Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Why Mary had to die.

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

  • Elamarna
    replied
    Originally posted by Pierre View Post
    I agree with this to 50 percent.

    Pierre

    I now assume you are reassessing your position following your research. Is that correct?

    Steve

    Leave a comment:


  • Pierre
    replied
    Originally posted by Pierre View Post
    This is the reason why Jack the Ripper chose Mary Jane Kelly:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9PexeYDx48A

    Regards Pierre
    I agree with this to 50 percent.

    Pierre

    Leave a comment:


  • Harry D
    replied
    Originally posted by curious4 View Post
    Well, it seems that the doctors couldn't establish a cause of death, so to my mind they could have come from a body destined for the teaching hospitals, but disposed of by students. Since the law of 1832 (I think) which allowed the bodies of people who had died in the workhouses or hospitals and were not claimed by anyone to be used for dissection, there had been no shortage of bodies. (This is not counting the body parts found in 1873 which were complete, but before Jack's time).

    So how can we be sure that they were murders. Not sure that we can.

    Cheers
    C4

    P.S. Dates possibly not exactly correct but too lazy to get up and check.
    Ah well I thought you were appealing to people on here to establish if this was the work of pranksters or not. Seeing as this was over 125 years ago and the contemporaries couldn't make the connection, I see no hope for that now.

    Leave a comment:


  • curious4
    replied
    Originally posted by Harry D View Post
    I'm not sure how it possibly could (be established)?
    Well, it seems that the doctors couldn't establish a cause of death, so to my mind they could have come from a body destined for the teaching hospitals, but disposed of by students. Since the law of 1832 (I think) which allowed the bodies of people who had died in the workhouses or hospitals and were not claimed by anyone to be used for dissection, there had been no shortage of bodies. (This is not counting the body parts found in 1873 which were complete, but before Jack's time).

    So how can we be sure that they were murders. Not sure that we can.

    Cheers
    C4

    P.S. Dates possibly not exactly correct but too lazy to get up and check.

    Leave a comment:


  • Pierre
    replied
    Originally posted by Robert St Devil View Post
    Does he attribute a representive significance to each body part? Does he have prior specifics for which location get what body part?
    Hi Robert,

    Probably since they never found the heads.

    I havenīt done an analyze from the perspective of the last question, but I have no reason for thinking so.

    My data for the torso murders are very sparse and my assumptions of them therefore very few.

    Regards Pierre

    Leave a comment:


  • Harry D
    replied
    Originally posted by curious4 View Post
    Has it been established that the Torso murders really were murders and not a joke (unfunny) by medical students disposing of body parts they had been studying?

    Best wishes
    C4
    I'm not sure how it possibly could (be established)?

    Leave a comment:


  • Pierre
    replied
    Originally posted by Rosella View Post
    And the other torsos, Pierre, which were found floating in the Thames, and the piece found in Percy Shelley's garden, for instance? The killer didn't want to give those to the police?
    So he must have piled up every dead body in Scotland Yardīs new building you mean?

    Jokes aside, he did actually have a reason for doing what he did during that weekend.

    Regards Pierre

    Leave a comment:


  • Robert St Devil
    replied
    Does he attribute a representive significance to each body part? Does he have prior specifics for which location get what body part?

    Leave a comment:


  • Rosella
    replied
    And the other torsos, Pierre, which were found floating in the Thames, and the piece found in Percy Shelley's garden, for instance? The killer didn't want to give those to the police?

    Leave a comment:


  • Pcdunn
    replied
    Originally posted by Pierre View Post
    Because he wanted to give the pieces to the police.

    Regards Pierre
    To taunt them for not finding him? Perhaps. I'm not convinced yet that Jack also did the Torso killings. He would need to be more intelligent and probably of a higher social class than the modern view of Jack has him.
    Do think it makes sense, however.

    Leave a comment:


  • Pierre
    replied
    Originally posted by Rosella View Post
    If the killer wished for the torso and limbs to be found immediately why didn't he drop them over the fence or in a residential square, as happened with other dumped body parts, notably Voison in 1917?
    Because he wanted to give the pieces to the police.

    Regards Pierre

    Leave a comment:


  • Rosella
    replied
    Originally posted by Pierre View Post
    Hi Rosella,

    I donīt agree, since there were people in the vault every day except for sunday.

    The leg and foot found by Smoker lay in a mound of earth.

    Regards Pierre
    The limbs found by the terrier had been buried. Not very deep, but buried. If the killer wished for the torso and limbs to be found immediately why didn't he drop them over the fence or in a residential square, as happened with other dumped body parts, notably Voison in 1917?

    Those Whitehall vaults were so dark there was minimum light even during the day. IMO the body parts were dumped by someone who either worked on the site or regularly brought supplies in.

    Leave a comment:


  • Pierre
    replied
    Originally posted by Karl View Post
    Then why not kill the women in secret, and dump the bodies where they were sure to be found?
    He wanted the police to come after him.

    Leave a comment:


  • curious4
    replied
    Has it been established that the Torso murders really were murders and not a joke (unfunny) by medical students disposing of body parts they had been studying?

    Best wishes
    C4

    Leave a comment:


  • packers stem
    replied
    Originally posted by Karl View Post
    I think that's what she'd normally do, yes. However, some clients might be willing to pay extra for a bit more privacy, and some girls might be prepared to accept that. It might well be that Mary accepted once too often.

    Of course, that begs the question: with the previous killings, why didn't Jack the Ripper trawl the streets until he found someone willing to do business from their home? There are several possible explanations. He could have been too impatient to wait for the one woman who might agree to take him home, or it might be the opposite: perhaps he was calculating enough that he knew the risk of getting caught would skyrocket if he kept asking potential victims for that added bit of privacy. After all, each prostitute who turned him down would then be a witness: "You know, just before she was killed, there was this creep who offered to pay me extra if we could do it in my bed. What, you too? Perhaps we should tell the police?" Well, I'm just thinking out loud, here.
    1888 Spitalfields,In general they didn't have homes.
    They had the possibility of a bed if they could raise a few pennys
    I suspect JTR may have been aware of this and been unlikely to ask for a roof for the evening.....unless he knew Kelly as 'blotchy' clearly did

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X