Casebook: Jack the Ripper - Main
   

Introduction
Victims
Suspects
Witnesses
Ripper Letters
Police Officials
Official Documents
Press Reports
Victorian London
Message Boards
Ripper Media
Authors
Dissertations
Timelines
Games & Diversions
Photo Archive
Ripper Wiki
Casebook Examiner
Ripper Podcast
About the Casebook

Most Recent Posts:
Witnesses: Kennedy and Lewis - by Wickerman 38 minutes ago.
Witnesses: 36 Berner Street............... - by Robert 3 hours ago.
Witnesses: 36 Berner Street............... - by MrBarnett 3 hours ago.
Witnesses: 36 Berner Street............... - by Debra A 4 hours ago.
Witnesses: 36 Berner Street............... - by MrBarnett 6 hours ago.
Mary Jane Kelly: Did Mary Kelly meet the Bethnal Green Botherer? - by Abby Normal 7 hours ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Witnesses: 36 Berner Street............... - (17 posts)
Witnesses: Kennedy and Lewis - (6 posts)
Lechmere/Cross, Charles: So if you live in Bethnal Green, you won´t kill in Whitechapel? - (1 posts)
Mary Jane Kelly: Did Mary Kelly meet the Bethnal Green Botherer? - (1 posts)

Wiki Updates:
Robert Sagar
Edit: Chris
May 9, 2015, 12:32 am
Online newspaper archives
Edit: Chris
Nov 26, 2014, 10:25 am
Joseph Lawende
Edit: Chris
Mar 9, 2014, 10:12 am
Miscellaneous research resources
Edit: Chris
Feb 13, 2014, 9:28 am
Charles Cross
Edit: John Bennett
Sep 4, 2013, 8:20 pm

Most Recent Blogs:
Mike Covell: A DECADE IN THE MAKING.
February 19, 2016, 11:12 am.
Chris George: RipperCon in Baltimore, April 8-10, 2016
February 10, 2016, 2:55 pm.
Mike Covell: Hull Prison Visit
October 10, 2015, 8:04 am.
Mike Covell: NEW ADVENTURES IN RESEARCH
August 9, 2015, 3:10 am.
Mike Covell: UPDDATES FOR THE PAST 11 MONTHS
November 14, 2014, 10:02 am.
Mike Covell: Mike’s Book Releases
March 17, 2014, 3:18 am.

Go Back   Casebook Forums > Ripper Discussions > Victims > General Victim Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #21  
Old 08-07-2016, 07:06 AM
kjab3112 kjab3112 is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: London
Posts: 152
Default

Richard

My reading was that they were incapacitated by direct carotid artery pressure with some form of gag to muffle any residual scream (+/- chloroform or ether) before the throat was cut. The thought of the sheet being used to disguise who he was killing hadn't occurred

Thanks

Paul
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 08-07-2016, 08:16 AM
c.d. c.d. is offline
Assistant Commissioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 3,680
Default

The question of whether or not these women were prostitutes and whether they were actually soliciting the night they were killed tends to get lumped together.

The police described them as unfortunates or prostitutes. I don't think they simply pulled that description out of a hat. In order to aid in catching the killer they needed to identify some connection among the victims. So I think it is a reasonable assumption that they had some basis for making that determination. We also know that the police considered the idea of dressing up as prostitutes. Why do that if it was non-prostitutes that were being attacked?

Now as to evidence that the women were in fact actively soliciting the night they were killed, what evidence would that be? Was it a requirement that they let someone know of their intentions or were they required to sign some document? Proving that they were in fact soliciting is difficult but it is much easier if we rely on what is more likely so.

Some have argued that if it can be shown that they were not ACTIVELY soliciting then they could not have been a Ripper victim. That argument would seem to fall short given the fact that these women were poor and had a fondness for alcohol. Even if they were not actively soliciting, we have no way of knowing their response to being approached by Jack with a reasonable story that he just got paid and wanted to have a good time and was willing to double the going price.

In conclusion it would seem that all of these women had at least some connection to prostitution even if it was only on occasion. Is that simply a coincidence and not significant? Even if a case can be made that they were not actively soliciting, is it really such a strong case that it would absolutely eliminate them as a Ripper victim?

c.d.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 08-08-2016, 04:27 AM
lynn cates lynn cates is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 13,841
Default hints

Hello KJAB. Thanks.

Quite. Of course, Polly and Annie hinted at it--verbally.

Cheers.
LC
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 08-08-2016, 04:30 AM
lynn cates lynn cates is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 13,841
Default Faith without works is dead.

Hello CD. Thanks.

But IF one makes a leap of faith (as per Kierkegaard), there should be some results.

After 125+ years, where are they?

Cheers.
LC
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 08-08-2016, 04:34 AM
lynn cates lynn cates is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 13,841
Default victimology

Hello (again) CD. Nice argument.

No, it would not eliminate them as "Ripper victims." But it might render moot the talk about victimology and all the women of the same walk.

Cheers.
LC
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 08-09-2016, 05:16 PM
Joshua Rogan Joshua Rogan is online now
Chief Inspector
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 1,900
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by richardnunweek View Post
Hi,
I believe without a doubt that Mary Kelly knew her killer, and well at that, the sheet initially placed over her head when attacked, gives a true indication of that.
Regards Richard.
Isn't it possible that, if she was awake enough to cry out when attacked, she pulled the sheet over her own head in an instinctive attempt (sadly futile) to protect herself?
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 08-14-2016, 12:30 PM
Premium Member
SirJohnFalstaff SirJohnFalstaff is offline
Premium Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Abzurdistan or Canada, depends
Posts: 566
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Columbo View Post
I wouldn't think they were prostitutes in the traditional sense. Only when times got tough. Eddowes went hopping, Chapman was reported to selling sewn trinkets of sorts. I don't know about Nichols and Stride if they did anything of the sort.

Kelly was probably the only prostitute by trade and most likely a maneater based on Barnett's testimony. She apparently only went out on the streets when she didn't have a man taking care of her.

Columbo
I disagree, only Eddowes seem to evade all allusion of prostitution, even casual.

Tabram was known to rely on the trade when times were rough.
Nichols was indeed solliciting for her doss money the very night she was killed.
Chapman was known to bring a man back to the doss house.
Stride had several convinction for prostitution in Sweden.
Eddowes, like I said, I can't find anything that points into prostitution.
Kelly was at one point a high end prostitute in a west end bordello.
__________________
Is it progress when a cannibal uses a fork?
- Stanislaw Jerzy Lee
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 08-16-2016, 12:19 PM
Madam Detective Madam Detective is offline
Cadet
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 29
Default

To be honest, I think it's questionable whether any of them were actually prostitutes, but rather, I think it's a case of how society construed them - women who had sex outside of marriage were seen as fallen. It was as black and white as that. However, a great many poor people's marriages fell apart or their spouses died and they took up with someone else - or a succession of other people, much as we would today. Unfortunately, women needed to rely on men in the Victorian era - being footloose and fancy free wasn't a state to which any woman would aspire for social and practical reasons. The canonical five were branded as prostitutes by the police because they were down-and-outs - they were degraded in every way - poor, alcoholic and shacking up with someone to whom they weren't legally married was part and parcel of what made them reviled by the newspaper reading public. I don't feel there is any real substantial evidence to make a case for them being called prostitutes. The witness statements are all extremely woolly - so much so that they are constant source of dispute on this forum. Can we believe anything anyone said? I have a hard time believing that anyone could recognise anyone's face at night on the streets of pitch black Whitechapel. And in the case of Elizabeth Stride and MJK, who we know were prostitutes - does having been one once mean that you are forever tarred with that brush? That's pretty damning.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 08-16-2016, 12:53 PM
Errata Errata is offline
Superintendent
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Tennessee, U.S.
Posts: 2,937
Default

To be strictly fair, few serial killers target prostitutes BECAUSE they are prostitutes. They target prostitutes because prostitutes are not super safety conscious, are vulnerable, they go off with strange men, and are less likely to be missed. So any women who also fit those criteria even if they are not selling sex are also likely to be targets. Homeless women for example.
__________________
The early bird might get the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 08-16-2016, 06:46 PM
drstrange169 drstrange169 is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 980
Default

Hello Madame Detective,

Point well made.

"Prostitute" is a word loaded with connotations, many of which may well not apply in these cases.
__________________
dustymiller
aka drstrange


"Whenever an expert says something that bolsters the Lechmere theory, it is not my task to disprove him ..."
Fisherman
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 05:48 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.