|
 |
 |
|
|
|
** 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 **
Question about Mary Kelly's last Customer
Casebook Message Boards: Ripper Victims: General Discussion:
Question about Mary Kelly's last Customer
Author: NickDanger
Monday, 13 December 1999 - 02:08 am |        | Can someone tell me why Mary Kelly would have spent hours with a customer on her last night, with no signs of sexual 'connexion'?
Thanks,
Nick |
Author: Bob_C
Monday, 13 December 1999 - 10:34 am | | Hi Nick,
No sexual connexion? I believe that was diagnosed for Eddowes. Taking into account the state of Kelly's lower body parts (yes, parts) as found, I doubt if such a diagnoses could have been reliable. It may well have meant that the killer had not had sexual intercourse before/during/....after.... the deed, but could that be at all detected some seven hours after death? In Kelly's case, at least.
I assume, and that is only an assumption, that carrotyblotch did have sexual connexion with Kelly, and we don't know how long he remained either. He could have departed immediately after the 'transaction' or at least have let Kelly join in drinking the quart of ale. He could, of course, even have been Jack, although unlikely.
The interesting fact that Kelly had folded her clothes neatly on a chair suggests that she intended to withdraw for the night, alone or not. Of course, she may have been tidy enough to do that with every client, which then suggests that Jack was just another John, and not expected to stay the night.
Best regards
Bob |
Author: NickDanger
Tuesday, 14 December 1999 - 07:11 pm | | Hi Bob,
Thanks for your take on this question. I'm wondering if checking for recent sexual activity was (or is) a standard part of a forensic autopsy. Dr. Bond's report states that 'The right thigh was denuded in front to the bone, the flap of skin, including the external organs of generation and part of the right buttock'. This seems to imply that the external genitalia, at least, were intact and could have been examined.
I note this in reference to the Eddowes autopsy where the absence of signs of sexual activity was noted. This fact is often cited to show that the Victorian authorities were not ignorant of sexual crime.
I've been wondering about what kind of transaction that Kelly and her last customer agreed upon. It must have included something more than for her to sing Irish songs to him. If indeed she was as short of funds as she seemed to be, why would she waste that much time on one client? I have no theory or larger point to serve in wondering about this, but I can't help thinking that it must have been potentially more lucrative than the one with carroty face and JTR may have had a disarming talent for making offers that seemed particularly attractive.
Just wondering.
Thanks,
Nick |
Author: Bob_C
Friday, 17 December 1999 - 04:29 am | | Hi Nick,
Sorry for the delay in answering. I had to make a sudden duty trip.
You have a good point with the singing bit. Kelly did tell Prater that 'she was going to have a song' as she went in with Blotcho, and later she was heard to sign. That she would have sung during the 'transaction' is not all that likely ('Oh! Are you still there?) however. IMHO he may have gone quite quickly.
No money was found by any of the can. victims, so we may assume that Jack took the loot back after, or while, the job was done. Could it have been that he offered something valuable, like a diamond broach or something to bait them?
Best regards,
Bob |
Author: NickDanger
Saturday, 18 December 1999 - 03:48 am | | Hi Bob,
Thanks for the response. I wonder if any of the forum contributors can tell us if an examination for recent sexual activity is/was a STANDARD part of a forensic autopsy. In Dr. Brown's autopsy report on Catherine Eddowes he specifically states that there are no signs of 'connexion'. This is along with the fact that there had been mutilations in the area of the external genitals, and of course her uterus had been removed. I don't believe that JTR did have sex with his victims, but I'm interested in knowing if checking for this was SOP with the forensic pathologists of the time and could such an examination have been EXPECTED to have been made on Mary Kelly.
Best wishes,
Nick |
|
|
|
|
