|
 |
 |
|
|
|
** 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 **
Archive through May 6, 1999
Casebook Message Boards: Ripper Victims: Specific Victims:
Mary Ann "Polly" Nichols:
Archive through May 6, 1999
Author: Bob_c
Thursday, 17 December 1998 - 08:56 am |        | Hi Jeff,
Great idea. I wanted to come over for Xmas but that has stalled. I will be comming over sometime Feb-March for about a week. I'll let you know when I know and maybe we could really meet and do a round.
Regards
Bob |
Author: Yazoo
Thursday, 17 December 1998 - 09:54 am | | Hey, Jeff,
I have no thoughts on what prompted the murderer's decision to kill and keep killing. I don't feel that any one or all of the victims holds a clue to the reason or the identity of the murderer though.
Yaz |
Author: Jeff D
Thursday, 17 December 1998 - 12:46 pm | | One idea that does come to mind about the Polly Nichols murder is that on the night of August 31st., the skies were a glowing red from a great fire down by the docks.
I guess it would make sense for the murderer to be thinking that this would be the perfect opportunity to strike, as possibly most of the local policemen, and other emergency services would have been down fighting or controlling situations down at the fire. This would make sense as a real opportune moment, making a good arguement for Nichols being the first victim of the Serial killer. He then enjoyed himself so much that he went out and repeated the act about a-week later.
So, I guess it probably was just a matter of the poor woman, being in the wrong place at the wrong time.
Cheers All !
Jeff D |
Author: Edana
Thursday, 17 December 1998 - 01:20 pm | | Hi folks!
Or maybe it was some kind of personal disaster that made him start that blazing night. He could have been raging (in his mind) through the streets of Whitechapel, thinking of all the wrongs that were done to him (or whatever) ..and the excitement of the fire combined with his own fiery torment could have set him off.
Edana |
Author: Yazoo
Thursday, 17 December 1998 - 01:36 pm | | Hey, All
Another origin point for a serial killer, as far as criminal behavior, is arson. Arson normally fits a killer who keeps his distance -- I've heard/read it, so I think it; but I KNOW nothing for certain about that trait (let Alex untangle that one!) -- but in his own mind JtR may have never "violated" the distance/separation between himself and his victims.
I suppose the cause of the fire was determined, wasn't it? I think I read somewhere that it was, but...you get the idea!
Yaz |
Author: Christopher-Michael
Thursday, 17 December 1998 - 03:07 pm | | Just a further note about Nichols' bonnet. . .
The earliest reference I can find in my admittedly incomplete Ripper library is in Knight's "Final Solution." He quotes from the report of Inspector Spratling, who, in taking inventory of Polly's belongings, mentions a "black straw bonnet, trimmed black velvet" (p. 50). Admittedly, Knight must be taken with a large grain of salt, but as the bonnet doesn't seem to have anything to do with his asinine theory, I think we might assume that in this case he quoted accurately.
I don't have copies of McCormick, Matters or Odell, so I can't say how they delineate the bonnet; I will note that by the time of Rumbelow in 1976, it is described as a "new black straw bonnet" (p. 42). When the change from Spratling's "bonnet" to Rumbelow's "new bonnet," I cannot say.
Jeff - I'm not ignoring your argument; in fact, I think it's very intriguing. I don't, however, have anything worthwhile to contribute, and so am remaining silent.
Christopher-Michael |
Author: The Viper
Thursday, 17 December 1998 - 07:08 pm | | Hello All. A few points about bonnets. The earliest reference I can find appears in 'The Times' on 1st September 1888. Nichols says to Emily Holland, "I'll soon get my 'doss' money; see what a jolly bonnet I've got now." Note that nowhere is the word 'new' mentioned, though the use of the word 'now' may have implied it to some future writers.
Tom Cullen in his book 'Autumn Of Terror', published in 1965 has "Never mind, I'll soon get my doss money. Look what a jolly bonnet I've got now" (page 26). This is almost identical to the newspaper.
However, Robin Odell on page 32 of 'JTR In Fact And Fiction' (also from 1965) quotes Polly as, "I'll soon have my doss money. Look what a nice NEW bonnet I am wearing now".
Regards. V |
Author: Bonnylass7
Friday, 26 February 1999 - 12:52 pm | | | Hi, this is addressed to everyone---I thought how interesting this all is (casebook:Jack the Ripper). Till of course I started reading these messages. What fun! your comments back and forth or interesting and amusing. I'm glad to see the politness yall add to your sometimes heated discussions!! Thank you for the history lesson done with such fun! |
Author: Jeff D
Sunday, 28 February 1999 - 06:49 am | | Hello Guys 'n' Gals !
"Watchman, old man...... I believe there is a woman lying murdered down the street!"
Were these the words of the Ripper ?
The short amount of time (allowing for the inaccuracies of Police watches, timekeeping, etc.) between the PC who walked down Buck's Row, then Mess'rs Cross & Paul's arrival on the scene finding Nichols' body, then PC Neil's arrival from the other end of the street, could indicate that the Ripper was still very close by at the time the body was discovered. I think this is a fair assumption, even allowing for an escalation in mutilations, I believe the Ripper would have taken away a trophy from Nichols, if he had the time.
The PC report of the man who crossed the street, apparently uninterested in the commotion surrounding the body, then the watchmans' statement of the man who came up to him, telling him of the murder, is very interesting to me. Do Ripper investigators place any credence in the night watchmans' statement? Certainly, if the encounter was made, this person knew that there was a murder,.. how would he have had such knowledge ? Could the Ripper have been hiding in the shadows very close by ?
It is this very, very slender lead that makes me believe that the Ripper just could have been an English man. The watchman's statement has always been intriguing to me, I do believe it was the Ripper who approached Mr. Kershaw. For example, someone like Kosminski or any foreigner would not have spoken in such a way to the watchman. "Old Man" is very English, isn't it ?
Any comments from the real world ??
Thanks All !
Jeff D |
Author: The Viper
Sunday, 28 February 1999 - 07:30 am | | Hello Jeff,
Bob Hinton noticed this too. He discusses it on page 30 of his book "From Hell..." and appears to reach similar conclusions to yourself.
Personally, I don't know what to make of the watchman, who I think you will find was called Patrick Mulshaw. At the inquest, Coroner Baxter was quite critical of him after Mulshaw admitted to having dozed off on several occasions. It is possible that Mulshaw, stung by critisism and guilt that he had seen or heard nothing, was trying to please. On the other hand, PC John Neil's statement that a man hurried past the crowd gathering around Nichol's body, taking no apparent interest in matters, could be a pointer in your favour (assuming that it was the same man). Regards, V |
Author: Jeff D
Sunday, 28 February 1999 - 07:56 am | | Thanks Viper !
Yeh.... of course Mulshaw ! I was working of the top of my head, I just blurted out something ...shaw and I realised my goof, as soon as I pressed "Post" (I could have easily checked the witness board). I do find this incident interesting though. It's Sunday morning, and my mind is more than a little hazy, he he! You make some excellent observations Viper, and I thank you for your comments. It was whether people here felt that there was any credence or how they interpret Mulshaw's statement that is exactly what I was looking for.
I do keep in mind that this was well before the so-called "Leather Apron", or "Ripper" scare so feel that the night watchman was telling the truth, at least as much as he knew about the goings on that night. The finding of Nichols body appears as very much just another unpleasant incident that the Police and Doctor had to deal with, hence the very casual investigation on the night itself.
Thanks Again V, well appreciated !
Jeff D
PS:- I've obviously missed a great deal of what's been happening over the last couple of weeks, what's this "Jury" thing all about ? |
Author: D. Radka
Sunday, 28 February 1999 - 12:23 pm | | I believe that the WM could have been a gentile or Jewish foreigner, and still have delivered credible English impersonations. He had the ability to convince women to lead him to secure places for his murders to be committed, didn't he? Credibility was his balliwick--he must have been well-skilled concerning how to dissimulate to obtain it.
It may be that the watchman matter is similar to the Packer matter. Packer said the man buying grapes from him for Stride was English-speaking and looking, not foreign or Jewish, but if he were clever the murderer might have aped English mannerisms well enough, and not all Jewish people are "Jewish-looking" (absolutely no stereotyping of any group of people is intended here.)
I am not saying the watchman or Stride's "boyfriend" was or was not the WM, just trying to leave the door open enough to permit these possibilities.
David |
Author: Calogridis
Thursday, 01 April 1999 - 11:05 pm | | Howdy All!
Polly Nichols is a very interesting victim, since she may have been the first in the series. This could potentially imply she was murdered close to where the Ripper lived or worked. There is a police station near to Buck's Row, for anyone who thinks Jacky Boy was a copper. The London Hospital is very close, for the insane doctor or medical student theories (John Saunders for instance). Also, Harrison, Barber & Company's horse slaughterers were a block away and arrived on the scene immediately! Could it be possible that while PC John Thain was being entertained by two of the slaughtermen, the third was on break?!
Cheers..........Mike |
Author: D. Radka
Friday, 02 April 1999 - 04:46 pm | | Exact murder sites were almost certainly determined by the victims, not by the murderer. He likely gained their confidence by letting them lead him to the place. Almost certainly, Polly met the murderer on a main thoroughfare and brought him to Buck's Row.
David |
Author: Calogridis
Saturday, 03 April 1999 - 03:23 pm | | Howdy David,
I'm not sure I agree with you. That would certainly be true if the Ripper were not a local man. Since he almost certainly was local, and obviously knew the foul courts and back alleys as well as anyone, why couldn't he choose- and for a little extra money the prostitutes would have gone anywhere! Remember the man that Sarah Lewis met who was trying to inveigle her or her friend to follow him down an alley. When neither one of them would accept, he tried to get them both to follow him.
Cheers.........Mike |
Author: D. Radka
Saturday, 03 April 1999 - 08:36 pm | | Mike,
The prostitutes would, I think, likely not have gone where a stranger wanted them to go for extra money during the Ripper scare. We are talking about a greatly heightened awareness of danger on the part of the whole populace. If the WM were to ask to go to a an especially remote place and offer extra money to do so, don't you think this would arouse the suspicions of the woman? Remember, the WM was apparently completely successful in his deceptions. True, Polly's murder took place before the Ripper scare had reached its zenith, but MO is MO.
As for Polly, Sugden says she was witnessed headed up one of the main thoroughfares, reeling drunk and saying she was about to get her doss money, soon before her body was found. Most likely she met the WM on that busy street just a few moments later, and she took him back into Buck's Row.
Thanks for the comment!
David |
Author: Calogridis
Saturday, 03 April 1999 - 11:31 pm | | Howdy David!
Twice I've written you a long memo and twice my connection has blown up as I was about to post- and of course everything was lost, so I had better be succinct this time! Very frustrating. anyway, good point about MO and the probability that the Polly picked up her client on the Whitechapel Road. After all, it makes sense that a hooker would surf the main drag. More to follow, I don't trust my connection tonight..... |
Author: Calogridis
Saturday, 03 April 1999 - 11:45 pm | | David,
I mean literally, dude, my finger was on the "Post" button when the thing blew up the second time. Guess I'll have to take baby steps to say what I want to say.
John Douglas of the FBI really impressed me with his book "Mind Hunter". In it, he talks about serial criminals first crimes being close to their home. Now we can be reasonably certain that this murder was not the Ripper's first crime, but it may have been his first murder. Hence, he may have lived or worked close by that part of Whitechapel Road (Buck's Row), although if Tabram were the first then George Yard would likely be the locale much to the delight of Chapman fans. So maybe we should be looking in the Buck's Row neighborhood for our man.
By the way, your point in an earlier memo on the Ripper, if he were a foreigner, being able to ape the mannerisms of the English is quite valid. After all, he would have to have lived there long enough to get an implicit grasp of the geography, so why not the language. Appreciate your excellent feedback as always!
Cheers............Mike |
Author: jane
Thursday, 06 May 1999 - 08:32 pm | | hello,
i just started reading about the JtR case, and i
am wondering, what are the possibilities that
Dr.Lewllyn could have been the murder? all the
murders took place near his home, and his motive
would be getting rid of the hookers in the
neighborhood. He knew a lot about anatomy, and was
specialised in autopsies, and therefor could have
performed all of the slicing and dicing easily. |
Author: Jon Smyth
Thursday, 06 May 1999 - 09:52 pm | | Hello Jane.
Only the Bucks Row murder (Polly Nichols) was near or nearest Dr Llewellyn's home.
It was mentioned at the time I think that he was considered albiet slightly, not seriously.
Whoever Jack was he displayed some thing more than just a grievence against hookers.
These crimes may have had a deeper meaning to Jack, he went way beyond what would have been required to 'get rid' or scare off hookers.
This killer may have had a mental fixation of sorts. And there is no reason at all to look for a Doctor as the killer, a Doctor would have been caught (smile) they worked to dam slow :-)
Jack knew a little about anatomy, certainly more than the average man on the street, but no reason to think he was a skilled or learned man at all.
And what ever skill we may think he had, could just have been luck.
Glad you joined us, keep the suggestions coming Jane.
All the best, Jon |
|
|
|
|
