|
 |
 |
|
|
|
** This is an archived, static copy of the Casebook messages boards dating from 1998 to 2003. These threads cannot be replied to here. If you want to participate in our current forums please go to https://forum.casebook.org **
Barnett, Joseph
Casebook Message Boards: Ripper Suspects: Specific Suspects:
Later Suspects [ 1910 - Present ]:
Barnett, Joseph
| | SUBTOPIC | MSGS | Last Updated |
 | Archive through 03 January 2002 | 40 | 01/05/2002 05:46pm |
| Archive through 06 June 2001 | 40 | 08/08/2001 09:08pm |
| Archive through 10 January 2002 | 40 | 04/01/2002 05:52am |
| Archive through 13 August 2001 | 40 | 08/17/2001 08:56am |
| Archive through 20 April 2002 | 40 | 04/20/2002 05:43pm |
| Archive through April 10, 2000 | 20 | 04/10/2000 08:38am |
| Archive through April 26, 1999 | 20 | 04/26/1999 05:32pm |
| Archive through April 30, 2000 | 20 | 04/30/2000 02:43pm |
| Archive through January 11, 2000 | 20 | 01/11/2000 07:03pm |
| Archive through January 15, 2000 | 20 | 01/15/2000 03:19pm |
| Archive through January 4, 1999 | 20 | 01/04/1999 02:37am |
| Archive through June 10, 1999 | 20 | 06/10/1999 07:55pm |
| Archive through June 16, 1999 | 20 | 06/16/1999 07:01am |
| Archive through June 21, 1999 | 20 | 06/21/1999 04:27pm |
| Archive through March 30, 1999 | 20 | 03/30/1999 12:20am |
| Archive through 22 April 2002 | 40 | 04/23/2002 07:48am |
| Archive through May 02, 2001 | 40 | 05/02/2001 04:46pm |
| Archive through May 09, 2000 | 20 | 05/09/2000 09:26pm |
| Archive through October 06, 2000 | 20 | 10/05/2000 12:30pm |
| Archive through September 03, 2000 | 20 | 09/03/2000 05:46pm |
| Archive through September 07, 2000 | 20 | 09/07/2000 09:50am |
| Archive through September 09, 2000 | 20 | 09/09/2000 12:29pm |
| Archive through September 13, 2000 | 20 | 09/12/2000 09:32pm |
| Archive through September 15, 2000 | 20 | 09/14/2000 09:12pm |
| Archive through September 16, 2000 | 20 | 09/16/2000 07:25am |
| Archive through September 17, 1999 | 20 | 09/17/1999 08:02am |
| Archive through September 18, 2000 | 20 | 09/18/2000 06:26am |
| Archive through September 20, 2000 | 20 | 09/20/2000 07:23pm |
| Archive through September 25, 2000 | 20 | 09/24/2000 01:39pm |
Author: Leanne Perry
Monday, 22 April 2002 - 07:12 pm |        | 'Billingsgate at Five in the Morning':
http://65.107.211.206/victorian/books/mcdonnell/billingsgate.html
Above describes a typical morning at Billingsgate warf during Victorian times. |
Author: Leanne Perry
Monday, 22 April 2002 - 07:26 pm | | G'day,
I don't know why the above link doesn't work!
This site gives a scene to imagine for Barnetts daily work life.
For those interested, go to
'The Victorian Web'
'Social History'
'Billingsgate (London Fishmarket) at 5a.m.'
Forgive me if I posted this before!
LEANNE |
Author: Leanne Perry
Monday, 22 April 2002 - 07:31 pm | | G'day,
Someone said here: 'If he was so much in love with Kelly how could he mutilate her?' Someone else replied:'I too have grave doubts that a man could do such a thing to a woman he loved'.
Posts like these weren't as frequent as I thought, but I just thought it was a major reason why some people wont even consider Joe as a suspect!
LEANNE! |
Author: Rosemary O'Ryan
Monday, 22 April 2002 - 07:56 pm | | All we can say with certainty is that the photograph of "Mary Kelly" is probably the most
extraordinary image in the history of photography.
Its power to mesmerise and enmesh the viewer is total...FULL STOP!
We are in the presence of SOMETHING UNREAL.Know what I mean?
Rosey :-) |
Author: Richard P. Dewar
Monday, 22 April 2002 - 11:16 pm | | Hi Jeff,
Your postulation about the Stride killing is one that I haven't read or considered - but is as plausible as any explanation I have seen thus far. It, of course, is not provable, but it makes sense.
Hi Leanne,
I am not so certain that a loved one could not perform the horrible mutilation that was done to Kelly. History is replete with cases of spurned lovers savaging those that rejected them.
Some have made the argument that Barnett murdered Kelly. That is possible. However, no one has made a convincing argument that Barnett killed any of the other victims (except to suggest that since he killed Kelly, and Kelly was killed by the Ripper, therefore Barnett is the Ripper).
To suggest Barnett was Jack the Ripper, as I have tried to show before, ignores precedence for serial killers.
Rich |
Author: Jeff Hamm
Tuesday, 23 April 2002 - 01:15 am | | Hi Rich,
I'm glad my speculation hasn't been suggested before, at least as far as we're both concerned. I wouldn't want to take credit for somebody else's idea. As you say, it's completely unprovable but in the relm of possible. Stride is the most difficult one, in terms of whether or not to include in a list of Ripper victims. Inclusion tends to be based upon consistency of victim "type", murder weapon (knife),throat cutting, silentness of the crime, and eye-witness discriptions generally matching that of suspect seen with Eddowes later that evening. But, if Stride was a victim of the Ripper, why the lack of mutilations? Why did he leave after only cutting of the throat? Lots of speculations, nothing provable. Much of the case is that way.
I think that's part of why the case is still facinating today. Lots of room for ideas, many of which seem consistent with the few bits of data available. The best a theory can do, at least at the moment, is to produce as little "error" around the data as possible, accounting for as much of it as possible, while not requiring highly unlikely events be required in the given explanation.
This is my concern about Barnett as being the Ripper, or even a copy cat for only Kelly. It's possible that he killed and mutilated Kelly based upon press reports of the Ripper crimes. Possible, but highly improbable. Improbable because it requires that the police, who would have seen him as such a good suspect (ex-lover of victim), not investigated his whereabouts for the time of the murder. Because his alibi was that he was at a given Lodging House, this information would be possible to obtain by questioning individuals there. Since he claimed he went to bed, this would have been backed up. Had he left and returned during the night, he would have had to been able to sneak both in and out again. Unlikely this was possible, or else why would anyone actually pay for a room? Just have one person rent a room, then sneak in later, and 2 or 3 can share the cost. Possible, but very unlikely.
And, of course, the case that he was the Ripper, and not just a copy-cat, has the same problem plus the fact that he would then be a seriel killer who stopped without being captured, which is very very rare. Or, he's the only case of a non-serial killer who kills and mutilates multiple people, including his ex-girlfriend, in order to scare his ex-girlfriend off the streets. Again, possible, but extremely unlikely.
It seems to me there are too many "extremely unlikely" things that have to have occured for Barnett to be "the one". As the evidence stands, Barnett's release does not appear to be a miscarriage of justice. At least in my view, anyway.
- Jeff |
Author: Leanne Perry
Tuesday, 23 April 2002 - 02:48 am | | G'day,
RICH: If Barnett butchered Kelly, I don't think he consciously killed her. I don't think it was planned, when he went back to Millers Court to plead with her to take him back....if...if...if.
If Barnett butchered Kelly in a fit of jealous rage, he wouldn't have had his senses to make it appear like another Ripper crime, if it wasn't!...if...if...if.
If it was Barnett who 'mutilated multiple people', may I suggest that it wasn't just to scare his 'wife' off the streets, but he had a strong hatred for prostitution...if...if...if!!!!!!!
LEANNE |
Author: graziano
Tuesday, 23 April 2002 - 05:30 am | | | Madonna Leanne, Madonna mia!!!!!! |
Author: Robert Maloney
Tuesday, 23 April 2002 - 06:08 am | | Dear Graziano,
It may be early, but I am not sleeping!!!
:-)
Rob |
Author: Chris Hintzen
Tuesday, 23 April 2002 - 07:48 am | | Hi Jeff,
I agree with your Stride hypothesis, and pose another possible reason. Maybe the killer was known to Stride? So that's why he had to silence her?
Hi Leanne,
One question dealing with Barnett's alibi(or lack of it). Lodging houses typically didn't have single bed rooms,(I'm not sure if Buller's is your typical lodging house though. Anyone know how much it cost for a bed there?) but were shared by several cots in one room.(This is how the Rattcliffe Highway Murderer was caught.) Since the police had been willing to question people in 200 lodging houses before, as well as do a MASSIVE house to house search in one section of Whitechapel, then why wouldn't they do the same at Buller's to check Barnett's story, just to be thorough?
Hi Raphael,
Ever heard of the O.J. Simpson case? That was a pretty brutal killing. Also some of the murders Leanne stated in her posts before, show several murderers who hacked up their first victim, and in some cases beyond all recognition. So it is possible that Mary Kelly could have been a killer's first attempt. Just depends on the emotions driving the killer at the time.
Adios,
Chris H. |
Author: Richard P. Dewar
Tuesday, 23 April 2002 - 10:20 am | | Hi Jeff,
I concur completely with your analysis.
Hi Leanne,
Perhaps the murderer of Kelly did not plan to make it appear to be a Ripper crime. There are lots of examples of enraged lovers committing ghastly attacks upon the women who spurn them. But as you say. . .if . . .if. . .if. . .
Rich |
Author: Daniel Hammond
Friday, 06 December 2002 - 01:56 am | | Rich,
Enraged lovers are nothing new. What is different is that while his attack on Kelly (if he is indeed the one who did it; and I belive he did) was being comitted, up to the point where he exeeded the limits of the other murders, it had all the hallmark trates of the previous killings. You can thank Dr. Phillips for placing the time of death incorrectly in this murder same as he did in Annie Chapman's inquest for providing the alibi for Joseph Barnett. I would be very curious to know where Joe was between 08:45 and 11:00 when the body was discovered |
Author: Terry Endres
Monday, 13 January 2003 - 10:59 am | | Since I'm new around here and haven't had much time to browse the archives, I don't know if what I'm adding is new.
Anyway, the entry for Joseph Barnett states he suffered from echolalia, which is then defined as a speech impediment. This is not quite accurate.
A speech impediment is a speech disorder caused by structural irregularities in the jaws or tongue that inhibit elocution.
Echolalia, on the other hand, is a symptom of several psychological disorders including schizophrenia.
Making this distinction strengthens the case against Barnett. No one can consider the attack on Mary Kelly as anything less than the work of a psychotic. And while any number of the suspects might be described as homicidal maniacs, Barnett shows at least one symptom of psychosis. |
Author: Dan Norder
Monday, 13 January 2003 - 08:22 pm | | Terry,
Actually, many people can and do consider MJK's attack as something less than a psychotic. They consider it the work of a psychopath. Psychopaths, like most serial killers we have caught, almost never have any psychotic symptoms. When they do they tend to be blitz killers who don't last more than a couple of days. Killers who can spread their attacks over several months are almost always quite able to function within society at large, although they may have less obvious problems.
(Bracing myself for the people who make up their own definitions of psychology terms to come in from another thread and go ballistic again.)
Dan
----------------------------------------------------------------
Consider supporting this great site by making a donation |
Author: Sir Robert Anderson
Monday, 13 January 2003 - 10:40 pm | | Hi Terry,
It is an honor to have a member of Phi Theta Kappa's Beta Gamma Sigma Chapter join us.
Pray tell us more about echolalia. Isn't this condition related to autism or Tourette's ?
Sir Robert |
|
|
|
|
