|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
S.R.
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 28, 2005 - 8:57 pm: | 
|
This is the first time I have looked at Joseph Barnett and the theory around him. I dont wish to offend anyone, but this theory has some holes in it.
I. the removal of certian organs suggests some form of deviate, particularly the uterus. Now it is possible he had some lame motive, or hatred of whores,but he took these organs on top of his dehumanising the corpses.
If Barnett wished to shock the public, I am quite sure he would have with just killing his victims, and even the mutilations were not neccessary. It is blatently obvious, the killer treasured the extras he took.The uterus being the ultimate trophy of the female identity.
- So, if the theory of Barnett has one goal in hand - to proove he was spooking Kelly out of the proffession, there is one small problem?
Why did he take Kellys uterus and heart - who was he trying to scare or shock at this stage? There is no reason for him to do it, as it was Kelly herself he was trying to scare.
- Also, does anyone think this is a ghastly overeaction.The catalyst being he lost his job.I put it to a few friends, this point, and they all said the same thing.The most likely thing he would have done was to just find another job if he wanted to support Kelly. Turning into Jack the ripper is a tad overeaction. |
Leanne Perry
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Leanne
Post Number: 2032
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 03, 2006 - 4:20 pm: |
|
G'day SR,
Saying that Barnett merely wanted to shock the public and/or discourage Mary Kelly from prostitution is an understatement. Barnett's hatred stemmed much deeper than that. He never grew up with a father, who died when he was 6 (I think), and his mother deserted her 5 children shortly after that.
There is no record of what happened to her but both mother and father were Irish immigrants, and it was common for Irish widows to abandon the responsibility of motherhood for a life as a prostitute.
The loss of Barnetts well-paying job, added to the fear of losing another important woman the same way as he lost the first, added to nagging jealousy caused by Mary's preference for her ex-lover Joseph Flemming I feel fuelled the murders. Then when Mary rejected his return the afternoon before she died that was the last staw! He flipped and killed her in a fit of rage. realising that it was all over. And so ended the 'Jack the Ripper' personification.
The removal of a uterus suggests to me a deep hatred of motherhood. If Barnett didn't know the exact location of the organ or what it looked like, it wouldn't take a genius to know it's rough whereabouts.
If the killer really treasured the bits he took, I'd say they made him feel that he'd finally won over woman hood. They would never leave him and would always be in his mind.
'Why did he take Kellys uterus and heart - who was he trying to scare or shock at this stage?' Only Kelly's heart wasn't located when the body was pieced together for burial. Her uterus and kidnies were back where they belonged. He had her heart so she could never give it to Joseph Flemming or any other man. If he couldn't have her, no one else could!
'Also, does anyone think this is a ghastly overeaction.' Read up about other murders in history. Read about the husband who murdered his wife, cut her up and then poured acid over her remains so that she ceased to be attractive to other males.
LEANNE |
Leanne Perry
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Leanne
Post Number: 2033
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 03, 2006 - 11:34 pm: |
|
G'day,
It has been argued here in the past, that if it was so common or Irish widows to abandon their children for the easy life of a prostitute, then how come there weren't more Jack the Rippers. That's like asking: "If so many people contracted venereal disease from prostitutes in those days how come they all didn't go out and kill a prostitute?" It takes a very unique individual.
It has also been argued here in the past that there is no record of Joseph Barnett every being violent towards Mary Kelly or anyone else. There have been countless cases where people have murdered, and friends and neighbours have said that the villain was the last person they'd pick to be a murderer. Many Killers are 'camoflaged' under a 'mask of sanity', that makes them appear soft and gentle and seemingly willing to do anything to ensure the victims wellfare.
Before the Ripper murders when Barnett was working at Billingsgate Fish Market, he had to be there well before the 5a.m. start of trade and a porter's work was over by lunchtime. He would have been home again just intime to catch Mary as she was getting ready to go out drinking with her friends. Witnesses said that she often came home the worse for drink and this would trigger rows. Barnett couldn't have joined her on these night time excursions because he had to get some sleep to be up at the market early in the morning. I wonder how they spent any time together. Barnett may have tried going out drinking with her and that resulted in him losing his job.
A street-seller of oranges earnt a lot less money, and he would have still had to have been at the fruit markets nice and early, then out in the streets of Whitechapel selling his product.
LEANNE |
Leanne Perry
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Leanne
Post Number: 2039
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, January 05, 2006 - 12:49 am: |
|
G'day S.R,
How's this for a 'ghastly overeaction'?:
I just read a recent report dated December 20, 2005, that told of a 44 year old Australian man who beat his wife to death in Thailand after 9 years of marriage.
He blugened her with a cricket bat for 10 minutes, then stabbed her in the back.
He said: "I guess I lost my temper. It was the first one in nine years....She had been working long hours and that makes it hard. We had had not much time together." Sound like anyone we know of?
LEANNE |
S.R
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 03, 2006 - 11:05 pm: |
|
Hi Leanne,
Thanks for straightening something out for me. There was more to Barnett than just trying to scare Kelly. You are saying he was a deviate due to a rich tapestry of events in his life - that is OK.The point I was trying to make was that Jack the Ripper was Jack the Ripper by choice. He was a deviate. Not because a man simply lost a job and could not get another right away.
I absolutey think he treasured the extras he took- as he took a large risk in taking them.
By taking the uterus I think he has shown us his cards. The uterus being the place where the embryo is created from the ovum situated there.He is taking away their right to be females - symbolically.There is definatly a problem with females or whores here.
If I were to support Barnett - it would certainly be because he was a physco-sexual deviate from past events more than an attempt to scare Mary. In any case, he must have known it wasnt working, as Kelly continued to work through the ripper attacks. At this stage I still support a motive similar to say Maybrick - the perfect fitting profile for JtR - even if his motive was fabricated.Someone like Tumblety also is well fitting. |
Leanne Perry
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Leanne
Post Number: 2051
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, January 09, 2006 - 5:00 am: |
|
G'day S.R,
It would have taken alot to make a serial killer like Jack the Ripper, and because it's over 100 years later we have to take a very close look at things like the time-period, the environment, the available technology, the lack of mental health facilities especially those available to the poor and the problems in the police force.
The Internet has allowed me to read genuine eye-witness reports on other sites describing Whitechapel in the late Victorian period, the standard of living, the problem of unemployment, descriptions of the markets etc.
The first Ripper book I read was 'The Diary of Jack the Ripper' in 1995, and I was convinced the mystery was solved and Maybrick was Jack. Then I discovered this Website and saw how little faith there actually was in the Diary's authenticity.
Hurry up and register with this site so you can join the debate and explore issues about the case with us!
LEANNE |
|
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.
|
|
|
|
