When was the estimation of when Mary took her last meal of fish and potatoes?

[Abby Normal]

Hello (yet again) Abby.

"After looking at all the comings and goings of the various witnesses, I think Mary was possibly killed around 1:30.

It would jibe with the meal and alleviate the problem of why Blotchy(as the ripper) would wait 4 hours to kill her. I could see Blotchy waiting an hour or so for the court to calm down and maybe wait for her to get drunker/pass out?"

OK. So Blotchy is waiting for a drunken "MJK" to pass out so he can do his thing. Acceptable. One hour is not so bad.

But could you offer a plausible conjecture about "MJK"? For example, is she looking for sex with a paying customer? Is he an old friend? Does she sing to get him in the mood?

I recognise the complexity of my question and difficulty in answering. However, I merely ask for a consistent guess.

Cheers.
LC

Hi LC
Great questions.
I think she may have known Blotchy to some extent before that night. I also think, having recently broken up with Barnett, that she might have been looking for a new boyfriend (one with Money). Or sans that, yes a customer, but one she, as it seems by her behavior, probably knew.

I think she was singing, because she was drunk and in a good mood--had food in her belly, possibly money in her pocket, and/or a new guy who had money, and the big show was in the morrow.

However, its entirely possible she had just met him that night and they hit it off and he was taking care of her with all the forementioned things.

My bet is she probably knew him though before.

[curious4]

Hallo All

I have always thought of Mr Blotchy as the facilitator and Astrachan man as the killer.

It could be said that there are similarities with the Liz Stride killing: entertained, wined and dined (East End style) and then the killer turns up, with Stride, the pub, the flower and cachous and then Schwartz's man turns up. What I find a little odd is that she is out trying to get money, but perhaps she was thinking "all this is very nice, but I still need rent money."

Best wishes
C4

[John G]

Cox saw Kelly with Blotchy at around 11:45; she was so drunk she could barely walk and started singing shortly afterwards. And, according to Catherine Picket, she was still singing 45 minutes later at 12:30. Now if Blotchy was her murderer, and assuming the crime was pre-planned, I somehow doubt that he would wait at least 45 minutes before striking, i.e. until she was asleep. I mean, she seemed to be virtually insensible anyway, so why delay? Surely, in such a state, he would have had little difficulty in catching her by surprise before quickly overpowering her; all the more so if he was JtR. And allowing Kelly to continue singing loudly ran the risk that a neighbour might come round to complain, which was what nearly happened as Picket intended to do just that before being stopped by her husband.

[John G]

Hi LC
Great questions.
I think she may have known Blotchy to some extent before that night. I also think, having recently broken up with Barnett, that she might have been looking for a new boyfriend (one with Money). Or sans that, yes a customer, but one she, as it seems by her behavior, probably knew.

I think she was singing, because she was drunk and in a good mood--had food in her belly, possibly money in her pocket, and/or a new guy who had money, and the big show was in the morrow.

However, its entirely possible she had just met him that night and they hit it off and he was taking care of her with all the forementioned things.

My bet is she probably knew him though before.

Hi Abby,

I also think that she may have been acquainted with Blotchy. It seems significant to me that Kelly not only appeared drunk but virtually insensible. And, of course, Blotchy was also carrying a quart of beer, which he took into Kelly's room. That suggests to me that they had been socializing for some time and, at the very least, that he was more than just a client.

Moreover, would Kelly have taken the risk of inviting a complete stranger back to her lodgings, especially when she was so drunk? And would she have risked falling asleep whilst he was still in the room? If he was a complete stranger that would clearly have been an extremely risky thing to do-quite apart from the JtR scare he might decide to rob her whilst she was sleeping.

However, if murder was his intention this causes other problems: If they were acquainted why take the risk of being seen in her company that night? And, of course, by allowing her to get so drunk he took the further risk that she would attract attention to herself and therefore to him. Surely a simpler, and less risky, plan would have been to visit her lodgings late at night, check through the window that she was asleep, and then simply break in. After all, Kelly's lodgings were hardly well- secured.

[John G]

Hallo All

I have always thought of Mr Blotchy as the facilitator and Astrachan man as the killer.

It could be said that there are similarities with the Liz Stride killing: entertained, wined and dined (East End style) and then the killer turns up, with Stride, the pub, the flower and cachous and then Schwartz's man turns up. What I find a little odd is that she is out trying to get money, but perhaps she was thinking "all this is very nice, but I still need rent money."

Best wishes
C4

Hello C4,

This is interesting. Are you suggesting that two killers were working together? If so, that would at least explain some of the differences in MO, assuming that Kelly was killed by JtR. I wouldn't rule out some degree of gang activity either, especially as there is evidence that a particularly violent gang was active during this period, i.e. as possibly evidenced by the attacks on Smith, Horsnell, Hames, and even Haynes and Tabram.

[Rosella]

All these times, 11:45 pm, 12:30pm, 4am for the cry are very approximate though aren't they? It's not as if these witnesses were wandering around with pocket watches or even had clocks in their rooms for sure, with the exception of Mrs Lewis (and if they did would they be lighting candles in the dark to check the time?) Some of it might almost be guessing.

I have always been intrigued by what the killer did when he got into Mary's room, by invite. Did he strip down to his shirt and lay beside her, or talk to her for several minutes in a reassuring sort of way? I just can't imagine Mary's death being as late as 4am, unless, heaven help us, there was yet another client after Astrakhan Man. Would Blotchy or Astrakhan man have sat waiting patiently in a filthy, dark, cold room, (remember the broken panes) for several hours until 3:30-4am waiting for a drunken woman to fall asleep?

I just think the cries of Murder were coincidental and from somewhere else. Mary probably died earlier, after falling into a drunken snooze with the sheet partly over her face and was then attacked.

[Abby Normal]

Cox saw Kelly with Blotchy at around 11:45; she was so drunk she could barely walk and started singing shortly afterwards. And, according to Catherine Picket, she was still singing 45 minutes later at 12:30. Now if Blotchy was her murderer, and assuming the crime was pre-planned, I somehow doubt that he would wait at least 45 minutes before striking, i.e. until she was asleep. I mean, she seemed to be virtually insensible anyway, so why delay? Surely, in such a state, he would have had little difficulty in catching her by surprise before quickly overpowering her; all the more so if he was JtR. And allowing Kelly to continue singing loudly ran the risk that a neighbour might come round to complain, which was what nearly happened as Picket intended to do just that before being stopped by her husband.

That's a good point JohnG
Howver, he might have also been waiting for the court to settle down. There was a brken window in the room and perhaps he heard comings and goings out in the court.

[curious4]

Hello C4,

This is interesting. Are you suggesting that two killers were working together? If so, that would at least explain some of the differences in MO, assuming that Kelly was killed by JtR. I wouldn't rule out some degree of gang activity either, especially as there is evidence that a particularly violent gang was active during this period, i.e. as possibly evidenced by the attacks on Smith, Horsnell, Hames, and even Haynes and Tabram.

Hello John

Yes, I do believe that much can be explained if there had been two (or three) involved. I started a thread on this recently.

Best wishes
C4

[Abby Normal]

Hi Abby,

I also think that she may have been acquainted with Blotchy. It seems significant to me that Kelly not only appeared drunk but virtually insensible. And, of course, Blotchy was also carrying a quart of beer, which he took into Kelly's room. That suggests to me that they had been socializing for some time and, at the very least, that he was more than just a client.

Moreover, would Kelly have taken the risk of inviting a complete stranger back to her lodgings, especially when she was so drunk? And would she have risked falling asleep whilst he was still in the room? If he was a complete stranger that would clearly have been an extremely risky thing to do-quite apart from the JtR scare he might decide to rob her whilst she was sleeping.

However, if murder was his intention this causes other problems: If they were acquainted why take the risk of being seen in her company that night? And, of course, by allowing her to get so drunk he took the further risk that she would attract attention to herself and therefore to him. Surely a simpler, and less risky, plan would have been to visit her lodgings late at night, check through the window that she was asleep, and then simply break in. After all, Kelly's lodgings were hardly well- secured.

maybe they were acquainted, but he didn't know where she lived?
To my mind it would seem far less risky to be invited in that trying to break in.

And if they were minor acquantences-whos going to know who he is. Cox didn't recognize him. Hell apparently no one even admitted seeing him out that night or selling him a pail of beer.

Up until he decides to strike, in the safety of her room, hes basically a nobody.

[Penhalion]

I agree with the people who think the cry of 'Murder!' was coincidental. It is described as common enough in the area that no one paid much attention to it. I suspect it was used as an expression of surprise or frustration and came from one of the rooms that were so close to Miller's Court and so crowded with people.

Personally, I doubt she went back out after Hutch saw her. I believe that he probably did see and even talk with her but the specific details were probably a fabrication. I don't think she was terribly worried about her back rent (if it was even as much as McCarthy claimed it was) and being drunk and tired on a cold, raw night probably stayed in. So how did she encounter JtR? Excellent question. Being very drunk, her sense of danger and normal caution might have been pretty well anesthetized. She might have let a relative stranger in under those conditions when she wouldn't have otherwise.

[Abby Normal]

Hello C4,

This is interesting. Are you suggesting that two killers were working together? If so, that would at least explain some of the differences in MO, assuming that Kelly was killed by JtR. I wouldn't rule out some degree of gang activity either, especially as there is evidence that a particularly violent gang was active during this period, i.e. as possibly evidenced by the attacks on Smith, Horsnell, Hames, and even Haynes and Tabram.

I think the apparent change in MO with Kelly -and Stride for that matter(hanging out, walking around, buying stuff) may have to do with the fact that the killer was getting more comfortable, brazen and sophisticated in his method.

To my mind Kelly and stride were apparently much more attractive than the previous victims, not as desperate, and perhaps more wary?

A change in plan might have been warrented as the series went on and his desires progressed, the situation became more risky and his methods became more refined.

[Abby Normal]

I agree with the people who think the cry of 'Murder!' was coincidental. It is described as common enough in the area that no one paid much attention to it. I suspect it was used as an expression of surprise or frustration and came from one of the rooms that were so close to Miller's Court and so crowded with people.

Personally, I doubt she went back out after Hutch saw her. I believe that he probably did see and even talk with her but the specific details were probably a fabrication. I don't think she was terribly worried about her back rent (if it was even as much as McCarthy claimed it was) and being drunk and tired on a cold, raw night probably stayed in. So how did she encounter JtR? Excellent question. Being very drunk, her sense of danger and normal caution might have been pretty well anesthetized. She might have let a relative stranger in under those conditions when she wouldn't have otherwise.

I agre with you except that I think she didn't go out after Blotchy.
Aman is a fig newton of hutches imagination.

[John G]

All these times, 11:45 pm, 12:30pm, 4am for the cry are very approximate though aren't they? It's not as if these witnesses were wandering around with pocket watches or even had clocks in their rooms for sure, with the exception of Mrs Lewis (and if they did would they be lighting candles in the dark to check the time?) Some of it might almost be guessing.

I have always been intrigued by what the killer did when he got into Mary's room, by invite. Did he strip down to his shirt and lay beside her, or talk to her for several minutes in a reassuring sort of way? I just can't imagine Mary's death being as late as 4am, unless, heaven help us, there was yet another client after Astrakhan Man. Would Blotchy or Astrakhan man have sat waiting patiently in a filthy, dark, cold room, (remember the broken panes) for several hours until 3:30-4am waiting for a drunken woman to fall asleep?

I just think the cries of Murder were coincidental and from somewhere else. Mary probably died earlier, after falling into a drunken snooze with the sheet partly over her face and was then attacked.

Hi Rosella,

Yes, some good points. I agree that the suggestion she was murdered around 4:00 am is quite possibly a red herring. Although two witnesses heard cries of "murder" or "oh murder" around that time, as I pointed out in a previous post their evidence is contradictory: Sarah Lewis heard a scream whereas Elizabeth Prater said the cry was in a faint voice. What may also be of importance is that Prater lived directly above Kelly, whilst Lewis lived on the opposite side of the court, next to McCarthy's shop, although this was directly opposite and probably only few feet away. Nonetheless, the fact that Prater heard only a faint sound suggests to me the cry probably emanated from the opposite side of the court, i.e. near to Sarah Lewis' lodgings, which would rule out Kelly being responsible.

[John G]

I think the apparent change in MO with Kelly -and Stride for that matter(hanging out, walking around, buying stuff) may have to do with the fact that the killer was getting more comfortable, brazen and sophisticated in his method.

To my mind Kelly and stride were apparently much more attractive than the previous victims, not as desperate, and perhaps more wary?

A change in plan might have been warrented as the series went on and his desires progressed, the situation became more risky and his methods became more refined.

Hello Abby,

Yes, you make some very well though out points. However, the sheer ferocity of the attack on Kelly perplexes me. For instance, the assault on Kelly was described by Dr Phillips as "most wanton", and it appeared that the killer had hacked and slashed away in a complete frenzy. This was obviously in contrast to the Chapman and Eddowes murders, where the medical professionals concluded that the perpetrator(s) had exhibited a significant amount of skill and anatomical knowledge. Of course, this has lead some people to conclude that Kelly was not a Ripper victim.

Nonetheless, Kelly's killer still had enough self control to perform the murder in a quick, efficient and arguably relatively humane manner, i..e. by severing the carotid artery which, of course, accords with the MO in the other C5 murders, but not Tabram who was also subjected to a frenzied assault.

Do you therefore think that the more frenzied assault against Kelly might indicate a more personal motive? In other words, suggesting that her killer was not a complete stranger?

[Abby Normal]

Hello Abby,

Yes, you make some very well though out points. However, the sheer ferocity of the attack on Kelly perplexes me. For instance, the assault on Kelly was described by Dr Phillips as "most wanton", and it appeared that the killer had hacked and slashed away in a complete frenzy. This was obviously in contrast to the Chapman and Eddowes murders, where the medical professionals concluded that the perpetrator(s) had exhibited a significant amount of skill and anatomical knowledge. Of course, this has lead some people to conclude that Kelly was not a Ripper victim.

Nonetheless, Kelly's killer still had enough self control to perform the murder in a quick, efficient and arguably relatively humane manner, i..e. by severing the carotid artery which, of course, accords with the MO in the other C5 murders, but not Tabram who was also subjected to a frenzied assault.

Do you therefore think that the more frenzied assault against Kelly might indicate a more personal motive? In other words, suggesting that her killer was not a complete stranger?

Hi JohnG
Perhaps. But I don't really see Kelly as frenzied. Tabram yes.
I think the extensive mutilation with Kelly is that he had more time and safety to do all he wanted. ie. to cut and mutilate a female and see what he could do with his knife.

As Ive mentioned there are numerous other indicators(other than a frenzied attack) that the killer knew Mary.

Remember the mutilations escalated as the series progressed and Eddowes also had her face targeted.

Ive never really bought into the idea that the extensive mutilations on Kelly or her face were necessarily indicators that it was "personal" as many have said here. It might be but might not. to me its kind of irrelevant because then you would have to reason that it was "personal" with Eddowes also(highly unlikely he knew her also) and because like I said there are many other evidence that the killer knew mary anyway.