently be considered attractive. Now I'm new to the case and the boards, too, but it seems to me that the only tie Mary might have with the first four is being a heavy-drinking prostitute in the East End. Honestly, she might not have even had dark brown hair like the others did.

MJ was the only victim undressed and killed indoors, and those points go hand in hand, but was the privacy the sole reason behind the unmatched savageness of the crime? I don't suppose I need to open that file. Was Jack lucky killing her in the privacy of her own lodge room? Are her personal details other than occupation relevant to the victimology? Am I looking at this all wrong?

Any thoughts on these points are appreciated.


Cheers,
somerset

Hello Somerset

We only have Mary's word for it that she was 25. I would add on at least five years, maybe more, at a guess. Kate Eddowes had auburn hair. I think perhaps JTR selected his victims more on vulnerability and availability than anything else.

Best wishes
C4

[Robert St Devil]

picqued interest

Meaningless, why?

Meaningless be ause of his signature.