the victims werent prostitutes

[Simon Wood]

Hi Jonathan,

Who said that?

Regards,

Simon

[jmenges]

Hi Simon,

This one's the Daily News on 10 September-

Sounds pass unheeded in Hanbury street - that is all. The lodger who came down at 5.25 fancied he hard a slight scuffle, with the noise of someone falling against the pailings, but he took no notice of that. They take very little notice in Hanbury street, even of strangers to the house, who sometimes turn in for a sleep on the stairs before the markets open.

Anybody is free to walk through the house passage into the back yard, and it is not uncommon in all parts of London for homeless persons to creep in and sleep in passages and staircases thus left. In this very house only a short time since one of the residents says a man slept on the stairs, certainly one night, and probably more than one. Under such circumstances, of course anybody passing through the yard would attract no attention.

There may be other press accounts of homeless sleeping inside, or even in the backyard, of 29 Hanbury Street. I'll have to look.

All the best,

JM

[Simon Wood]

Hi Jonathan,

Thank you very much.

Regards,

Simon

[PaulB]

I've just had a rummage through the inquest transcripts on Casebook, Ripperology's vade mecum.

Emily Holland "did not know in what way she [Polly Nichols] obtained a living. She always seemed to her to be a quiet woman, and kept very much to herself." Wynne Baxter called her unfortunate, but in the context of her being a murder victim.

Nobody at Annie Chapman's inquest mentioned 'unfortunate' or prostitution. Asked what she did for a living, Amelia Palmer said, "She used to do crochet work, make antimaccassars, and sell flowers. She was out late at night at times."

John Kelly said he . . . "never knew she [Eddowes] went out for any immoral purpose," although "We had been unfortunate at the hop-picking."

The word 'prostitute' wasn't uttered at Elizabeth Stride's inquest. Wynne Baxter mentioned that Stride sometimes being worse for drink was 'unfortunately' a failing with her, and asked what she was doing for a livelihood, Mary Malcolm replied, "I had my doubts."

Asked why Barnett left Kelly, he said, "Because she had a woman of bad character there, whom she took in out of compassion, and I objected to it. That was the only reason." Caroline Maxwell said, "I believe she was an unfortunate," without explaining the basis for her belief.

Ubi autem probationem?

Hi Simon, take a look at MEPO for both Nichols and Chapman.

[PaulB]

Hello Paul,

On a serious note, I hope you don't feel as though I stepped on your toes or was trying to steal your thunder. It was certainly not my intention to do so. My apologies if that is the case.

c.d.

Of course I didn't think that at all, I was glad that you thought the same as me. It's always nice to have support. I was actually agreeing with the additions. So, no apologies necessary.

[Wickerman]

.....

Asked why Barnett left Kelly, he said, "Because she had a woman of bad character there, whom she took in out of compassion, and I objected to it. That was the only reason." Caroline Maxwell said, "I believe she was an unfortunate," without explaining the basis for her belief.

Ubi autem probationem?

Simon, do you accept Barnet's police statement to Abberline on 9 Nov?

"....when in consequence of not earning sufficient money to give her and her resorting to prostitution, I resolved on leaving her...."

Double checked what you were talking about this time

[Observer]

John Kelly said he . . . "never knew she [Eddowes] went out for any immoral purpose," although "We had been unfortunate at the hop-picking."

He would say that though wouldn't he? The poor woman had been brutally murdered. Why kick her when she was down by revealing that she was a prostitute?

The word 'prostitute' wasn't uttered at Elizabeth Stride's inquest. Wynne Baxter mentioned that Stride sometimes being worse for drink was 'unfortunately' a failing with her, and asked what she was doing for a livelihood, Mary Malcolm replied, "I had my doubts."

Stride had convictions for prostitution. She and Kidney had broken up. She was on the bones of her backside when she was murdered, she had received money from the Swedish Church shortly before her murder. On the night of her murder she was seen with at least two separate men, neither were traced.

Asked why Barnett left Kelly, he said, "Because she had a woman of bad character there, whom she took in out of compassion, and I objected to it. That was the only reason." Caroline Maxwell said, "I believe she was an unfortunate," without explaining the basis for her belief.

Ubi autem probationem?

Mary Kelly's death certificate reveled her to be a prostitute. Who completed that certificate? Considering that the poor woman had been butchered by JTR, it's not unreasonable to think that they thought long and hard before registering her as a prostitute. I believe there was sufficient evidence for the authorities to label her as such.

[Herlock Sholmes]

I’m beginning to suspect that these poor women might have been prostitutes

[Wickerman]

Lets not be hasty now.....

[Simon Wood]

In his 19th September report, Inspector Abberline thought Bucks Row an ideal location for prostitutes, but didn't go so far as to accuse Nichols and Chapman of belonging to the Frail Sisterhood—

"Bucks Row is a narrow quiet thoroughfare frequented by prostitutes for immoral purposes at night and no doubt the back yard of 29 Hanbury Street has been used for a similar purpose."

No doubt.

The following newspaper article is interesting.

Evening News
London, U.K.
7 September 1888

FIFTH EDITION.
THE WHITECHAPEL MURDER.
WATCHING BUCK'S ROW.

This morning, at one o'clock, two reporters commenced a watch in Buck's-row, which terminated at eleven o'clock, and from what they then observed, coupled with the evidence already given, they came to the conclusion that the police are altogether wrong in their assumption that the murder was committed on the spot where the body was found. This seems to be absolutely impossible, for the following reasons. In the first place, Buck's-row is a decently wide thoroughfare, running at right angles from Baker's-row to Brady-street. Buck's-row is in every sense thoroughly respectable, every tenant being an old inhabitant, and of good class. In addition to well-to-do artisans, the row contains a mission hall, the factory of Messrs. Schneider and Sons, and the factories and warehouses of Messrs. Torr, and Browne and Eagle, together with the private residence of the Rev. Henry North Hall, the curate of St. Mary, Whitechapel. There are watchmen at night at these factories, and many of the private residents were awake at the time the deceased was murdered, but none heard any cries for help on Friday morning.

It has been stated that the street is a dark one, but this is altogether wrong, for it is well lighted at all hours of the night by the great lamps outside the [Albion] brewery of Messrs. Mann and Crossman, in addition to the ordinary street lamps, and it seems inconceivable that such a well-lighted street would be selected for the crime.

WINTHROP STREET.
Winthrop Street, on the other hand, is very narrow and very dark, and tenanted by many of the worst characters in London, and there seems to be no doubt whatever that the murder was committed there, and the body brought round the corner and left a few yards up Buck's-row. The extensive nature of the injuries and the absence of blood in Buck's-row, as proved by the police, also goes to show that the murder was not committed there, and if this be so there was probably a second party cognisant of the murder, if not a participator in it. It may be stated that a thorough search of the houses in Winthrop-street has not been made by the police yet, and there is good reason to believe that had this been done at the outset a clue to the murder and the actual spot where it took place would have been discovered.

POLICE BEATS.
The police system of particular beats and regular time for certain constables to be upon those beats is thoroughly well-known by the criminal classes, and the medical evidence gives colour to the theory that Constable Neil was watched, and the moment he had passed through Buck's-row the body was carried there and left where he found it half an hour afterwards on his return along that beat; and as the body was not cold the murder was committed perhaps three-quarters of an hour before the discovery of the victim.

The whole of the inhabitants of Buck's-row are of one opinion, viz., that the murder was not done there, and as many of them know the locality well, having lived there for 20 or 30 years (the youngest inhabitant three years), some respect might, it is thought, be shown to their knowledge.

[Ginger]

Stride had convictions for prostitution. She and Kidney had broken up. She was on the bones of her backside when she was murdered, she had received money from the Swedish Church shortly before her murder. On the night of her murder she was seen with at least two separate men, neither were traced.

I don't think she was quite as hard-up as all that. Remember that Stride had earned 6p cleaning Saturday afternoon, and hadn't dipped into that to pay for her bed Saturday night. She took 6p with her when she went out Sunday evening. When the body was examined after the murder, she had no money on her. If Deimschutz was correct in believing that he had interrupted the killer, then while it's possible that he had time to steal her money after cutting her throat, it doesn't seem likely.

It's that lack of money that makes me think that Stride wasn't prostituting that night. I think she had a spare 6p, went out and had a good time with it, and was going to see if she couldn't pick up a cleaning job before she went home to bed.

[caz]

Nobody at Annie Chapman's inquest mentioned 'unfortunate' or prostitution. Asked what she did for a living, Amelia Palmer said, "She used to do crochet work, make antimaccassars, and sell flowers. She was out late at night at times."

Out late at night with all that lot, looking for customers? Presumably the swine who killed her made off with half a dozen crocheted place mats, a pair of antimacassars and a bunch of chrysanths, in addition to the body parts. Are we looking for a husband who was in for a damn fine hiding from the missus if he went home empty handed?

The thing is, for those victims who had ever accepted some material reward - money, food, drink, clothes - from a male stranger in exchange for a sexual favour, a personal line had been crossed, which they might be prepared to stray over again if the circumstances were compelling. It seems a trifle perverse to argue that the killer had accidentally picked on two or more impoverished women out alone at night who, coincidentally, had taken a personal vow never to do such things for money, no matter what the temptation was, nor how much they needed a good meal or stiff tot of gin, or a dry place to sleep, or to avoid eviction, and regardless of how many antimacassars they were having to cart round with them unsold.

It reminded me of this famous exchange:

Churchill: "Madam, would you sleep with me for five million pounds?"
Socialite: "My goodness, Mr. Churchill... Well, I suppose... we would have to discuss terms, of course... "
Churchill: "Would you sleep with me for five pounds?"
Socialite: "Mr. Churchill, what kind of woman do you think I am?!"
Churchill: "Madam, we've already established that. Now we are haggling about the price".

So back to Jack:

Jack: "My dear, would you do me a small favour for thruppence?"
Victim: "On yer penny-farthing, mate."
Jack: "How about a shilling, a bottle of gin and some fish and chips thrown in?"
Victim: "Done."
Jack: "You will be, my dear. Two ways."

None of the victims might have gone out intending to sell sex on the last day/night of her life. The point is, if the killer's perception was that they were all just commodities, it was irrelevant to him as a violent predator whose immediate need or desire was murder and mutilation. That's what he was buying, and he didn't need to honour any promises to pay; he had a sharp knife to do his bidding for him, whether a victim was suckered in or not.

Love,

Caz
X

[Robert]

Are we looking for a husband who was in for a damn fine hiding from the missus if he went home empty handed?

Nope. Think lupins. Think Dennis Moore.

[MrBarnett]

Are we looking for a husband who was in for a damn fine hiding from the missus if he went home empty handed?

Nope. Think lupins. Think Dennis Moore.

"Your doillies or your life!"

[Simon Wood]

Hi Caz,

Very droll.

The JtR legend relies on two core beliefs.

1. All the victims were prostitutes.

2. All the victims were murdered where their bodies were found.

Regards,

Simon