|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
pmdci
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Monday, July 21, 2003 - 1:40 pm: |       |
Guys,
Just one comment about the murder bien commited indoors. It was raining VERY hard that morning. |
Christer Nordstrom
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Monday, August 18, 2003 - 9:55 am: | |
Hi
If Mary were pregnant, who was the ”father”?
Perhaps the “father” couldn’t risk any gossip, or blackmailing?
Could it be that McCarthy collected the rent in Mary’s bed sometimes?
I believe that McCarthy could come and go to the apartments without been suspect.
About Barnett's words years after the murders: 'I always felt sorry for her killer, for he could never come forward for fear of being topped'.
Could Barnett had known about the pregnancy, or were he outside the apartment and saw - perhaps - McCarthy?
Regards,
Christer (from a sunny Sweden)
|
Glenn L Andersson
Detective Sergeant
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 100
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 19, 2003 - 11:09 am: | |
What! Another Swede???  !!!!!!!!!!!!
Hi Christer (unless you're one of those who check out the website, write a message and then never comes back).
The theories you suggest in connection with murders on prostitutes during the late 29th century (pregnany with for example a married man and this being the motive) are quite popular and often discussed.
I don't konow that much about McCarthy's personal or family life and we can only speculate about his relations with Mary Kelly. That he "collected" the doss money in her bed can't be totally disregarded, these things most certainly did occur.
But is there a real possibility that he would be able to mutilate her to this excessive extent? I for my part believe that the murder was committed by someone who have done something similar before, in a criminal context -- and that is my main reason to believe she was Ripper victim, and we have no indications showing that McCarthy was the Ripper -- or had a criminal redord (that I know of).
All the best 
Glenn L Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Andrew Spallek
Detective Sergeant
Username: Aspallek
Post Number: 94
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 19, 2003 - 11:31 am: | |
Hello Christer,
I just can't beleive that pregnancy would have gone unmentioned in the autopsy report nor can I believe the pathologist would have missed it. I can only conclude that she was not pregnant.
As to the possibility of McCarthy accepting sexual favors in leiu of rent, I suppose this could have happened on occasion. But it must not have been his normal practice, or he certainly would not have sent his servant to collect the "rent" that morning now, would he?
Andy
|
Robert Charles Linford
Chief Inspector
Username: Robert
Post Number: 620
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 19, 2003 - 6:10 pm: | |
Hi all
McCarthy said that Kelly was 29 shillings in arrears with the rent, so unless he was lying, I don't suppose Kelly managed to pay much of the rent this way.
Mind you, if this was a practice of hers, I can imagine Bowyer : "Please can I go round and collect the rent, Boss? PLEASE! There's 29 shillings worth to collect..."
Robert |
Antagora C.
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Sunday, September 21, 2003 - 5:54 pm: | |
Mick, i think just like you, he did´n´t have a "proceding" to do his work, his style changes under the circunstances. |
Sarah
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Friday, September 26, 2003 - 6:14 am: | |
I just want to refer to a point made earlier about the possibility of there being a copycat serial killer who killed MJK. Ok, who said it had to have been another "serial" killer. Maybe someone just killed MJK and noone else. Maybe the reason she was so badly mutilated was that it wasn't JTR who was often believed to have had medical knowledge, but someone who knew nothing about where anything was in the body so went over the top to disguise this fact. Just a thought. |
Maryanne
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Monday, September 29, 2003 - 6:35 pm: | |
Well I've always believed her to be a Ripper victim, but I suppose anything is possible. Perhaps he just got carried away because he had the privacy of the room to mutilate her to the extremes that he did. I've always been of the assumption that she was pregnant, and have printed out pages from the internet that say she was discovered to be pregnant - during her first trimester. I think the problem is that mistakes happen and things get misquoted like where for instance the breasts were supposed to be placed - a newspaper stated on the bedside table, whereas most write up says underneath her head and by her feet.
One article I read was that her heart was also under the pillow, but the general consensus was that the heart was missing.
We know that the Ripper was getting worse and worse with each mutilations he performed, so why shouldn't it be him who went absolutely beserk when he got his victim alone in the room. Perhaps she knew him, perhaps she required an abortion - look at the way the legs are positioned - that was my opinion after recently looking at that horrendous picture again. |
Sarah
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Monday, October 06, 2003 - 6:04 am: | |
Hi Maryanne,
We seem to be replying to each other's posts alot!! Please could you let me know where you found the information on MJK being pregnant as this would be of great interest to me. Thanks in advance.
Sarah |
Maryanne
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Monday, October 06, 2003 - 5:53 pm: | |
To be honest Sarah I'm absolutely confused now! lmao! Through the years I've browsed at lots of books without ever purchasing them. I've only recently purchased a couple because I'm doing a modern Jack the Ripper story on a forum and wanted some research material. A couple of the internet pages I've got have stated her pregnancy but haven't elaborated.
More recently I've printed out another page from the internet of a book review - Jack the Ripper - Revealed. But the author in that seems to think she was fairly advanced in pregnancy, which I don't think she was. I'm sure it was supposed to be in the very early stages! Much of what this author writes about seems to be a twist in the tale of the screen play "From Hell." So perhaps most of it is nonsense!
I guess I'm going to have to buy all the books available instead of just browsing at them in "Waterstones" and whatever! lmao!
Are we allowed to put down web sites in this forum? I know some forums don't allow it.
By the way I would prefer it if she definitely was not pregnant. The murder was bad enough as it was, without there being an unborn baby involved.
Talk to you again. |
Sarah
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, October 08, 2003 - 5:48 am: | |
I agree, whoever it was who was killed, MJK or another, it is horrible to think of an unborn baby being involved. I think you are allowed to put other web pages down on here, I've seen many links to other sites posted and I've done a couple myself.
Regards, Sarah |
Sarah Long
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Tuesday, November 11, 2003 - 10:10 am: | |
Hey guys,
I don't know if anyone else has seen this but on another website (less detailed than this of course) it states the following details about Mary:-
"Just as the panic created by the 'Ripper' begins to die, the killer performs the most brutal of all his murders, taking several hours to finish the dismemberment. The victim is later discovered to be pregnant."
I have no idea where they got their information from about Mary being pregnant as I'm sure there was never any mention of it in any records made at the time. I also wonder how they knew it took "several hours" to complete the mutilations.
Regards,
Sarah |
Annie Caroline Boogaerdts
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, November 12, 2003 - 8:11 am: | |
I do think MJK was pregnant and required for an abortion or was forced to spread her legs to get aborted (look at the position of her legs on that horrible photograph) and on another site I found a text saying she was pregnant
http://www.geocities.com/quietlyinsane5/jack.html |
Annie Caroline Boogaerdts
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, November 12, 2003 - 8:22 am: | |
anything else that I forgot to tell
you about, regarding, MJK
Many of the books about Jack the Ripper make no mention of this at all, but some do state that Mary was in the early stages of pregnancy. What was the source of their information? None of the evidence given at the brief inquest mentioned it, neither do the reports of the police surgeon who first examined the remains and the pathologist. Tom Cullen in "Autumn of Terror" states, without giving his sources, that the police surgeon hinted that Mary was in the early stages of pregnancy while an unnamed newspaper hinted that the foetus was missing. Wilding's evidence is the existence of these rumours, and the conversation that Mary is said to have had with a neighbour. One of the most curious pieces of evidence given at the inquest was that of Mrs. Caroline Maxwell, who lived across the way from Mary and had spoken to her once or twice before. She stated that she had seen and spoken to Mary at 8am on the Friday, some hours after the probable time of death. (The time of death was fixed by body temperature and also because the cry of "Murder!" had been heard at 4am. A man was heard to leave Mary's lodgings at 6am.). Mrs. Maxwell stated that Mary had told her she was feeling unwell, and when Mrs. Maxwell had suggested a drink, Mary said that she had had a glass of beer but had brought it up. There are, of course, many reasons why someone might be sick, but Wilding, and other researchers have taken this sickness to be due to pregnancy. Without being able to prove anything, the facts in hand suggest that if Mary was pregnant she would have been in the early stages, dating from say mid August to mid September. |
Sarah Long
Police Constable
Username: Sarah
Post Number: 6
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, November 18, 2003 - 7:01 am: | |
I still find it odd that some websites say that Mary was pregnant but none of the books I've read suggest the same thing. If Mrs Maxwell has seen Mary on the Friday morning, then I believe that it wasn't Mary who was killed and that the reason she was looking sick and upset was because she had just come from that room. It would explain why the door to her room was locked. Mary may have swopped clothes with the victim (Mrs Maxwell said that Mary was wearing clothes she didn't recognise) and made her escape. That is if the time of death is acurate. |
Richard Brian Nunweek
Inspector
Username: Richardn
Post Number: 414
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, November 18, 2003 - 5:00 pm: | |
Hi Sarah.
I find it hard to believe that Mjk, was not the victim in Millers court, although I feel that Mjk has become a name we know her as, rather then her real name.
As I have stated before there was a time, 30 years ago when I had similar ideas as yourself, but a lot of water has flowed under the bridge since them rather novice days, I believe Kelly was killed about 45 minutes after she was first seem by Maxwell[ around 915am], this would explain the significant sightings, and I for one cannot doubt Mrs Maxwells account.
I would never discount your theory entirely, but the plot that kelly entered the room swopped clothing with a mutalated corpse, and managed to keep her sanity, to leave whitechapel ,to start anew, would seem unbelievable, even hardened detectives, found the scene harrowing, one could only ponder how Kelly would have found this scenerio.
Sorry Sarah, this type of fiction has been done before, but to serious followers of this case, is just not acceptable.
Regards Richard. |
Sarah Long
Sergeant
Username: Sarah
Post Number: 23
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, November 19, 2003 - 9:23 am: | |
Richard,
"Sorry Sarah, this type of fiction has been done before, but to serious followers of this case, is just not acceptable."
I find this comment of yours insulting and just plain rude. I am very serious about this case and I see that this could happen. Let's be realistic here, you didn't know Mary. Just because you may not have been able to do what I believe she MAY have done, it doesn't mean she didn't. People can do the oddest things in terrible situations.
I am not the only person on here to suggest such a thing and I'm sure that anyone else who believes this could have been a possibility would also find your last comment insulting. |
Luxy
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, November 19, 2003 - 10:44 am: | |
Hi Richard
"I would never discount your theory entirely, but the plot that kelly entered the room swopped clothing with a mutalated corpse, and managed to keep her sanity, to leave whitechapel ,to start anew, would seem unbelievable, even hardened detectives, found the scene harrowing, one could only ponder how Kelly would have found this scenerio"
People under crossfire - as MJK certainly was when she found the mutilated corpse in her bed - often do strange things; but others stay extremely calm and react stone cold sober. Shock comes along in the aftermath. Then she could have made her way to Ireland.
Luxy
|
Richard Brian Nunweek
Inspector
Username: Richardn
Post Number: 416
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, November 19, 2003 - 4:25 pm: | |
Sarah,
It was not my intention to insult, for as I mentioned that same theory , I myself pondered over in the seventys, I realize that people can react completely out of contrast, when situations arise, but I just cannot vizualize, kelly have enough self control, to enroll herself in this murder, by condeeming herself to the gallows, which surely such an act would warrant.
Sarah.
You are new to these boards, with just twenty three posts, You will with respect have to learn, that us old timers , have set opinions, that although are flexible to suggestions, will state their opinions at all times, infact these boards are full of critics, no bad thing,but as stated my remarks should not be considered an insult, purely a disagreement.
Regards Richard. |
Sarah Long
Sergeant
Username: Sarah
Post Number: 30
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, November 20, 2003 - 4:59 am: | |
Richard,
Yes I have made only 23 posts since I was registered. I have no idea if you can remember but I've been on here quite a while now as an unregistered guest and before I came on here I had studied Jack the Ripper for quite some time.
So you are saying that, by not reporting a murder she would have been hanged. I think not. She didn't kill the poor girl, so how was she guilty? Also she may have gotten to a stage when ANY way out of Whitechapel was better than the life she was living.
Your last remark was not simply a disagreement but a certain insult, you clearly said that serious followers think the concept rubbish, therefore suggesting that I am not a serious follower. |
Richard Brian Nunweek
Inspector
Username: Richardn
Post Number: 420
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, November 20, 2003 - 2:17 pm: | |
Hi sarah,
With respect come down off your high horse, I have never insulted any one on these boards, it is just not my policy, I was merely stating that it was improbable that Kelly swappped clothes, with a person she found, in her room, composed herself, and dissapeared without trace with no savings, to a better world.
As for being hung, she would have been deliberatly seen to have being perverting the course of justice, and would have been treated as an accessory in a bloody murder, wasting police time, damaging vital clues, you name it Sarah.
I am not going to apologize, for insulting you, for the simple truth is I haven't.
Regards Richard. |
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 1303
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, November 20, 2003 - 3:33 pm: | |
Hi all
Re the scenario in which Mary walks into her room, sees the devastation, and, when she has recovered from the shock, walks away from the East End allowing everyone to believe she's been murdered :
Leaving aside the time of "Kelly's" death, which is a separate issue, I just feel that unless Kelly was definitely being sought by people whom she feared (as some maintain she was), there would have been no reason for her to disappear. True she owed rent, but I get the impression (I may be wrong) that the most that could happen to poor people who owed rent, was that they were evicted.
Actually, wouldn't Kelly stand to gain from being the woman in whose room JTR claimed a victim? Wouldn't there be newspaper stories, drinks in pubs, etc?
Sarah, are you saying that Kelly was being chased by someone?
Robert |
Sarah Long
Sergeant
Username: Sarah
Post Number: 47
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Friday, November 21, 2003 - 5:16 am: | |
Richard,
Saying I am not a serious follower of the case is an insult Richard whether you believe it or not. I'm sorry but the only reason I was bringing this up is because I have never ever just stood there and let people talk to me in such a way. I've come on here to voice my opinion and you just through it back in my face.
Robert,
I'm not saying anyone was chasing her. She was always on about wanting out of the prostitution business and wanting to go back to Ireland, so when the situation arose, I'm merely saying that she could have taken advantage of it.
Sarah |
Richard Brian Nunweek
Inspector
Username: Richardn
Post Number: 422
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, November 21, 2003 - 2:21 pm: | |
Sarah.
Please I am not suggesting you are not a serious follower, by the amount of posts you are contributing there is no doubt on this,with regard to your attitude' I have never let people speak to me in such a way'
My answer is 'What Way'?.
Surely you can take critism, I most certainly have had my share on these boards.
So I offer my hand in friendship, and lets disagree, without causing offense to each other, because you have my word Sarah, it is not a personal vendetta, it is simply opinion.
Regards Richard. |
Leanne Perry
Chief Inspector
Username: Leanne
Post Number: 934
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, November 21, 2003 - 5:02 pm: | |
G'day,
I don't know what we're arguing about here. I just read the words: 'attitude', 'insult', 'just plain rude' and understand that we are arguing! Can I just say, from experience, that one can't tell a poster's tone of voice when one reads what they wrote, and certain words stand out more than others, when they shouldn't, so can we make up?
LEANNE
(Message edited by Leanne on November 21, 2003) |
|
Use of these
message boards implies agreement and consent to our Terms of Use.
The views expressed here in no way reflect the views of the owners and
operators of Casebook: Jack the Ripper.
Our old message board content (45,000+ messages) is no longer available online, but a complete archive
is available on the Casebook At Home Edition, for 19.99 (US) plus shipping.
The "At Home" Edition works just like the real web site, but with absolutely no advertisements.
You can browse it anywhere - in the car, on the plane, on your front porch - without ever needing to hook up to
an internet connection. Click here to buy the Casebook At Home Edition.
|
|
|
|
