|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Leanne Perry
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Leanne
Post Number: 1035
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 31, 2003 - 9:19 pm: |       |
G'day Chris,
I just re-read my last post, and I didn't word it right. I meant that the condition 'schizophrenia' wasn't used until 1924. I can't find the exact date that 'echolalia' was named.
I did find out that in 1861 a doctor named Broca identified the area of the human brain that controls speech, and the 'language/comprehension' area was located in 1874 by Wenicke.
The point I am trying to make is that psychiatry was an new area of study, so how much medical assistance would have been available to London's poor in 1888?
LEANNE |
Christopher T George
Chief Inspector
Username: Chrisg
Post Number: 532
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, January 01, 2004 - 12:33 pm: | |
Hi Leanne:
You're right that I think we can assume that Joe Barnett received no assistance for his condition, given that psychiatry was at its infancy in 1888. In the United States, an early pioneer on brain function was Dr. William Alexander Hammond, a former U.S. Surgeon General, who began by examining brain trauma victims during the Civil War and who also commented on the Ripper case in 1888, on whether the killer was insane. You may know that I wrote about the influential but controversial Dr. Hammond in a recent article in Ripperologist.
Best regards
Chris George
(Message edited by ChrisG on January 01, 2004) |
Natalie Severn
Inspector
Username: Severn
Post Number: 164
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, January 01, 2004 - 2:29 pm: | |
Dr Connolly had done some brilliant work with the patients at St Bernards Hospital in Hanwell which was teamed with Colney Hatch! This was in the 1850"s.He pioneered research into mental illness
and carried through innovatory and radical programmes for them.He was an early advocate
of the humane treatment of those sufferers.I cant remember anymore but will look it up when I get back[also I"m not sure I"ve spelt Connolly correctly]. |
Leanne Perry
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Leanne
Post Number: 1042
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, January 02, 2004 - 6:47 am: | |
G'day Natalie,
As to the 'humane treatment' of mentally ill people, 'normal' people don't realise how rescent the changes are! Yesterday when I was researching this issue, I found a picture of an old assylum room and it was more like a solitary confinement cell!
LEANNE |
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 1738
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Friday, January 02, 2004 - 7:26 am: | |
The story that Chris found, about the fire at Colney Hatch, seems to indicate the authorities' usual level of incompetence and indifference.
Robert |
Natalie Severn
Inspector
Username: Severn
Post Number: 173
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Friday, January 02, 2004 - 5:34 pm: | |
hi Leanne and Robert,Yes This was common but in Hanwell Asylum Dr John Conolly introduced a policy of non restraint.He was an innovator in the treatmment of the mentally ill who were encouraged to take part in drama games outings etc .The Bazaar sold needlework,[wooden]toys etc all made by patients and non restraint was practised .Similar programmes were introduced in Colney Hatch.[1851-it started in 1838 in Hanwell].
Best Natalie. |
Rodney Gillis
Sergeant
Username: Srod
Post Number: 21
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, January 04, 2004 - 7:52 pm: | |
Hi Richard,
"It may seem an obvious answer, but it would imply her killer only wanted her heart . . . "
I think you are exactly correct. The only problem is that there could be others besides Barnett who wished to have her heart. Perhaps Hutchinson? |
Richard Brian Nunweek
Chief Inspector
Username: Richardn
Post Number: 543
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, January 05, 2004 - 3:54 am: | |
Hi Rodney,
To be honest, I have never considered Hutchinson, anything more then a credible witness, like Mrs Long, lawande, schwartz,Maurice Lewis, and others, I have no reason to suspect a witness to a specific event as being 'Jack'.
But Barnett is a different proposition.
The huge puzzle , that this case is, is extremely difficult to solve, but in suggesting Barnett as the killer, peices of this jigsaw, start to fit together, while no other suspect to date, comes near.
I am simply going with my instincts, but I do have a open mind , and although I may appear to be wearing blinkers, regarding his guilt, I will take every candidate seriously.
Richard. |
Colin Benson
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Monday, January 05, 2004 - 10:52 pm: | |
"Were she to have been mixed up in a cause such as this both her friendship with the nuns of the Crespin Sreet convent and her indifference to how she made her living makes some sense."
Could someone please help me with the above statement by Mrs. Severn? I tried to track down the source for the connection between Kelly and the convent but ended against a blank wall (okay, there was a graffito, but we know that this has no meaning, hasn't it...)
Where do you know from?
Thank you - Colin
|
Cludgy
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 06, 2004 - 9:27 am: | |
If Barnett was JTR, then he must of known that with the murder of Kelly the game would have been up.
Would you randomly murder five women and be the most wanted man in London, and then butcher a woman whom you had lived with?
You would if you had a death wish, and fancied being strung up. |
Suzi Hanney
Inspector
Username: Suzi
Post Number: 170
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 07, 2004 - 6:28 pm: | |
Richard-
Read Bob Hinton's book...he doth persuade if you're looking at Hutch as a possible!
Cheers
Suzi |
Richard Brian Nunweek
Chief Inspector
Username: Richardn
Post Number: 555
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, January 08, 2004 - 2:01 pm: | |
Hi suzi,
I Have read Bob Hintons book, many times, i found it a good read, and he made a good case for his suspect.
The trouble is with this subject, which is in its 106 year now, we can not prove anything.
some people assume they will only be convinced of a suspect, when there is concrete evidence, what author to date has ever provided that, and I doubt if anybody in the future will either.
When writing a book , all one can do is make a good case for a suspect, with enough plausible recommendations, to make the reader , find it hopefully intresting.
Richard. |
Richard Brian Nunweek
Chief Inspector
Username: Richardn
Post Number: 556
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, January 08, 2004 - 2:03 pm: | |
suzi,
my maths failed me. 116 years.
Richard. |
Natalie Severn
Inspector
Username: Severn
Post Number: 175
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, January 08, 2004 - 2:17 pm: | |
HI Colin various sources refer to Mary finding refuge with the nuns of The Womens refuge -still in existence in Crispin Street[now being refurbished as flats].It is near where Millers Court stood.Various stories about the nuns have circulated over the years, one of which is that one of them stated "none of it would have happened if it hadnt been for Mary Kelly"-make of that what you will.Stephen knight/Melvyn Fairclough are main but not sole sources.Best Natalie |
Natalie Severn
Inspector
Username: Severn
Post Number: 176
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, January 08, 2004 - 2:27 pm: | |
Again-Colin-it was just a thought of mine really that because none of Mary"s relatives ever appeared she might have had a false name and might have been spinning a yarn about her Welsh miner husband who died in a mining disaster.I thought it possible that Mary might have been the widow of a Fenian and might herself have sympathies in this direction hence the secrecy and camouflage.She was given a wonderful funeral paid for by the priest himself[catholic].Interesting.
However I think that Mary was actually a poor young woman who was getting by as best as she could at the time with alcohol problems to boot. Natalie. |
Suzi Hanney
Inspector
Username: Suzi
Post Number: 182
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, January 08, 2004 - 3:54 pm: | |
Richard !! 116 .....yes! 'm crap at maths too!! Incidently off the record any ideas..not flat!! for Sat?? email me!!
Natalie-I always think..why Kelly?? good 'stage name' for someone posing as an irish girl!..why not Davies or was it Davis?? ..lots of them in Wales boyo!! Can't help but think that there is a Welsh connection(!) here somewhere!!
Cheers
Suzi |
John Savage
Detective Sergeant
Username: Johnsavage
Post Number: 133
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, January 08, 2004 - 4:56 pm: | |
Hi Natalie
According to Phillip Sugden's book, the expenses of Mary Kelly's funeral were paid by Henry Wilton, the virger of St. Leonard's Church Spitalfield. This was in fact C of E, not Catholic. The courtege made its way to St. Patrick's Roman Catholic Cemetery, Leytonstone.
Regards
John Savage |
Natalie Severn
Inspector
Username: Severn
Post Number: 180
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, January 08, 2004 - 5:08 pm: | |
John,thanks for the correction- it changes things
quite a bit.
Suzi,Yes I also think about the stage connections McCarthy had and the tall flamboyant Mary---canthelp wondering if they were related in some way.
Best Natalie |
Suzi Hanney
Inspector
Username: Suzi
Post Number: 185
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, January 08, 2004 - 5:18 pm: | |
Natalie-John's post was interesting wasn't it the C of E /Catholicthing is very interesting..praps religion didn't come into it..p'raps Wilton was a 'chum' of McCarthy and did the right thing by the Mary girl!! All sounding very theatrical isn't it!!Don't think Mary was tall though..small and stout is the general idea -with a kick like a carthorse when provoked I reckon!Quite sure that Mary and McCarthy were related in some fashion though..what about the letters that Mary got via McCarthy from Ireland,Brother Johnto (!) etc.etc.
I'll look forward to your comments
Cheers
Suzi |
Richard Brian Nunweek
Chief Inspector
Username: Richardn
Post Number: 557
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, January 09, 2004 - 3:54 am: | |
Hi suzi,
The letters intrique me. did Barnett say that she had nothing to do with her family?. Yet they obviously were aware of where she was living, so she must have contacted them at least once to give an address, or somebody did?.
What happened to the letters, did she burn them , or were they still in her room ,when she was killed. If they were , surely the police would have known, the address of the relatives, and been able to contact them.
I have been pondering over the possibility , that somebody else , other then Mary Jane, contacted her folks, in order for them to try and straighten out their wayward daughter, even her brother was reported to have visited Kelly at the court, barnett knew the regiment, he was in , and where he was accurately stationed, so such a visit must have occured.
It strikes me , a lot occured in Kellys life , in the last few weeks leading up to her death.
Richard. |
Natalie Severn
Inspector
Username: Severn
Post Number: 183
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Friday, January 09, 2004 - 4:44 pm: | |
Hi Suzi and Richard,I cant say much more than I said really.Mary"s family appear to not want to be seen-maybe they were rather conventional and she kicked against that with her drinking and prostituting herself.If they were based in Wales they would no doubt have been surrounded by chapel goers possibly full of rectitude and gossip
and maybe would have felt the pressure of too much scrutiny had they gone to her funeral.
Mary herself didnt appear capable of fitting into that kind of life and according to Joe was off to Cardiff where she started her highjinks as soon as she could.Sounds to me like she had a pretty bad drink problem and needed to finance it.
Cheers Natalie. |
Suzi Hanney
Inspector
Username: Suzi
Post Number: 194
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Friday, January 09, 2004 - 9:00 pm: | |
Richard-
Was just about to go to bed and thought I'd have a look at this!! (Thanks for yr email!!)
All this business about mjk and her letters..seemingly coming and going via Mc Carthy!! and there's all this toot about mjk asking jb to read to her!!! Letters surely aren't written to people who can't read them! o.k.Richard..let's start a serious thread!!..WHO WAS WRITING THOSE LETTERS to mjk??!! |Am very intersted in this..hereby may hang a tale.....? All best Suzi |
Mike Park
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 04, 2004 - 12:36 pm: | |
Hello all!
As a newbie here I have been trawling throught the documents and postings for a few days and I thinks it's time for me to wade in a give a few opinions, based on my knowledge and reading of these materials.
Let me start off by explaining a few things. I DO think that the murder of MJK is significant and that it IS the work of the Whitechappel killer, but not for the same reasons that Richard and others have posted here.
MJK is important because her killing is the most vicious, longest lasting and had the most physical evidence collected about it. From a modern criminal profiling/Crime Scene Investigative perspective, it has the most "evidence" to offer. We can "see" what JtR may have done to the others, had he had 2 hours to work on them. Why did he have 2 hours? Dumb luck (don't under estimate the role of dumb luck in a serial killer case). JtR, a disorganized killer, is out cruising for a victim of opportunity. Not many women out who match his prefered victim (35+, 5ft ish), but what luck there's one who is propositioning him (MJK). She has a bed nearby, what luck no reason to do this one in a hurry (or what luck, the door is unlocked, he doesn't need to grab one off the street).
To me, the mutilation of MJK is quite similar to the others, just taken to the extreme - organs missing, intestines removed and placed on one side of the body, other body parts/organs placed around the victim. This organ placement ritual has meaning to the killer and I don't think anyone has yet determined what that meaning is.
And let's not get too concerned about MJK being the only (as far as we know) victim that was killed and mutalated indoors. As I stated above, this may mean he just had the good luck of finally getting one he could do indoors. Serial killers can make slight changes in location and MO during a killing spree. For instance, Gary Ridgeway, the Green River Killer, only dumped 5 or so of his victims in the Green River. The King County Sherrifs made the mistake of discounting other killings because they were not in or near water. As it turned out later, they missed 3 earlier victims of Ridgeway for that reason. Additionaly, victim Carol Christianson was posed in a bizzare manner (bag over her head, bottle of wine in her hand, a pyramid of ground sausage over her abdomin and two fish across her shoulders), much different that the others. Some investigators thought she wan't a victim of the Green River Killer. We now know she was and that the circumstances of her killing were simply different.
And again, to compare JtR to the Green River Killer for a moment, Ridway was able to kill 48 prostitutes in a 3 year span and then stop completely for over 10 years (mainly because he was still able to revisit undiscovered dump sites to "re-live" the events in his mind instead of risking getting caught killing again when the heat was on him). He then killed 3 more women in the 1990s, at least 2 of which the authorities did not link to the Green River Killer until he told them about it (one was even ruled a suicide by the coroner). If these kinds of mistakes by authorities and self-control by a killer can occur in modern times, I certainly think it is possible, even probable, that the same kind of thing occurred back in the 1880-1890s.
For these reasons, I suspect that JtR killed before and after the 5 we normally attribute to him.
One other thing I have wondered about is serial killers don't suddenly start killing...they usually graduate from burglary, voyuerism and/or rape to murder. Has anyone done a search of the historical police records for these kinds of crimes and or persons who have commited them in the previous 10 years before 1888?
Just curious.
Thanks for the lively debate and discussion
Mike |
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 1088
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 04, 2004 - 5:34 pm: | |
Mike,
Thank you for a splendid post. It probably won't come as a surprise to most people here that I agree with every word of it.
Regarding the Ripper's prior activities, I think this question has come up on some occasions. For those of us who don't have access to the police records such an investigation is of course difficult, but many of us here -- I included -- have put forward the benefits of doing such a research. It is my belief that if one would come across an individual in the files that has been taken in for disorderly conduct, vices, arson and maybe even violent threats and assaults (possibly with a criminal behaviour that is escalating and developing) during a period of years prior to the Ripper murders, it would be interesting. The problem is, that most of these crimes would have been rather common offenses in East End.
All the best
Glenn L Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Caroline Anne Morris
Chief Inspector
Username: Caz
Post Number: 704
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, February 06, 2004 - 8:53 am: | |
Hi Glenn,
Another problem would be that if, as you maintain, the ripper would have avoided ‘violent threats and assaults’, or ‘disorderly conduct’, that could be witnessed by a third party, it is quite conceivable that he would never have been identifiable after the event, depending on who were his surviving victims and the circumstances. Before the murders began in earnest, for example, a prostitute would not necessarily have been quick to report any such incidents to the police.
Love,
Caz
|
Michael Raney
Detective Sergeant
Username: Mikey559
Post Number: 74
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Friday, February 06, 2004 - 12:04 pm: | |
Mike,
I agree with Glenn, excellent post. I'm positive that there are killings at least before MJK if not after. Also as Caz says, these prior acts may not have been reported because of who the victims were and the general circumstances of life in the East End at that time in history.
Mikey |
Mike Park
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Thursday, February 05, 2004 - 9:31 am: | |
Glenn,
Thanks for the words of encouragement. I have read a great many of your posts over the last week or so and I also agree with much of what you say as well.. Birds of a feather I suppose ;)
I realize that the research into prior activities might be difficult or nearly impossible (since many of the records have probably been destroyed over the years - stolen, thown out, lost in the Blitz), I was wondering if anyone had done this. As well, it seems that many people have their favorite suspect, I wonder if they have researched the background of their suspects to see these kinds of behaviours.
I realize that many of these crimes would have been common, but I think that SOME would have been less so, such as a Peeping Tom, or someone who stole undergarments or someone who was local and a frequent "John" in the area. And Arson is one that I didn't think of...
Anyway, I will keep reading about the vitims and suspects as I have not made up my mind on a favorite suspect yet (from what little I have read, I don't think anyone brought up thus far is right) or on all the vitims...but the research continues..
Mike
BTW, I realize I may have posted this in the wrong thread so please excuse me...Mozilla and tabbed-browsing can be confusing at times ;) |
|
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.
|
|
|
|
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page