Prater/Lewis/Hutchinson/Cox

[Tom_Wescott]

Caz,

Don't fall into the Perry Mason trap. He loves being controversial with the case to get attention and cause frustration. Most recently he's suggested that Kate Eddowes, along with Stride and Kelly, was not a Ripper victim. Even the Swedes wouldn't touch that one.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[perrymason]

Rather than address each poke, Ill summarize....

- Urination is an inescapable body function, getting paid to have sex isnt.

- There are no statements, comments, suggestions or remarks by any of the Mary Jane Kelly witness club documented anywhere that she had at any time been known to bring clients to her room

- It is widely known and accepted that Mary Jane Kelly was a "street whore" at the time of her death, when she chose to work.

- Joe Barnett was said by witnesses close to Mary to be opposed to Mary selling herself "on the streets"

- Its is very difficult or near impossible for a woman to sing while engaging in oral sex, or any other kind.

- Mary Kelly was the only Canon victim that had a room she could stay in without providing money for that night.

- There are no accounts, stories, suggestions or intimations by any witness that Mary was to be evicted for her arrears, including her landlords.

- It is suggested by a witness close to Mary that she may have been receiving money from both Joe Barnett and Joe Fleming simultaneously.

- There are no reports that any rent arrears had been paid since Joe Barnett left, despite her having some income from potentially 2 sources.

- Mary received some coins from Maria Harvey the afternoon of No 8th, when it is said both women stayed in the room all afternoon.

- Some clothes belonging to Maria's laundry clients were found in the room. Some clothing in the room has been referred to as being folded. Mary has a pump outside her windows, and a tin bath under her bed.

- 1 Inquest witness testified to seeing Mary Kelly out of her room after approx 11:45pm on Nov 8th, and had her statement preceded by a warning for its content.

- No witnesses saw light or heard noise from Mary Janes Room after 1:15-1:30am.

-2 witnesses testified they heard a cry from the direction of the court, neither stated they thought it was Mary Jane.

- At least one Senior Medical authority did not believe that Catherine Eddowes was killed by the man being referred to as Jack the Ripper by the press and police.

- Mary Jane Kelly was killed indoors and was at least 14 years younger by statements on her age, than the youngest prior Canon victim. All 4 prior victims had ages ranging within a 6 year span, and were killed outdoors.

- The act of vomiting empties the stomach of its contents due to the involuntary contractions.

- Mary Kelly had the remains of her last meal in her stomach when examined

- Carrie Maxwell spoke to a woman who had thrown up twice before 9 am

Best regards all.

[Sam Flynn]

Hi Mike,

- There are no statements, comments, suggestions or remarks by any of the Mary Jane Kelly witness club documented anywhere that she had at any time been known to bring clients to her room

There is not one statement that said she did not bring clients to her room, either.

[c.d.]

Hi Michael,

If Barnett did not like Mary being a "career girl", then it is not surprising that she would have been hesitant to bring back clients to her room. Throw in the fact that he was supplying her with money as a further disincentive to do so. But now Barnett is out of the picture as is the money that he gave her. Is it now such a leap that Mary may well have resorted to bringing back clients to her room?

c.d.

[celee]

Hi Michael,

If Barnett did not like Mary being a "career girl", then it is not surprising that she would have been hesitant to bring back clients to her room. Throw in the fact that he was supplying her with money as a further disincentive to do so. But now Barnett is out of the picture as is the money that he gave her. Is it now such a leap that Mary may well have resorted to bringing back clients to her room?

c.d.

Hi,

No, it is not to much of a leap to believe she brought clients back to her room.

Your friend, Brad

[Dan Norder]

Urination is an inescapable body function, getting paid to have sex isnt.

It's an inescapable prerequisite for being a prostitute, though, and it's indisputable that Mary Kelly was one.

There are no statements, comments, suggestions or remarks by any of the Mary Jane Kelly witness club documented anywhere that she had at any time been known to bring clients to her room

You mean other than the statements of Mary Ann Cox and George Hutchinson, as documented in virtually every Ripper book in the world...?

Mary Jane Kelly was killed indoors and was at least 14 years younger by statements on her age, than the youngest prior Canon victim.

And that has a much to do with determining who killed her as her being the only one with "Jane" for a middle name does: nothing.

But, worst of all, all of these things and more have been repeatedly pointed out to you, yet you continue to repeat the exact same nonsense over and over. You've gone beyond merely being ignorant to purposefully misrepresenting facts to try to slant things so that you can rationalize up some nonexistent support for your false claims.

[Chava]

Michael, Cox states that she saw Kelly go to her room with Blotchy Face, and I think if that was a rare occurrence she would have said so. It doesn't sound as if Cox was surprised at all that Kelly should have a male visitor, so I think it's probable that Kelly did take men back to her room. The main question is: who did she bring back? Everyone? Just regulars? Occasional regulars? Highly privileged clients?

The best, Michael,
Chava

[Ben]

You continue to rant on hysterically and in the face of many records to the contrary ,that toffs never went to Whitechapel.They did

Well, here I'd challenge you to cite one single occasion where I stated that toffs "never" went to Whitechapel, let alone ranted hysterically about it. As for the "toffs" that did find themselves in that pocket in the East End for whatever reason, and who were dwarfed numbers-wise by the local blue-collar contingent, yes, they probably did own "nice" overcoats and watches, but did they parade their finery in the most conspicious manner imaginable in what was well-known to be a notorious hotspot fot crime, poverty and homelessness, and when public feeling was agitated anyway by the knowledge that a serial killer was active in that immediate locality?

Probably not.

It's a bit boring for me, because to tell you the truth, I'm secretly desperate for people dressed like Dr. Gull from "From Hell" to have have been sauntering the district in that area in the small hours, but I've had to put that desire to one side, grit my teeth, and concede that they probably didn't.

I'm gutted.

Did they flash their gold when they were pissed or high on opium on a Saturday night in Whitechapel eager to buy sex from a prostitute-----you bet they did!

No, actually, I don't bet they did. I bet they didn't.

[perrymason]

I wont bother mentioning any more evidence for my statements again Dan,...by request, since not one rebuttal from anyone has shown any of them to be inaccurate. Starting with your assertion that Blotchy Man was a known "client". And making Hutch seem credible once again after 120 years of not being so.

All that anyone has provided as refutation is their personal opinion, and their incredulity at reading the bare facts.

You are of course free to assume Blotchy was a client not an escort home, and you can assume that Mary did bring clients to her room after Joe moved out, you can also assume that Mary went out after being seen entering at 11:45 on the 8th. You may assume Mary was due for eviction. You may assume that Marys work ethic had her working in the rain drunk when she didnt need doss or drink that night.

Heck you can even assume that a young woman would have no need for a space all her own, or that she might treasure that privilege, being broke all the time. She did seem to have sympathy for women like her that didnt, like Maria Harvey until shortly before Marys death.

My only point has been that not one of those assumptions can be proven by anyone or has any known data to base it on, but using only the given testimony at Inquest, ignoring the woman who saw a dead woman throwing up, you can make a reasonable assumption that does seem to have corroboration in certain areas.

Guess away, thats all Im doing, but at least my guesses seem to have some shred of evidence to support them. I think thats akin to shooting at a target with an eye patch over one eye.

What many have suggested is akin to shooting at a target blindfolded, while facing away from it.

Best regards.

[Chava]

I'm with Ben. I bet they didn't. Unless they were absolutely dumb. That was one of the most dangerous areas of a dangerous town. The police called Dorset St 'The Do-As-You-Please' and they wouldn't go down there alone. Slumming is one thing--and didn't come into fashion for 30+ years--suicide is another!

[Natalie Severn]

I'm with Ben. I bet they didn't. Unless they were absolutely dumb. That was one of the most dangerous areas of a dangerous town. The police called Dorset St 'The Do-As-You-Please' and they wouldn't go down there alone. Slumming is one thing--and didn't come into fashion for 30+ years--suicide is another!

What about when they were high on their drug or drink of choice? Did they race home to change into their slumming gear before heading for their next buzz?I dont think so. A drunken toff behaves in exactly the same manner as a drunken prole--- read the statistics on drunken and dangerous driving for some examples of where matters of personal as well as public safety get thrown to the wind.
Moreover a casual glance at some of the photographs taken in broad daylight from that period, depicting Petticoat market, reveal a fair scattering of the well dressed in amongst the less fortunate.
Norma
ps -who said he was "slumming"?He may have been to the Theatre in Commercial Street where Dan Lemo was starring that night,had had a few drinks afterwards and was out looking for a prostitute before going home.

[Sam Flynn]

Hi Mike,

- Mary Kelly had the remains of her last meal in her stomach when examined

- Carrie Maxwell spoke to a woman who had thrown up twice before 9 am

Just to clarify:

Bond states that there was a partly-digested meal of fish and potatoes scattered in the abdominal cavity and in the remains of the stomach attached to the intestines. He doesn't refer to "the remains of her last meal", as one might imagine would have been the case if she'd vomited it up earlier. On the contrary - there was evidently enough food to have spilled out into the abdominal cavity, whilst still maintaining a presence in Kelly's stomach after it had been cut. That sounds like a reasonable amount of food was inside Kelly when she was killed.

Maxwell mentions only one act of vomiting (which may or may not completely empty the stomach), by the way.

[Ben]

Spot on, Chava. Good points.

Hi Norma,

What about when they were high on their drug or drink of choice?

What about before they became chemically inconvenienced? What about before they decided (apparently!) to go out drinking near Flower and Dean Street for example? Did they think that Astrakhan cuffs and thick gold chains were the ticket, or might they just have taken into account the nature of the district, dressed down, and then got sloshed or high? 'Cause the latter makes infinitely better sense to me.

If you think it was only "toffs" going to the theatre in Commerical Street....

Moreover a casual glance at some of the photographs taken in broad daylight from that period, depicting Petticoat market, reveal a fair scattering of the well dressed in amongst the less fortunate

Nah, not really.

Not in any of the photographs I've looked at from the period.

[Chava]

Natalie, all the drugs and booze and depravity found in the East End were also found in the West End! There would be no need whatsoever to go down to Dorset St to find them. And if they had an inclination for louche life they didn't need to go further than the area around Soho. I'm not saying 'toffs' didn't go to Whitechapel ever, but I think if they did they would have stuck out like extremely sore thumbs. Yes, there were well-dressed people in Petticoat Lane. Not everyone in the East End was on their uppers. There were a lot of fairly middle-class people living in the area and a number of Jews who had reasonable businesses living there. My in-laws lived there from when they arrived in the UK in 1908 until they went further north to Stoke Newington in 1931. They weren't wealthy, but they weren't on their uppers either. They rented a place in Mulberry St and lived above the shop.

But there is a world of difference between a Jewish print-maker and his family and a West End Toff. I can't see why the latter would go down to Whitechapel unless it was on some kind of charitable mission. And that's where you'd maybe find Jack The Toff, in Toynbee Hall. A man from there would have been known in the area and trusted, so that is possible.

[Dan Norder]

I wont bother mentioning any more evidence for my statements again Dan

You can't mention "more evidence" until you first provide any evidence at all. You just make stuff up off the top of your head and expect everyone else to buy into it.