Author: Cindy L.
Tuesday, 23 March 1999 - 11:44 pm |        |
I don't know if anyone has mentioned this on the boards before. I appologise for taking everyone's time if they have, but I just noticed a strage similarity while browsing through the casebook.
Catherine Eddowes was a.k.a. Kate KELLY; and the next victim was Mary Jane KELLY. These were also the two victims that suffered the most mutilation.
Any thoughts? |
Author: Christopher T. George
Wednesday, 24 March 1999 - 01:07 am | |
Hello, Cindy L.:
Yes the use of the name Kelly by Kate Eddowes has indeed been remarked upon before. A number of the murdered women went under various names. It is hard to know if anything should be read into the similarity of names. Kelly was a common Irish name, and there were a lot of Irish in the poorer parts of London at this date.
Chris George |
Author: Cindy L.
Wednesday, 24 March 1999 - 10:46 pm | |
Chris,
True enough about the name Kelly being a common Irish one, sort of like today's Smith and Jones. I guess it was just a coincidence.
Cindy |
Author: JACKIE WILSON
Monday, 05 July 1999 - 05:31 am | |
Hi Cindy!
I have also noticed that coincidence between the names Kelly and Mary, or Kate, or Anne. I have a distinct feeling that maybe old Ripper was a really good hit-man, and only had so much to go on. Maybe he finally found her in the end. Well, she was the youngest, the only one who had semi-regular kip, and was pregnant. I'll bet she blabbed, and it was the baby, or a venereal disease that made the guy go crazy. Since they all seemed to go on nicknames, the killer must have gone nuts trying to get the identity of a woman whom someone had a knee-trembler with in a dark alleyway. Who could see? better yet-who would want to?
I find it really strange that Kelly lived inside instead of out on the street. Must be a reason... |
Author: Leanne
Monday, 05 July 1999 - 07:16 am | |
G'day Cindy, Chris and Jackie,
Catherine Eddowes lived with a market worker named John Kelly, not long after her seperation from her husband.
On Saturday the 29th of September, at 2pm Eddowes promised Kelly that she would be back in a couple of hours. She then got drunk and passed out on the pavement, where she was taken to Bishopgate Police Station and gave her name as Mary Ann Kelly.
LEANNE! |
Author: Jeff D
Saturday, 04 December 1999 - 05:57 am | |
Hello Everyone !
Thanks Chris for your response. I thought best to carry on this particular thread on a more appropriate board.
You certainly make some valid comments, and of course just about anyone who lived in the area at the time would have struggled financially, so this is a very vague thread by which to make a link. I do think though that money had a very strong part to play in first of all placing the victim into harms way, and secondly as tool used by the killer to disarm the victim. I just think that Polly Nichols for example, who went back onto the streets after 1:00 in the morning, sporting a never before seen bonnet, in reasonably high spirits sure of herself that she would get her doss money soon. She had even had the money "x" number of times that day and drunk it. The main point is I believe they were totally focussed on getting just enough money that would resolve their immediate problem, and this maybe clouded their judgement, or put them off their guard. The murderer did also go through the posessions of his victims, looking for something, though it would have been obvious to most that had the victim anything of value on their person, it would be in the pawn shop long before.
On the matter of gifts. I was just reading the newspaper coverage of Eddowes inquest on the CP-site "highly recommended for even more Ripper material on the www" (ha ha!) and it had just struck me as more than a coincidence that the officer who loosened Catherine Eddowes clothing when she was admitted to the gaol when drunk, mentioned the red silk handkercheif around her neck. I would have thought these kinds of items to have been rather uncommon. A gentleman then was witnessed offering Mary Kelly a similar item. This has to be more than a simple coincidence, wouldn't you think ? Eddowes, who was broke the previous day, had enough to get stinking drunk. Whether the handkercheif was an old possession or not and totally unrelated, I believe she had met her killer that day, or at least some time before the fateful night. I do apologise, I don't have any reference material to hand. Which witness was it that mentioned Kelly being offered the red silk handkercheif (it wasn't Hutchinson's suspect was it) ? I know this item has been mentioned briefly in the past, but I'm convinced the Ripper made some token offering, and had some kind of pre-selection ritual which allowed him to make the acquaintence of his future victim.
Cheers
Jeff d |
Author: ChrisGeorge
Saturday, 04 December 1999 - 11:49 am | |
Hi, Jeff:
Unfortunately you are right--it was George Hutchinson who told the police he saw the man with Mary Jane Kelly give her the red handkerchief. As we know, George's testimony has been doubted because of its detail which seems unrealistic in bad lighting conditions. Specifically, George places MJK and the man she was with at the entrance to Miller's Court where the handkerchief was passed from the man to the woman:
"They both stood at the corner of the court for about 3 minutes. He said something to her. She said all right my dear come along you will be comfortable. He then placed his arm on her shoulder and gave her a kiss. She said she had lost her handkerchief he then pulled his handkerchief a red one out and gave it to her. they both then went up the court together. . . ."
Bob Hinton in his book "From Hell" (pp. 245-6) notes that in the dark it would not be possible to see the color of the handkerchief, particularly since none of the photographs of the entrance to Miller's Court show a gas lamp there. He hypothesizes that Hutchinson added the red handkerchief because "a report in the press mentions one of the suspects at the scene of the Stride killing wore a red neckerchief".
Chris George |
Author: Jon
Saturday, 04 December 1999 - 05:01 pm | |
An extract from the Daily Chronicle, Nov 10, 1888
quote:
'Opposite the court (Millers Court) is a very large lodging house of a somewhat superior character. This house is well lit and people hang about it nearly all night. There is another well frequented lodging house next door to McCarthy's and within a yard or two of the entrance to the court is a wall lamp, the light from which is thrown nearly on to the passage....'
Might be of interest..
Regards, Jon |
Author: Davidoz
Monday, 08 January 2001 - 06:54 pm | |
Why a 'particular class' of women?
Historically speaking there have been prostitutes in all cultures (Islam incorporated this business into its aristocratic family kinship structure, vis., hareem.
Prostitutes have always been vulnerable in terms of 'European' cultures. They provide something else...a womb.
Vulnerable, manipulable, and...? |
Author: Grailfinder
Monday, 08 January 2001 - 07:45 pm | |
Hi Davidoz
Perhaps you might like to ponder over this;
(from a very old English Dictionary)
Quean, n. Worthless Woman.
Queen, n. Female Sovereign.
"A Rose, by another name?, maybe, or whores of a different colour"?
The Quean is dead, long live the Queen. |
Author: Davidoz
Monday, 08 January 2001 - 08:50 pm | |
| Yes, I know Grailfinder. And your time is up. The dog that did'nt bark in the night, eh. |
Author: Grailfinder
Monday, 08 January 2001 - 09:20 pm | |
| er, what? |
Author: Joseph
Monday, 08 January 2001 - 10:26 pm | |
Hello David,
That is an interesting bit of information you have there, " Islam incorporated this business into its aristocratic family kinship structure, vis., hareem". (Davidoz on Monday, January 08, 2001 - 06:54 pm) Can you cite your sources please? A request for substantiation is not much to ask from the man who can lead us from darkness into light |
Author: Joseph
Tuesday, 09 January 2001 - 12:24 am | |
| Wie tut Gerhardt? |
Author: Davidoz
Tuesday, 09 January 2001 - 08:15 pm | |
Grailfinder,
Very fast with those obscure Eng.,Dicts., Happen to have one lying around, eh?
"Coelli Regina", indeed. Linguisticm can't save you Grailfinder. I've got the magic bullet now! " Ccelli Die", (Garlic, to you mate!) |
Author: Davidoz
Tuesday, 09 January 2001 - 08:47 pm | |
Joseph,
They BOTH shot Ignorance! |
Author: Joseph
Tuesday, 09 January 2001 - 09:42 pm | |
Davidoz,
Apparently, you are beginning to feel the pressure that is generated by fear; it is preventing you from answering the same questions you ask of others, i.e.name your sources. In your post of Monday, January 08, 2001 - 06:54 pm, you state:
"Islam incorporated this business into its aristocratic family kinship structure, vis., hareem". I mentioned the post was interesting to me and asked you, the same way you had asked The Viper, "What is your source reference for the calculations, Viper?" (By Davidoz on Monday, January 08, 2001 - 05:36 pm) to expose your source for this information. You chose double talk, much the same way you always do when confronted,
instead of co-operation.
If you are not prepared to defend your point of view, don't ask others to defend theirs.
The other questions you wish to avoid at all costs are: Wie tut Gerhardt? Well, how is he?
Bis du ein betrug? Well, are you? |
Author: Davidoz
Wednesday, 10 January 2001 - 11:22 am | |
Joesph,
Don't torture me! If I provide this reference, will you keep your promise about that ladder?
OK. "The Illuminations of Me'reha", by 'bdul Omar
Khy'ham. Sufi, c.AD. 681. Folio ed., Burton's transl., 1888. (Lines 666-667).
Keep yer promise, you Hermes! |
Author: Joseph
Wednesday, 10 January 2001 - 02:49 pm | |
Davidoz,
You must have lost something in the translation. Prostitution was never a part of the Islamic Hareem.
The women of an Islamic Arab household are referred to as hareem, and as such, they have claims to the benefits of haram, or sanctity, on various social levels. The ha'areem is a sanctuary, it is a physical, as well as spiritual, place of protection for women. Within the confine of ha' areem, women are considered forbidden or haram, e.g. the patriarch's daughters are haram or taboo, off limits, as are his daughters-in-law; this is considered an inner haram, or inside the family taboo. There is also an outer haram, where the patriarch's wife is included in the protective circle (hurma of the ha'areem to all the outsiders of the family; the only persons with access to the wives are the husbands themselves. "Ironically, the term hareem has acquired a meaning in English that is diametrically opposite of it's original meaning".(People and Cultures of the Middle East: Bates and Rassam, Prentice Hall, New Jersey, 1983)
You may be confusing concubines with prostitutes; concubines are allowable under the sunna or path of conduct in Islamic law.
Now about that ladder you're going on about; it wouldn't have a series of chutes connected with it, would it?
Be advised that Cyllene and I will gladly put you up for the night in our cave in Arcadia, but you'll have to sleep with Apollo's cows.
You should feel right at home. |
Author: Davidoz
Wednesday, 10 January 2001 - 03:04 pm | |
Instructive Joseph,
No doubt you have an obscure Islamic dictionary to hand?
You should always vary the timing of your 'posters', somewhat. |
Author: Michael Lyden
Sunday, 17 June 2001 - 12:27 pm | |
Hello everyone.
The other evening,I was watching a film called "The Fixer".Unfortunately I missed the first 20 minutes or so and then tried to pick up the plot as best I could.
The story took place in Russia(Early 20th century I think)
A jewish man had been falsely accused of murdering a young Russian boy and was thrown into prison.There, he was regularly beaten up and generaly treated badly.One day a Russian lawyer came to visit him in his cell.As they sat down,
the lawyer told the jewish man that he had spoken with a man who had witnessed the actual murder of the child.The real murderer was in fact the childs mothers lover.
When the body of the boy was discovered, it contained 39 stab wounds.There were three clusters of thirteen punctures.
The witness went on to explain that the murderer(a Russian),Had strangled the boy and "Added the ritual perforations later, to make it look like a Jew had done it".
Now, I believe the film was based on fact,but the whole Idea of this ritual murder put me in mind of the Martha Tabram killing.Was the number of stab wounds(39) significant?
In the case of the Chapman and Eddowes murders, Jack had pulled out the intestines and placed them over their shoulders.This act too,I believe forms part of an ancient ritual murder.
I generaly disregard the Goulston street graffito
as being the work of the Ripper, but this film has made me reconsider the whole issue.
Any comments would most welcome.
Regards ,
Mick Lyden. |
Author: Simon Owen
Sunday, 17 June 2001 - 12:36 pm | |
Interesting Mick !
I'd like to know why the number 39 is significant in relation to Judaism , can anyone help ? |
Author: Jon
Sunday, 17 June 2001 - 12:38 pm | |
See, I told you it was Pedachenko all along  |
Author: Michael Lyden
Sunday, 17 June 2001 - 12:54 pm | |
Hello,
Simon and Jon,let me make it clear that I am not a conspiracy theorist,but I have considered the possibility that Jack may have been a London man trying to implicate a Jew.
Regards,
Mick Lyden |
Author: Jon
Sunday, 17 June 2001 - 01:17 pm | |
Mick
Of all the mass(?) murderers we can read about I found the one with the most similarities (in my opinion) to the Victorian JtR was the modern Russian murderer, Chikatilo.
Regards, Jon |
Author: Christopher T George
Sunday, 17 June 2001 - 05:59 pm | |
Hi, all:
"The Fixer" is a 1966 novel by Jewish American novelist Bernard Malamud. It was made into a film directed by John Frankenheimer with Alan Bates, Dirk Bogarde, and Georgia Brown in 1968.
According to the website http://fox.rollins.edu/~tcook/personalpage/fixer.htm, which gives a summary and commentary on the novel, the book is based on a true event -- -- the Beiliss Case, the mutilation murder of a 13-year-old schoolboy, Andrei Youshchinsky, whose body was found in a cave on the outskirts of the city Kiev, Russia, in March 1911. Four months later, Mendel Beiliss, a watchman at a brick factory near Kiev was arrested for the crime. The case did not come to trial for two more years. In 1913, Beiliss was indicted and tried for the murder of a Christian child whose blood was allegedly to be used in certain "traditional Jewish rituals." There was an international outcry over the charge, and Beiliss was eventually acquitted.
In "The Fixer" the mutilated body of a twelve year-old boy named named Zhenia Golov is found in a cave near the factory. When, by chance, his co-workers discover that the protagonist of the story, Yakov Bok, is a Jew, they fabricate incriminating stories in order to implicate the fixer in the death of the child. Bok is duly arrested and imprisoned under suspicion of "ritual murder" -- of killing the child to obtain blood for use in making Passover matzos.
As well as the Malamud novel based on the case, there is a nonfiction book on the case, by Maurice Samuel, BLOOD ACCUSATION: The Strange History Of The Beiliss Case, published by Knopf in 1966.
Chris George |
Author: Rosemary O'Ryan
Sunday, 17 June 2001 - 06:57 pm | |
| "Where are The Thirty-Nine Steps?" |
Author: Christopher T George
Sunday, 17 June 2001 - 08:46 pm | |
| Ask John Buchan, Rosie. |
Author: John Omlor
Monday, 18 June 2001 - 08:37 am | |
Or Alfred Hitchcock.
--John |
Author: Christopher T George
Monday, 18 June 2001 - 09:08 am | |
Aren't we a Witty bunch? Uhoh, suspect Dame Mae Witty.  |
Author: Michael Lyden
Wednesday, 20 June 2001 - 11:32 am | |
Hello,
Jon,I can see what you mean about the similarities between JtR and Chikatilo.
Christopher,Thanks for the info about the film.
Regards,
Mick Lyden |
Author: Diana
Wednesday, 20 June 2001 - 11:48 am | |
| Chikatilo comes the closest to being a second JTR I think. |
Author: Simon Owen
Wednesday, 20 June 2001 - 01:18 pm | |
| I think Peter Kurten ' the Vampire of Dusseldorf ' or Vacher the French Ripper are closer , Diana. |
Author: Diana
Wednesday, 20 June 2001 - 02:04 pm | |
| Hmm. I smell a new thread. I have read a book on Chikatilo and only have read en passant of the others you name. I believe I started a thread awhile back on other SK's. When I finish reading about the Hillside Strangler I intend to make a section. |
Author: David Cohen Radka
Wednesday, 20 June 2001 - 03:30 pm | |
We need a Harold Shipman thread. BBC says he may have killed over 600--a whopping total if ever there was one. The first 125 would not be traceable--surviving records aren't complete enough. JtR is just a little baby compared to the Dr.
David |
