How strange is this

[Sally]

Yes, or both of them were. If Thomas had a steady job portering he could bring in a reasonable amount of money. The wife is not listed as having an occupation in 1871; perhaps she was caring for their young family. 10 years later, when they were older, it would have been easier to work.

[lynn cates]

explanations

Hello Sally. Thanks. A sensible alternative explanation.

And you are right that Helen may have wished to leave her "vocation" undesignated.

But why? How could she have earned the 4d doss? (heh-heh)

Cheers.
LC

[richardnunweek]

Hi,
The question must be, was this family at 14 Dorset street in 1888?
If so, then it is possible that one of them, sent a hoax letter to the police force of their original birth place, the most likely being Thomas who in 1888 was 42 years old.
But why? very confusing.
Regards Richard.

[lynn cates]

suggestions

Hello Richard. My suggestion would be that Helen, not the entire family, lived there in 1888. (Although, of course, this cannot be proved at the moment.)

My further suggestion would be that such a letter would not be entirely atypical for a bored 21 year old. I think there was another young lady, Maria Coroner (or something like that) who did about the same--sent a hoax letter for a lark.

Cheers.
LC

[richardnunweek]

Hello Lynn,
I agree, especially if she was living in Dorset street alone in 88, and you are right that another young lady did send a hoax letter, and was punished severely.
But this one was sent just a few doors away from Millers court, which makes it unique.
Regards Richard.

[lynn cates]

coincidence

Hello Richard. Completely agree. But I would suggest coincidence.

Cheers.
LC

[Michael W Richards]

Hello Lynn,
I agree, especially if she was living in Dorset street alone in 88, and you are right that another young lady did send a hoax letter, and was punished severely.
But this one was sent just a few doors away from Millers court, which makes it unique.
Regards Richard.

I agree with Lynn Richard,... less coincidental might be that variations of Marys name and Dorset street address were used 2 times by the preceding "Ripper" victim as aliases in her last 24 hours.

That street may link more than we now know.

Hmm.

Best regards,
Mike R

[Errata]

I don't suppose we know if the addresses were clearly marked on Dorset?

[richardnunweek]

Hi,
I believe the only way we can dismiss this as coincidental is if, the family from Norfolk, or at least one of them,were not resident at 14 Dorset street in 1888.
If present, it would present to much a coincidence.
Putting it in prospective.
The Yarmouth police received what was a hoax letter ,addressed from the above informing them that the killer would strike on the 8th.[ albeit in Yarmouth]
This was in the edition Friday 2ND November.
The address in question, if it could be found, had a resident of the Smith Family at the time of posting, the very fact that they originated from Norfolk, and the murder of Kelly, who was discovered one week later, was just a few metres away, would be striking.
Why would the writer contact the Norfolk police ..answers please?
What was the motive for the letter , and why was it sent from just a few doors away from the next victim.
It would appear that the writer [if the killer]would not send the police to his own address, unless it was done to incriminate someone ..
We must not forget also, that Mrs Maxwell lived at that address, and she went to great lengths to convince both police and inquest that the time of death was during daylight..
I have a suspicious mind, and until further research comes to light, I must shelve it under ''wait and see''
Regards Richard.

[Michael W Richards]

I don't suppose we know if the addresses were clearly marked on Dorset?

I can tell you Errata that some time ago I was discussing the partition wall in Marys room with Sam Flynn here, and he isolated a section of the door that showed clearly the ghost if you will of the number "26" on it...(remember the partition wall was partially constructed of old doors),... it would seem to indicate that it was an old Dorset facing door, perhaps to the shed or the entrance just inside the archway.

So based on that I would say its likely at least some addresses were marked on the doors.

All the best,

Mike R

[Errata]

I can tell you Errata that some time ago I was discussing the partition wall in Marys room with Sam Flynn here, and he isolated a section of the door that showed clearly the ghost if you will of the number "26" on it...(remember the partition wall was partially constructed of old doors),... it would seem to indicate that it was an old Dorset facing door, perhaps to the shed or the entrance just inside the archway.

So based on that I would say its likely at least some addresses were marked on the doors.

All the best,

Mike R

Well, I was thinking that if a person who lived there sent the letter, they were morons for using a return address (which is unusual in an anonymous threat). If a person who didn't live there sent the letter, then they would either have to make it up, or pick a house specifically. Making it up would result in a colossal coincidence, though not out of the realm of possibility. Picking a house specifically means that someone in that house is being set up for a visit from the cops. If the buildings were well marked, then the person targeted would live in 14. If they weren't well marked, then someone may have miscounted, meaning the target lived one or two buildings over. So I guess the question is, who within 2 or 3 buildings of 14 Dorset pissed someone off enough that being framed as Jack the Ripper seemed like a good idea?

[Wickerman]

...(remember the partition wall was partially constructed of old doors),...

Mike.
One door is readily apparent, do you recall why it was suggested that there were more forming a partition?
This partition just came up again over at JTR Forums, but I can't remember why it was suggested that it was a complete false wall, unless it is just Prater's reference to seeing a glimmer through the partition from the stairs.

The door that is faintly visible appears to have been papered over (wallpaper?), but there is no similar impression adjacent to it so it looks like one door in a wall, not a continuous line of doors.

Regards, Jon S.

[richardnunweek]

Hi,
As Errata stated ''colossal coincidence'' as for the framing of someone, the most likely , but we should not forget if a member of the Norfolk family resided there in 1888, the target was them...
But why?
The wrong house?
How many people living that immediate area had connections to Yarmouth?
So who would want to draw attention to someone just a few doors away from Millers court.
And talking about ''Colossal coincidences'' the very house that Maxwell lived in, along with her husband, the woman who claimed the impossible, and stuck to her guns throughout...was she attempting to give someone an alibi ?
Why?
The trouble is although coincidences exist, we simply just can't disregard them as ''Must be's''
Regards Richard.

[Sally]

Doors - in an age of delivery I should think that most were numbered.

Coincidence - I see two possibilities. The letter writer was a Smith (in which case they must have been very worried when an actual murder took place down the road a week later); The letter writer wanted to implicate a person at that address - from the information available to us, probably a Smith.

Since, obviously, one would have to be an idiot to include a return address on a 'Ripper' letter (as also pointed out by Errata) the latter appears more likely.

As Richard says - Why?

That's the question.

[lynn cates]

criminals below genius

Hello Errata.

"Well, I was thinking that if a person who lived there sent the letter, they were morons for using a return address."

But sometimes this is the case. There are known cases of hold ups where demands were made on the person's business card.

Sometimes a bored 21 year old is not operating at genius level. (heh-heh)

Cheers.
LC