Introduction
Victims
Suspects
Witnesses
Ripper Letters
Police Officials
Official Documents
Press Reports
Victorian London
Message Boards
Ripper Media
Authors
Dissertations
Timelines
Games & Diversions
About the Casebook

 Search:
 

Join the Chat Room!

Maxwell's wins over Dr Bond 100 years... Log Out | Topics | Search
Moderators | Edit Profile

Casebook: Jack the Ripper - Message Boards » Witnesses » Maxwell, Caroline » Maxwell's wins over Dr Bond 100 years later « Previous Next »

Author Message
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Steve Murray
Unregistered guest
Posted on Monday, July 04, 2005 - 3:49 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Many people belive that MJK may hold the key to the JtR saga and I believe in a roundabout way this is in fact the case. The problem that most people have with Maxwell's statement is due to the fact that it hurts the case against the suspect they want to believe in. I can't find any reason why she should be discredited. Once you take a good look at the facts it becomes clear to me that Dr Bond's post-mortem report sank Maxwells statement. However as James Tully tells us in his book, Prisoner 1197, (by the way i think his suspect is a little bit suspect)his friend the eminent Dr Hocking, who has carried out over 40,000 autopsies says that rigor mortis starts to kick in around 2-4 hours and not the 6-12 hours stated by Dr Bond. this brings Maxwell's statement back into play. MJK could have been seen by Maxwell as she said. Lets be honest, medical science is far more advanced today than back in 1888. I fully understand why at the time the police and the then coroner MacDonald went with Dr Bond, as today the establishment stick together and both would have ran into very deep water if they sided with Maxwell over Dr Bond. It seems to me that every time i pick up a new book on JtR each author leaves out details which do not fit his suspect. I have had many suspects floating around in my head over the years but now feel more and more sure that JtR IS A MYTH! Take a look at just 3 of the so called 5 victims Nichols, Stride and MJK apart from them all having been murdered in the same area there is no real link. How anyone can just push aside Maxwell's statement blows me away! COPY CAT KILLINGS!
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Bob Hinton
Inspector
Username: Bobhinton

Post Number: 313
Registered: 2-2003
Posted on Friday, July 08, 2005 - 6:06 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Hi,

Unfortunately trying to establish time of death by using rigor mortis is an exercise full of problems.

First off there is no standard time for the onset of rigor - I have personally witnessed it commencing as little as an hour after death.

Rigor mortis is a chemical reaction and like most chemical reactions is effected by differing conditions - one of these being the temperature.

As a rule of thumb rigor starts earlier the higher the temperature. So a person snuggled down under a duvet in a warm room is going to commence rigor a lot quicker than someone left on a freezing cold street.

If you look at the probable temperature in MJKs room you can safely say it will be on the very low side. The weather was damp and cold, the window was broken and there was virtually no heating in the room apart from some warm ashes which wouldn't have that greater effect on the timing.

Also the body was eviscerated and uncovered, all these factors suggesting that the onset of rigor would have been delayed.

Bob Hinton
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Suzi Hanney
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Suzi

Post Number: 2749
Registered: 7-2003
Posted on Saturday, July 09, 2005 - 7:02 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Hi
The 'problem' regarding rigor mortis has always been a bone of contention as far as I'm concerned..the relevant differences in temperature with regard to the onset of rigor may have a great deal of bearing on the 'time of death' re Mary...a cold, dank,damp room with a broken window and a body stripped of most of it's skin,muscle,tissue etc would,I'd imagine have kept that body 'un rigored' to such a point that time of death would have been impossible to state!
Maybe though....our HUGE (?) fire MAY have been a naive attempt to re-adjust time of death by 'encouraging' the onset of rigor..

Suzi
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

c.d.
Unregistered guest
Posted on Saturday, July 09, 2005 - 10:09 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Steve,

You mentioned the possibility of a copy cat killing as have others on the boards. If I understand the term correctly, a copy cat killing can be carried out by anyone who is so inclined and who has access to the details of the previous killings. Given the fact that the details of the earlier murders were known throughout England as well as other countries, doesn't it seem to be one heck of a coincidence that the copy cat struck in Whitechapel within walking distance of the other murder cites? Furthermore, if we accept the possibility of a copy cat killing, then not only do we have to come up with an explanation for why Jack stopped killing but we have to explain why the copy cat stopped as well.

"Never try to teach a pig to sing. You won't succeed and you will only end up making the pig angry."
Old Irish Proverb
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

CB
Unregistered guest
Posted on Thursday, July 14, 2005 - 4:11 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Hi Steve,

The problem I have with believing maxwell, are the times. She claimed to see Kelly talking to a man around 8:45. If he was the ripper, he would have two hours to kill Kelly, and make his escape before the body was discoverd. If the man Maxwell saw Kelly with was the ripper, You would have to acount for some polite conversation before the offer was made. Then Kelly and the man go back to her place. Kelly undresses, folds her cloths. She gets comfortable, the ripper strikes. He then has to mutilate the body and make good his escape before the body is discoverd.

I believe that if Maxwell is correct then the ripper Killed Kelly after nine in the morning, and left no later then 10:30 in order to make his escape. This gives the ripper an hour an halve to cut and mutilate Kelly's body. Buy it?

Macnaughten, claimed that the ripper must have spent two hours cutting up Kelly. Inspector Dew claimed that the coroner was not sure about the time of Death, but he was certain that Kelly could not have been alive after eight in the morning. There comes a time when developing a theory that it is wise to relise that the detectives, and the Doctors who worked the case, knew a little something.

The ripper would have also had to make an escape in daylight with alot of people about. Look how many people claimed to see Kelly that morning. In my opinion the ripper would have been awful luck not to be spotted by someone leaving that late in the morning.

You may be right. The ripper case is strange, and it is possible. So who knows?

Hi C.D.

Most people who suggest the copycat theory claim that Barnett killed Kelly, and in order to draw suspicion away from himself, he killed Kelly in ripper fashion. It does not have to be Barnett, it could be anyone who killed Kelly, and wanted to take suspicion away from themself by making the murder look like a ripper murder. In those cases the copycat killer would not be a serial killer. You would not have to explain why he stoped killing. I agree if there was another serial killer out there who was killing woman in ripper fashion, you would have to explain why the killer stops.

Your friend, Brad

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Nicholas Smith
Sergeant
Username: Diddles

Post Number: 26
Registered: 6-2005
Posted on Friday, July 15, 2005 - 7:56 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

G'day Bob, Brad, Steve and Suzie, everyone.

Bob, as you will know I did a lengthy article about MJK's time of death in one of the 'Ripperoo' magazines. I can't remember which one it was, but I can find out as I still have the master copies.

Anyway, I was able to pin down the time of MJK'S murder to a couple of hours - around about 4 or 5 in the morning. This takes into account the state of the body, rigor mortis, heat of the room etc.

If you like I'll post this script here tomorrow.

Sincerely
Jules
Former Editor
Ripperoo
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Diana
Chief Inspector
Username: Diana

Post Number: 688
Registered: 2-2003
Posted on Saturday, July 16, 2005 - 11:59 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Maxwell says Mary had just vomited. Bond found a meal of potatoes and fish in her stomach. End of story.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Andrew Spallek
Chief Inspector
Username: Aspallek

Post Number: 907
Registered: 5-2003
Posted on Tuesday, July 19, 2005 - 10:54 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Diana's point is well taken. Even though vomiting doesn't always empty the stomach contents it is most unlikely that Mary would have eaten a meal if she were feeling that ill.

You have to be extremely sceptical about witness statements, especially those that are at odds with other evidence. Read witness accounts of nearly every airplane crash. Invariably witnesses claim that the plane was "in flames" as it flew into the ground -- even when investigations prove positively that there was no pre-impact fire.

Andy S.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Diana
Chief Inspector
Username: Diana

Post Number: 701
Registered: 2-2003
Posted on Friday, July 22, 2005 - 7:38 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Today I had an interesting conversation with a friend. We are both married to men who were raised on farms and we were comparing experiences visiting the farms of our husbands' childhoods.

My friend told me that when visiting her mother and father in law on the farm, her father in law told her he was going to slaughter a calf and asked if she wanted to watch. She did not.

Some time later he returned to the house carrying the calf's liver in a bucket. It was going to be cooked for their lunch. Here's the interesting part. She said it was steaming. I asked her what time of year this was and she said fall.

Apparently, since the calf was newly dead and the liver was still hot, when it was exposed to the cold autumn air it created some kind of vapor.

I immediately thought of Mary Kelly. Her room was unheated. It was November. If this thing that happened with the calf is a common phenomenon, we have another hint as to time of death.

If Mrs. Maxwell had indeed seen Mary when she claimed to then Mary would not have long been dead when the man came for the rent.

Imagine how the Victorian mind would have processed and described the sight: I saw the most awful sight of my life. She was torn into pieces with bits of her all over the room. And blood everywhere. Worst of all, a horrid miasma seemed to rise from the bed on which the body lay. It wafted round the room like a thousand evil spirits.

None of the contemporary accounts mention anything about steam. Of course this is an argument from silence with all the weakness that accompanies an argument from silence. But it can be of some value when put with other evidence.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

CB
Unregistered guest
Posted on Friday, July 15, 2005 - 10:56 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Hi Nicholas,

It would be very interesting to read your article! I think that cry of murder that two witnesses heard was Kelly. I believe she was killed around 3:45 I think that your time of death is accurate.

Your friend, Brad
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

c.d.
Unregistered guest
Posted on Friday, July 15, 2005 - 3:15 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Hi Brad,

Thanks for your response to my post. The problem I have with Kelly's murder being a copy cat murder is that it seems the killer went way beyond what was necessary to make it look like the previous murders attributed to the Ripper. Had Barnett, or anyone else, wanted to kill Mary and make it look like the Ripper's work, he could have stopped the mutilations way before he did and still have the police think it was the Ripper's work. Could Barnett, or anyone else, really have slashed Mary's face beyond recognition and ripped out her intestines just to cover their actions? I really have trouble accepting that.

"Never try to teach a pig to sing. You won't succeed and you will only end up making the pig angry."
Old Irish Folk Saying
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

David Cartwright
Unregistered guest
Posted on Saturday, July 16, 2005 - 1:17 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Hi C.D. & Brad.

C.D., I agree with your argument & conclusions. I don't see anything other than that Kelly was a Ripper victim. If anyone had intended to stage a copycat killing, he could have achieved that, and convinced the police, by simply severing the throat, and cutting open the abdomen.

Why take the risk of discovery and capture, by staying around for two hours and cutting Kelly to pieces?? This would have been totally unnecessary for achieving the copycat object.
To me, this was the Ripper indulging his gory fantasies & gratification to the full behind locked doors & undisturbed, something he was unable to do on the streets, where time was short.

Brad, I agree with you that the official view is the most reliable here, and Dr.Bond's verdict on the time of death has to be accepted as more reliable than other theories about the time of death. I don't accept any of Mrs.Maxwell's story.
Good point made by Diana too.

Frankly, I don't know how this copycat thing got started. Sounds to me like bored Ripperologists dreaming up a new mystery to keep their interest alive.

Best wishes guys.
DAVID C.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert

Post Number: 4716
Registered: 3-2003
Posted on Saturday, July 23, 2005 - 9:25 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Hi Diana

Interesting. Of course, Bowyer and the other people who looked through the window wouldn't have noticed any steam, even if there had been any, because it was so dark. By the time entry was obtained, any steam would doubtless have stopped. So I'm not sure how far we can take your argument, because people just weren't in a position to see steam in the first place.

There's a reference to Chapman's steaming entrails in Farson.

Robert
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Glenn G. Lauritz Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna

Post Number: 3801
Registered: 8-2003
Posted on Saturday, July 23, 2005 - 10:06 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Hi David C,

"If anyone had intended to stage a copycat killing, he could have achieved that, and convinced the police, by simply severing the throat, and cutting open the abdomen."

Yes, that is what people think -- that a copy cat murder always have to display minor injuries than the 'originak'. However, that is a completely wrong deduction.
A lot of cases has shown that copy cats can be just as horrendous as the works of the original killer, sometimes even worse. This is mostly because they believe the murder might not be linked to the serial killer otherwise.

But the main factor to consider is that if the copy cat murder is a domestic one, the extreme mutilations also has another important function (at least in the killer's head because it seldom works and they always seem to underestimate the police);
namely to make the identification of the victim as difficult as possible!
Another factor is that the mutilation also are based on real emotions from the killer, and not just inflicted for the sole purpose of copying. Often it is a combination.

"Frankly, I don't know how this copycat thing got started. Sounds to me like bored Ripperologists dreaming up a new mystery to keep their interest alive."

No actually I assume it started because some experts actually began looking at the facts objectively -- as well as on other similar cases in crime history -- and not just accepting clean off that it automatically has to be part of a series.
It is not just bored Ripperologists that are considering this possibility but also other criminal experts.
In my mind there are loads of indications in the Kelly murder that makes such considerations justified.

All the best
G. Andersson, writer/crime historian
Sweden

The Swedes are the men That Will not be Blamed for Nothing
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Diana
Chief Inspector
Username: Diana

Post Number: 704
Registered: 2-2003
Posted on Monday, July 25, 2005 - 7:50 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

OK, the next step in my steam theory is to figure out just how much light Bowyer would have had.

It was mid morning and unless it was overcast or raining there would be a fair amount of sunlight.

Then you would have to know which way Mary's window faced. Would the sunlight be coming in over Bowyer's shoulder or would it be coming from the other direction which would mean he would be standing in the shadow created by the building?

If the body wasn't giving off steam any more then it had been there for awhile.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

CB
Unregistered guest
Posted on Sunday, July 24, 2005 - 1:45 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Hi all,

I feel Kelly was a ripper victim. Some people believe that Barnett killed Kelly, and Barnett was in fact Jack The Ripper. Some people believe that Barnett Killed Kelly, and in order to draw suspicion away from himself he made the murder look like a ripper murder. Some people believe that Kelly staged her own death, and they mutilated the body to make it look like a ripper victim, and to make identification of the woman difficult.

If I had to choose one scenario, I would choose Barnett being the ripper. I agree that it would have been difficult for Barnett to do what was done to kelly. Kelly was the woman he loved. If Joe killed her in a fit a passion, he would not of had to do what he did to the body. She was a prostitute. It was considered a dangerous life. The alibi would have been more important. of course this is rational thinking. Barnett could have paniced. He may mutilated Kelly in such a fashion to make sure that the police thought it was a Jack crime.

It is posible that any client of Kelly could have killed her, for any reason, and tried to make it look like a ripper murder. However, I think Kelly was a ripper victim. Some detectives who worked the case differd on who they thought was a ripper victim. Abberline and others thougt Tabram was a ripper victim. Other detectives thought some of the murders after Kelly were ripper victims, but they all believed that Mary Jane was killed by Jack the ripper. If you start doubting the detectives, and the Doctors the case would become a huge unsolvable puzzle. I have always thoght that some people have really over thought the case. Alot of real smart people have an interest in the case. They have backgrounds in various fields, and they make good arguments. However just because something is posible does not make it likely. It is posible that Kelly was not a ripper victim. It is posible that Stride was not a ripper victim, and it is posible that Tabram was a ripper victim. Were do we go from hear. You pursue the avenues, but it may lead you in the wrong direction.

I have a straight forward aproach. I think that when investigating this case, you must investigate every one of the main five murders as ripper murders untill you come across some evidence that convinces you a victim is not a ripper victim.

The debate will go on. That is purpose of the boards. I respect all opinions, and I have a great deal of respect for Glenn's knowledge on such matters. However, no one has come up with any solid evidence to suggest that Kelly was not a Jack victim. Too study the ripper murders, and regard the kelly murder as a copycat murder because it is possible, would be like cutting your foot off after stepping on a nail because it could get infected. I think the kelly murder is the most important murder in the series.

You friend,Brad

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

David Cartwright
Unregistered guest
Posted on Saturday, July 23, 2005 - 11:52 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Hi Glenn.

As always, you make perfect sense.
My problem is that the reference to a domestic killing, is usually aimed at Joe Barnett, and I just can't find a single shred of evidence, or sound motive for accusing the poor guy.
But this is not the thread for that discussion, so I'll have to leave that for now.

I came to these boards with the idea of learning from those who may know things that I haven't learned from long studies of Sugden, Begg etc.
It's clear that you harbour doubts about Kelly, and knowing you to be a very sound and sensible man, I feel that you must have a good reason for these doubts.

Trying desparately to stay sensible, I can't imagine some guy coming along with a personal grievance against Kelly, not just killing her, but hacking her literally to pieces with almost unbelievable savagery, then carrying on normally in life without ever committing such an act again.

I feel that you're average man in the street would be incapable of butchery of another human being on that scale. But the Ripper WAS, and had already proved it.
But something seems to put some doubt in your mind Glenn, so I have to take that seriously.
I'm sure we can find an appropriate time and place for you to explain these things to me.

I never seek confrontation, or go on ego trips.
You learn nothing that way. The personal conclusions I've reached on the Ripper case could all be wrong. What I DO aim for however, is to stay sensible about these things at all times.

Best wishes Glenn.
DAVID C.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Caroline Anne Morris
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Caz

Post Number: 1970
Registered: 2-2003
Posted on Wednesday, August 03, 2005 - 5:12 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Hi Glenn,

But the main factor to consider is that if the copy cat murder is a domestic one, the extreme mutilations also has another important function (at least in the killer's head because it seldom works and they always seem to underestimate the police);
namely to make the identification of the victim as difficult as possible!


But that can't apply to Mary Kelly's murderer, because he left her in her own room - it's a bit of a giveaway.

And it certainly doesn't apply to Joe Barnett because he identified her!

Riddle:

What would Jack the Ripper have done if he met Mary Kelly in November 1888 and she offered to take him somewhere they would be undisturbed all night?

Answer:

Precisely what your domestic killer is supposed to have done. Why wouldn't he?

Love,

Caz
X
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Diana
Chief Inspector
Username: Diana

Post Number: 720
Registered: 2-2003
Posted on Wednesday, August 03, 2005 - 8:37 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

I just finished checking the Victorian London section of the Casebook and the cloud cover on the ninth was 100%.

Mary's corpse may have or have not been emitting steam when Bowyer looked in the window. We'll never know.

Even if the sun was behind him, it wouldn't have penetrated those clouds. Lacking any source of artificial light that room must have appeared quite dim.

I'm sure that this ambience made it worse for Bowyer. He saw enough to transfix him and what he couldn't see, his imagination must have filled in.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Luke Whitley
Unregistered guest
Posted on Wednesday, August 03, 2005 - 5:55 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Hi Caz.

I absolutely agree with all you say here.
I'm always willing to give Glenn a hearing, whatever his views, but no matter how many times I look at the evidence in the Kelly murder, I'm still totally of the opinion that she WAS a Ripper victim.

I believe that the reason there were no murders in October, was due to the increased police and private patrols, plus the fear among the prostitutes following the double event. I think it likely that the Ripper was still on the prowl in October, but for one reason or another, came up empty handed.

I believe that what he found in Kelly, was exactly what he was seeking, and that was a victim who would take him indoors, where he wouldn't be disturbed. It would certainly have helped his cause, to be well-dressed, prosperous looking, (as Hutchinson described), and with a suitable disarming manner.

I simply just can't see this savage butchery being a domestic killing, and certainly not the work of poor Joe Barnett.

Warmest regards Caz.
LUKE WHITLEY
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Nicholas Smith
Sergeant
Username: Diddles

Post Number: 33
Registered: 6-2005
Posted on Tuesday, August 09, 2005 - 9:45 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

G'day Diana, Brad. Sorry for the late reply but I've been sleeping

Diana: When you first mentioned the steaming liver from the calf, the poor little bugger would have been killed withing 1/4hr to 1/2hr max before it's liver was taken in fo cooking regardless of the weather conditions.

Probably so with MJK. Her body was cut to ribbons and exposed to the elements helping the body cool down quite rapidly. Even if there was a fire and she had an electric blanket on, there wouldn't have been any steam coming from it.

Brad: G'day mate, I've found one article I wrote, but in that one I supported the 'I'm not quite dead yet' theory - surmising that Kelly was not the person found in 13 Millers condominiom. I'm still trying to find the other one about the time of death.

Bear with me until I come out of hibernation again.

Nicholas.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Nicholas Smith
Sergeant
Username: Diddles

Post Number: 43
Registered: 6-2005
Posted on Thursday, August 18, 2005 - 7:09 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)



A Ripperoo Article
This article originally appeared in Ripperoo, the flagship magazine of the Australian Cloak and Dagger Club. For more information, view our Ripperoo page. Our thanks to the editor of Ripperoo for permission to reprint this article.

ESTIMATING MARY KELLY'S TIME OF DEATH
By Cherise McClain, Carl Dodd & Julian Rosenthal

The murder of Mary Jane Kelly has probably raised more questions than answers in regards to the other Whitechapel murders. Debate has raged over whether it was in fact Kelly who was found dead and mutilated in 13 Millers Court that morning. After the dead woman was found in Kelly’s room, several people supposedly saw Mary Kelly alive and walking around. In addition to this identity problem, the corpses ‘time of the death’ has eluded investigators like no other case. What we are going to do here is take another look and try to come up with a way to logically determine the approximate time and possible events leading to her death. If we are lucky, we might be able to help eliminate some of the confusion here.

In order to calculate the time of Mary Kelly’s murder, we’re going to use four items: witness information, the Ripper’s previous actions, rigor mortis coupled with the Coroner’s report and lastly, common sense. The reader should understand that there is no guarantee that our estimate of the situation will be correct. We, the authors do feel that we have come up with a realistic estimate and scenario that may explain Mary Kelly’s murder a little bit better than what Ripper investigations have had to use.

Witness Information:
Where many people get confused is when they read too much into what witnesses say. When an investigator works with statements from witnesses, the investigator should not nitpick a statement to the point where the investigator gets confused about what has been said. This is one of the points where common sense comes into play.

In the book: ‘The Jack the Ripper A-Z’ Paul Begg, Martin Fido, Keith Skinner, information on all five of the five canonical ‘Ripper’ victims plus others, can be found. The leading Ripper investigators have gone to great lengths to make sure that the information in their book is accurate. Using this book, we will try to narrow down the times when the Ripper attacked his victim and killed her. The copy that we will be using is the one published with a revised edition of 1996.

In ‘The Jack the Ripper A-Z’, the main section on Mary Kelly starts on page 214 and goes to page 220. When we look at this section, we see that all the witness observations that night, help us.
On page 217 we can find this interesting paragraph: ‘At 2:00 a.m. George Hutchinson met Kelly in Commercial Street, where she addressed him by name and asked him for sixpence. Hutchinson watched her proceed toward Aldgate and pick up another client near Thrawl Street. He examined him closely under the light of the Queen’s Head on the corner of Fashion Street as the two passed him, and followed them to Dorset Street, where he watched them go into Kelly’s room. Then he waited outside for 45 minutes, sheltering under the arched entry besides Crossingham’s Lodging House before going home. Neither the client nor Kelly emerged during this time.’ Basically George Hutchinson saw Mary Jane Kelly pick up a client and take the client to her room. He then stood around for about 45 minutes outside, and observed neither leave.
The next paragraph we quote from this book is on page 218: ‘Mrs. Kennedy, Sarah Lewis and Elizabeth Prater, who lived in the room above Kelly’s, all reported hearing the cry of “Murder!” from the direction of Kelly’s room shortly before 4:00 a.m.’ With this second paragraph, we now have a witness, 3 of them, who tell us that at approximately 4:00 a.m., Mary Kelly was probably being murdered. We can say this because of what the 3 women heard, plus how they later reported it. In addition, Mary Kelly was the only person in that area known to be attacked at that time. So narrowing things down a bit, we can say that in the area of 2:45 a.m., George Hutchinson had not heard or seen anything that involved Mary Kelly being in a danger, so he left the Millers Court area. At about 4:00 a.m. Kelly probably yelled “Murder!” Somewhere between 2:45 and 4:00 a.m. was when Mary Kelly was probably attacked. But there is more homing to be done on this scenario later...Keep these 2 main time references in mind for later use!

The Ripper’s Previous Attacks:
One of the things that the authors took a long look at, was information involving previous attacks done on other victims. McClain and Dodd found that in 3 of the 4 previous attacks, the Ripper had met the victims and in less than half an hour, based upon information given by several witnesses, killed the women. This means that the Ripper’s attacks had been done with speed in mind and that only a little time had been used by the Ripper to lure the victims into being comfortable with his presence.

Again, using ‘The Jack the Ripper A-Z’ for reference purposes, we find that Mary Ann Nichols was the first of the Ripper victims. Information on Nichols starts on page 317 in the book. We learn from the book that at about 2:30 a.m. Ellen Holland saw Nichols alive. We also know that Nichols’ body was found at about 3:40 a.m. by two men. In Nichols’ case there was about a 70 minute gap from the time she was last seen alive to the time her body was found.
In ‘The Jack the Ripper A-Z’, we next look at the murder of Annie Chapman. Chapman’s information starts on page 75. At about 5:30 a.m. a woman named Elizabeth Darrel saw Chapman alive and talking to an unknown man. At about 6:00, John Davis found Chapman’s body lying next to a fence. That means that in about a 30 minute period, Jack the Ripper had met Chapman, gotten her to feel comfortable with him and then killed her. Chapman’s murder displays a certain amount of speed to it, that future investigators need to analyze.

Elizabeth Stride was the third victim of the Ripper. In the ‘A-Z’, her information starts on page 434. In Stride’s information we learn that a Police Constable named William Smith, at about 12:30 a.m., saw Stride alive and talking to an unknown man. Another witness named James Brown was almost certain that he saw Elizabeth Stride alive and talking to an unknown man at about 12:45 a.m. At about 1:00 a.m., Louis Diemschutz found Elizabeth Stride’s dead body in Dutfield’s Yard. At most the Ripper had about 30 minutes to kill her, based upon the observation of the Constable. If we believe William Smith, the second witness, the Ripper had only about 15 minutes in which to kill her, before her body would be found. Again, speed seems to have been used in this murder.

On page 121 of the ‘A-Z’, is where Catharine Eddowes’ information starts. At about 1:00 a.m. Eddowes was released from police custody from an earlier arrest for public intoxication. At about 1:35 a.m. Eddowes was seen alive and talking to an unknown man by 3 other men in the area of Duke’s Place entrance to Church Passage. At about 1:45 a.m. Police Constable Edward Watkins came into the area and found Eddowes’ body in the southwest corner of the square. This means that the Ripper had about 10 minutes or less to kill and mutilate her.

Understanding that the estimates of times that the Ripper had to kill and mutilate his victims is based, in this section, on approximations and guesses from witnesses who had seen or found the victims. Could the Ripper have had more time in which to work? Yes, he could have, but not much more. It is also possible that the Ripper may not have had as much time to work. What does seem to stand out is that in 3 of the murders the Ripper had 30 minutes to get things done. In 30 minutes the Ripper had to make the victims feel comfortable with him, get the women alone, launch his attack, kill the victims and then mutilate them. The Ripper’s speed in 3 of the 4 murders might indicate that he had done some prior planning and knew exactly what he was going to do before he did it. In other words, the Ripper sort of pulled a one-man high-speed, pre-planned attack against 3 of the 4 victims. His fury was such that his victims didn’t make much noise when they died.

As we move on to the next section of our article, we want to keep what we now suspect in mind so that we can tie all of our information together later. In this case, we want to keep in mind that in a short time frame the Ripper would meet his potential victims and attack them.

Rigor Mortis and the Coroner’s Report:
Rigor Mortis is one subject on which nobody seems to agree. If you go to different reference books and Websites you’ll find that each one has a different idea involving rigor mortis and how fast it can set into place in a dead body. Years ago it was not unusual for police officers, in some areas, to be taught that rigor mortis could develop twice in some bodies. There are some sources of information that say rigor mortis can start to set into a body within a few minutes of death. Other reference works to indicate that it takes hours to start setting. This will be one of those places where we will will need to use some common sense.

As a general rule, most people who work with dead bodies think that rigor mortis starts to set in after about 3 or 4 hours. There are various conditions that may cause it to set into a dead body faster or slower than is normally expected. Air temperature and moisture in the air are two examples of factors that cause its’ arrival to be delayed or accelerated, but basically 3 to 4 hours is the normal set in time.

Rigor mortis will gradually dissipate over the next several days after it has set into place. Again various factors can affect how it moves through a body. As another general rule, ‘rigor’ peaks in about 12 hours.
So what we have is rigor mortis starting to set into place in about 3 to 4 hours, peaking in about 12 hours, and then gradually dissipating over the next couple of days. With this understanding of it, we’re now going to try to work with a Coroner’s report involving Mary Kelly’s death.

Jules Rosenthal managed to develop information involving a report from a Dr. Thomas Bond. According to Dr. Bond, who performed the autopsy on Kelly at 2:00 p.m. rigor mortis had started to set in, but became more pronounced during the examination. Quoting from his annexed report of the autopsy he says: “Rigor Mortis had set in, but increased during the process of the examination. From this it is difficult to say with any degree of certainty the exact time that had elapsed since death…”

So if the autopsy started at 2:00 p.m. and rigor mortis was setting into Mary Kelly’s body, we can figure that rigor mortis would probably peak at about 3:00 p.m. or a little later. If we use the general rule that rigor mortis peaks in about 12 hours, then we can say that Mary Kelly probably died sometime after 3:00 or 3:30 a.m.
Now let’s couple all of our information together and see what we have. Let’s see what sort of a general scenario we can develop about Mary Kelly and Jack the Ripper.

The Information Summary:
We know that George Hutchinson left the area of Mary Kelly’s room at about 2:45 a.m. When Hutchinson left, we can be pretty sure that Mary Kelly was still alive. We also know that at about 4:00 a.m., 3 women heard somebody, probably Mary Kelly, cry out “Murder!”
This part indicates that Mary Kelly was probably alive at about 3:00 a.m. and under attack at about 4:00 a.m.

We know from analysis information involving prior attacks initiated by the Ripper, that he worked fast and seems to have used a furious sort of attack on his victims. He would lure in his victims so that they would feel comfortable with him and then strike.
With the general rules involving rigor mortis and the coroner’s report, we sort of confirm the information about when Mary Kelly died: sometime after 3:00 a.m. or 3:30 a.m. When the authors put all this information together, they came up with an interesting but chilling scenario involving the murder of Mary Kelly. Here’s what has developed in the Mary Kelly murder: Mary Kelly was probably attacked at or just before 3:30 a.m. During the attack she was knocked out or rendered unconscious. During the time that Mary Kelly was unconscious, it is thought that Jack the Ripper started to mutilate her. At about 4:00 a.m. Mary Kelly became unconscious again, discovered what the Ripper was doing to her body and cried out. It was at 4:00 a.m. that the Ripper finished killing Mary Kelly. This is why the time estimation involving rigor mortis seems to back-up information from the witnesses.

If Mary Kelly died the way that the authors think it may have occurred, then she suffered the worst of all the Ripper’s victims. Mary Kelly probably died knowing that she had no hope of survival and that she was already in the hands of pure evil.

If this scenario is one that police officers were able to develop back in 1888, then it would explain why so many of them were shaken-up by Mary Kelly’s death. The thought of any woman dying in the manner described here in this possible scenario, would’ve shown the officers just how bad things were for ‘Jack the Ripper’s’ victims.
Cherise,Carl , and Jules!

Topics | Last Day | Last Week | Tree View | Search | User List | Help/Instructions | Register now! Administration

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.