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 5 hours ago.
Mary Jane Kelly: Did Mary Kelly meet the Bethnal Green Botherer? - by Wickerman 6 hours ago.
Mary Jane Kelly: Did Mary Kelly meet the Bethnal Green Botherer? - by Wickerman 6 hours ago.
Hutchinson, George: Why Didn't the Police Have Schwartz and/or Lawende Take a Look at Hutchinson? - by DJA 7 hours ago.
Hutchinson, George: Why Didn't the Police Have Schwartz and/or Lawende Take a Look at Hutchinson? - by packers stem 7 hours ago.
Mary Jane Kelly: Was Mary Kelly a Ripper victim? - by c.d. 8 hours ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Motive, Method and Madness: Geoprofile of Jack the Ripper reveals Tabram and Nichols connection. - (66 posts)
Scene of the Crimes: distances between kills.odd - (15 posts)
Hutchinson, George: Why Didn't the Police Have Schwartz and/or Lawende Take a Look at Hutchinson? - (9 posts)
Mary Jane Kelly: Was Mary Kelly a Ripper victim? - (7 posts)
Levy, Jacob: Jacob the Ripper - (5 posts)
Torso Killings: JtR failed amputation. Torso killer was successful. - (4 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 > Motive, Method and Madness

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #41  
Old 11-11-2015, 09:15 AM
Michael W Richards Michael W Richards is offline
Assistant Commissioner
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 3,418
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rosella View Post
^ No Michael, YOU assume that Mary Kelly was at home and in bed when her killer arrived. Don't place your assumptions on the rest of us, please!

Also, as John Kelly stated in his inquest evidence that Eddowes was 'trying to borrow money 'so that she need not walk the streets' on the day she died, the cat was out of the bag.

I think that Kate's way of making a living when she had no small items to hawk and she was stony broke, was exactly the same as other extremely poor women in the area. She knew her daughter was no longer living where she had been and she would have had to get money for a bed.

You can believe that Mary Kelly and Liz Stride were averse to soliciting on the nights they died, as is your right. My right is to believe otherwise.
As for Mary Rosella, she was first attacked undressed in her bed while facing the partition wall, the only person she was seen with that night is Blotchy Face at 11:45pm on Thursday, so she either brought her killer in with her in the form of Blotchy, or he arrived after Blotchy left at some point. In which case she would have been in bed. Her room was dark and quiet by 1:30am.

As for who was soliciting when they met their killer(s), I assume nothing...I know that ONLY 2 women admitted to another party that they were soliciting and that there is no evidence that Kate, Liz or Mary were.

Anyone who thinks they were out soliciting anyway is doing so without the support of any evidence. And the theory that Jack picked up working street women is left in question...that's if you believe in Jack. If they didn't fall prey to a stranger, then tons of possible motives are still on the table.
__________________
Michael Richards
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 11-11-2015, 11:32 AM
Errata Errata is offline
Superintendent
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Tennessee, U.S.
Posts: 2,937
Default

I think the signature is wrong...
__________________
The early bird might get the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 11-11-2015, 11:44 AM
curious4 curious4 is offline
Chief Inspector
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 1,748
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael W Richards View Post
As for Mary Rosella, she was first attacked undressed in her bed while facing the partition wall, the only person she was seen with that night is Blotchy Face at 11:45pm on Thursday, so she either brought her killer in with her in the form of Blotchy, or he arrived after Blotchy left at some point. In which case she would have been in bed. Her room was dark and quiet by 1:30am.

As for who was soliciting when they met their killer(s), I assume nothing...I know that ONLY 2 women admitted to another party that they were soliciting and that there is no evidence that Kate, Liz or Mary were.

Anyone who thinks they were out soliciting anyway is doing so without the support of any evidence. And the theory that Jack picked up working street women is left in question...that's if you believe in Jack. If they didn't fall prey to a stranger, then tons of possible motives are still on the table.
Sorry Michael, this was meant for Rosella


No. Kate would have literally had to walk the streets all night if she had nowhere to sleep. It was an offence to sleep on the streets. I believe this was taken up at the inquest.

Best wishes
C4

Last edited by curious4 : 11-11-2015 at 11:49 AM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 11-11-2015, 12:14 PM
Michael W Richards Michael W Richards is offline
Assistant Commissioner
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 3,418
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by curious4 View Post
Sorry Michael, this was meant for Rosella


No. Kate would have literally had to walk the streets all night if she had nowhere to sleep. It was an offence to sleep on the streets. I believe this was taken up at the inquest.

Best wishes
C4
Hi Curious,

We are told that Kate and John slept together almost every night, yet when she exits the police station, she goes in the opposite direction of where he would likely be. I believe John did in fact secure a bed for that night, so, had Kate gone looking for him she wouldn't have to walk the streets. The City's policy of holding D & D's until they were sober, unlike the Met who held them all night, did contribute to street traffic...but with Kate there are stories about her that make us question why she went to Mitre Square, and what happened those last 24 hours.
Some questions are;

1.The pawn ticket was for Friday, not Saturday as John said. They had money Friday night...so why did Kate supposedly go to a casual ward? And why, by the storyline, was she released without having to do any labor for her bed...as was the rule at casual wards.
2. Kate told a friend she intended to collect reward money for giving police the name of the killer at large...if so, was she blackmailing that party for an even greater reward?
3. She had no money that we are aware of on Saturday afternoon, yet she gets stupid drunk on someones money by 8pm. Who paid, and why?
4. Early on the police themselves speculated she had an "arranged meeting'? What prompted them to make that statement"?

Its far to easy, and without any evidence, saying that Kate was probably soliciting. Since she had been hopping for weeks, and since we have evidence that she and John were together every night by the landlord...just how often was she soliciting at that place in time? If at all.

How often was Liz Stride soliciting, when she said herself that she had been working for a few months "among the Jews"? How often did Mary solicit, with almost 3 weeks in rent arrears and a fear of the streets that Fall?

Its easy to speculate those three were soliciting, far harder to provide any proof of that.
__________________
Michael Richards
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 11-11-2015, 12:55 PM
curious4 curious4 is offline
Chief Inspector
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 1,748
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael W Richards View Post
Hi Curious,

We are told that Kate and John slept together almost every night, yet when she exits the police station, she goes in the opposite direction of where he would likely be. I believe John did in fact secure a bed for that night, so, had Kate gone looking for him she wouldn't have to walk the streets. The City's policy of holding D & D's until they were sober, unlike the Met who held them all night, did contribute to street traffic...but with Kate there are stories about her that make us question why she went to Mitre Square, and what happened those last 24 hours.
Some questions are;

1.The pawn ticket was for Friday, not Saturday as John said. They had money Friday night...so why did Kate supposedly go to a casual ward? And why, by the storyline, was she released without having to do any labor for her bed...as was the rule at casual wards.
2. Kate told a friend she intended to collect reward money for giving police the name of the killer at large...if so, was she blackmailing that party for an even greater reward?
3. She had no money that we are aware of on Saturday afternoon, yet she gets stupid drunk on someones money by 8pm. Who paid, and why?
4. Early on the police themselves speculated she had an "arranged meeting'? What prompted them to make that statement"?

Its far to easy, and without any evidence, saying that Kate was probably soliciting. Since she had been hopping for weeks, and since we have evidence that she and John were together every night by the landlord...just how often was she soliciting at that place in time? If at all.

How often was Liz Stride soliciting, when she said herself that she had been working for a few months "among the Jews"? How often did Mary solicit, with almost 3 weeks in rent arrears and a fear of the streets that Fall?

Its easy to speculate those three were soliciting, far harder to provide any proof of that.
Hello Michael

I agree. There is no evidence that Kate ever prostituted herself. I believe she was feigning drunkeness, needing a safe place to wait before an appointment with her killer, hence her preoccupation with the time. She was obviously on good terms with the supervisor of the casual ward if she confided to that she thought she knew the killer's identity, so I have always thought she talked him into releasing her early, or else (from memory I think the women did cleaning jobs and the men picked oakum) she finished her task early.

Best wishes
C4
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 11-11-2015, 01:11 PM
DJA DJA is offline
Chief Inspector
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Some Australian Mountain Range.
Posts: 1,720
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael W Richards View Post
Some questions are;

1.The pawn ticket was for Friday, not Saturday as John said. They had money Friday night...so why did Kate supposedly go to a casual ward? And why, by the storyline, was she released without having to do any labor for her bed...as was the rule at casual wards.
2. Kate told a friend she intended to collect reward money for giving police the name of the killer at large...if so, was she blackmailing that party for an even greater reward?
3. She had no money that we are aware of on Saturday afternoon, yet she gets stupid drunk on someones money by 8pm. Who paid, and why?
4. Early on the police themselves speculated she had an "arranged meeting'? What prompted them to make that statement"?
.
1. If you mean the Shoe Lane Casual Ward,that was in Nichols' old stomping ground. Not "Whitechapel",but Fleet Street.
"Sailor" Hutchinson's late father ran a hotel around the corner at one time.
2. Obviously.
The reward would be difficult to collect when it became obvious that all CV5 were in on it.
Eddowes/Conway and Nichols had known each other since 1867.Notice how she moves in next door to Kate just before the hop picking.
3.Jack the Ripper.
4.That is new to me.No doubt they knew though.
__________________
My name is Dave. You cannot reach me through Debs email account
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 11-11-2015, 01:13 PM
Michael W Richards Michael W Richards is offline
Assistant Commissioner
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 3,418
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by curious4 View Post
Hello Michael

I agree. There is no evidence that Kate ever prostituted herself. I believe she was feigning drunkeness, needing a safe place to wait before an appointment with her killer, hence her preoccupation with the time. She was obviously on good terms with the supervisor of the casual ward if she confided to that she thought she knew the killer's identity, so I have always thought she talked him into releasing her early, or else (from memory I think the women did cleaning jobs and the men picked oakum) she finished her task early.

Best wishes
C4
I have no problem with the above thinking curious. Although, I would say that for me, its likely she did get hammered, that the objective of her drinking partners was to get her into that state so she wouldn't be hesitant about talking to them about her supposed claim on the reward, and I think that what they learned from her had something to do with her being murdered. I also think its possible that the hand on sailor mans chest might have been her being thankful that sailor man waited for her, perhaps a meeting may have been set for 1am.

If you think the above is possible, then you might also agree with me that because of the very short time elapsed between the sighting and her discovery, sailor man might have led her to someone already waiting in the square.

Cheers
__________________
Michael Richards
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 11-11-2015, 02:29 PM
Graham Graham is offline
Assistant Commissioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Midlands
Posts: 3,402
Default

I don't know whether you guys have clocked this, but as this thread has got more, shall we say, 'technical' and 'involved', Pierre seems to have lost interest in it. Which kind of leads me to suspect that his knowledge of the Case is at best superficial, and at worst based upon what he probably spends time on picking up from these boards as he goes along, so to speak.

Graham
__________________
We are suffering from a plethora of surmise, conjecture and hypothesis. - Sherlock Holmes, The Adventure Of Silver Blaze
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 11-11-2015, 02:41 PM
Michael W Richards Michael W Richards is offline
Assistant Commissioner
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 3,418
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Graham View Post
I don't know whether you guys have clocked this, but as this thread has got more, shall we say, 'technical' and 'involved', Pierre seems to have lost interest in it. Which kind of leads me to suspect that his knowledge of the Case is at best superficial, and at worst based upon what he probably spends time on picking up from these boards as he goes along, so to speak.

Graham
I think Graham that Monsieur Pierre is just baiting bears. Not an advisable hobby.
__________________
Michael Richards
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 11-11-2015, 04:02 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 Michael W Richards View Post
Hi Curious,


Some questions are;

How often was Liz Stride soliciting, when she said herself that she had been working for a few months "among the Jews"?
Its easy to speculate those three were soliciting, far harder to provide any proof of that.
Working among the Jews could mean working for those who didn't want to break the Sabbath, which means one day/week.
__________________
Is it progress when a cannibal uses a fork?
- Stanislaw Jerzy Lee
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 12:18 AM.


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