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: Sarah and Maurice Lewis - by Scott Nelson 16 minutes ago.
Hutchinson, George: Any updates, or opinions on this witness. - by Sam Flynn 2 hours ago.
Witnesses: Sarah and Maurice Lewis - by jerryd 2 hours ago.
Hutchinson, George: Any updates, or opinions on this witness. - by Ben 2 hours ago.
Hutchinson, George: Any updates, or opinions on this witness. - by Wickerman 3 hours ago.
Witnesses: Sarah and Maurice Lewis - by jerryd 3 hours ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Witnesses: Sarah and Maurice Lewis - (13 posts)
Hutchinson, George: Any updates, or opinions on this witness. - (9 posts)
Scene of the Crimes: Mitre Sq, The demise is almost complete - (1 posts)
Torso Killings: torso maps - (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
  #31  
Old 04-06-2017, 03:17 AM
DarkPassenger DarkPassenger is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 358
Default

Quick question...

I read somewhere that prostitutes in the period of Jack proactively approached their potential customers and placed a hand on their chest. Is this right?
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 04-06-2017, 06:40 AM
Michael W Richards Michael W Richards is offline
Assistant Commissioner
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 3,243
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Madam Detective View Post
This has occurred to me on several occasions. Aside from Mary Jane Kelly, it seems to me that the other victims may have just been rough sleepers who weren't able to find their doss money for the night and bedded down in a door way or a quiet corner. How are we so certain they were prostitutes? There is no suggestion that they had sexual intercourse with the ripper, there was no money found on the bodies. On the police reports the word 'prostitute' was written into the section marked 'occupation' - but might this have just been a guess by the police that a woman walking the streets at night was a prostitute? In fact, it seems to me that most of the victims had been beggars.
Based on existing known evidence, 2 of the Five Canonicals stated to friends that they were out to earn money for their bed that night. In the middle of the night. Safe to conclude it was soliciting. Unfortunate and Prostitute are both used to describe the women, though I would think that Mary is the only one of the Five who had been doing this exclusively for a living for some years. We know of no other way she made money......other than "from the kindness of strangers". We have evidence that Liz cleaned rooms and was regularly employed doing that up until her murder, Polly and Kate knitted and sewed. Kate also went hops picking in the summer, and had John to assist her with money.
__________________
Michael Richards
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 04-07-2017, 02:39 PM
Bridewell Bridewell is offline
Assistant Commissioner
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Bottesford, Leicestershire
Posts: 3,670
Default

If they were prostitutes, were they killed because they were prostitutes?

For that there is no evidence whatsoever that I can think of other than the "Dear Boss" letter - which almost everybody thinks was a journalistic hoax - and therefore not evidence of any kind about the killer's motives.
__________________
Regards, Bridewell.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 04-07-2017, 05:25 PM
GUT GUT is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: I come from a land Down Under
Posts: 7,335
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bridewell View Post
If they were prostitutes, were they killed because they were prostitutes?

For that there is no evidence whatsoever that I can think of other than the "Dear Boss" letter - which almost everybody thinks was a journalistic hoax - and therefore not evidence of any kind about the killer's motives.
Now that's a different question.

I think they may have been killed because they were prostitutes in that prostitutes were an easy target, ie the most likely females to go with a stranger to a private place in the middle of the night. As opposed to the killer had a set on prostitutes.
__________________
G U T

There are two ways to be fooled, one is to believe what isn't true, the other is to refuse to believe that which is true.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 04-07-2017, 07:06 PM
Wickerman Wickerman is online now
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 9,505
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GUT View Post
Now that's a different question.

I think they may have been killed because they were prostitutes in that prostitutes were an easy target, ie the most likely females to go with a stranger to a private place in the middle of the night. As opposed to the killer had a set on prostitutes.
Right, he didn't kill them because they were prostitutes (ie; he didn't hate prostitutes).
His victims were prostitutes because they were plentyful, available, and willing to go somewhere secluded. Which, presumably other women out late at night like; a midwife, a maid, a nurse or housewife would not.
__________________
Regards, Jon S.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 04-09-2017, 09:24 PM
Scott Nelson Scott Nelson is offline
Inspector
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,179
Default

Possibly, they may have been out at night. After all, I've just seen the new documentary series on Queen Victoria and it shows that on occasion midwives, maids and nurses were out and about at all hours of the night.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 04-09-2017, 09:45 PM
GUT GUT is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: I come from a land Down Under
Posts: 7,335
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wickerman View Post
Right, he didn't kill them because they were prostitutes (ie; he didn't hate prostitutes).
His victims were prostitutes because they were plentyful, available, and willing to go somewhere secluded. Which, presumably other women out late at night like; a midwife, a maid, a nurse or housewife would not.
Sums up my opinion pretty well.
__________________
G U T

There are two ways to be fooled, one is to believe what isn't true, the other is to refuse to believe that which is true.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 04-09-2017, 11:01 PM
Varqm Varqm is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 466
Default

Originally Posted by Wickerman View Post
Right, he didn't kill them because they were prostitutes (ie; he didn't hate prostitutes).
His victims were prostitutes because they were plentyful, available, and willing to go somewhere secluded. Which, presumably other women out late at night like; a midwife, a maid, a nurse or housewife would not.


Is there anything to tip the balance towards this argument as opposed to
the killer hating prostitutes? Or both?
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 04-09-2017, 11:07 PM
GUT GUT is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: I come from a land Down Under
Posts: 7,335
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Varqm View Post
Originally Posted by Wickerman View Post
Right, he didn't kill them because they were prostitutes (ie; he didn't hate prostitutes).
His victims were prostitutes because they were plentyful, available, and willing to go somewhere secluded. Which, presumably other women out late at night like; a midwife, a maid, a nurse or housewife would not.


Is there anything to tip the balance towards this argument as opposed to
the killer hating prostitutes? Or both?
I don't know of evidence to PROVE it either way.
__________________
G U T

There are two ways to be fooled, one is to believe what isn't true, the other is to refuse to believe that which is true.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 04-10-2017, 02:23 AM
Robert Robert is offline
Casebook Supporter
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 4,832
Default

Hi Dark Passenger

I've never heard of the hand on chest thing - except obviously with Eddowes.

Of course, if Hutchinson is to be believed, it was Mr A who approached MJK by tapping her on the shoulder. If Mary was looking for a client, Mr A must have been pretty quick with his shoulder tap before Mary got her chest touch in.
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 10:55 AM.


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