|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Richard Brian Nunweek
Chief Inspector
Username: Richardn
Post Number: 780
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, April 04, 2004 - 4:05 am: | 
|
Hi,
Mayby I should not refer to this point, as it would not fit in with Barnett being involved , however, when Mrs cox's neice was interviewed, some years back, she refered to a comment her Aunt told her many years before, that being, when the Blotchy faced man, entered the passage, he was grapping hold of her by the hand , so much so Kelly remarked' All right love , dont pull me along'.
This action surely is similar to Strides attacker, attempting to pull her in to the street, also the recent bruise on Eddowes left hand, between thumb, and forefinger, indicates a grasping of the hand, not a holding of one.
I would suggest that the same individual, may have been responsible, for all three killings.
but I should add, I believe that Coxs Blotchy faced man is falsified, and the description, she told the police , was nearer to what she told her neice, that being 'A real toff' and that is one of the reasons they , had reason to take Hutchinsons suspect seriously.
Regards Richard. |
Natalie Severn
Chief Inspector
Username: Severn
Post Number: 612
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, April 04, 2004 - 7:52 am: |
|
Thanks for that snippet Richard.I really think he may have been more significant in all this than has been thought.However she did seem quite happy with him singing away for several hours.Several of the witnesses say she carried on with the violets rendition---maybe it got on his nerves and thats how it started!The other thing that struck me was that the man who had his arm around
Elizabeth Stride was also reported as looking like he had had a few.
Thanks anyway Natalie |
Dan Norder
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Sunday, April 04, 2004 - 5:32 am: |
|
Where do these stories come from, Richard? Are you relying on your memory of what somebody said on TV or radio that they claimed someone else said? Or is this from somewhere else? It'd be nice if you mention a reference for these sorts of things.
I'd take the original description as related by the witness to police over an alleged story of some relative saying something different years after the fact. The longer the length of time passes and the more people it goes through, the less reliable a memory is. That's specifically why officials these days try to get statements as soon as possible with as few interactions with other people (who might contaminate the recollections) as possible.
But I can at least give you kudos for bringing up something that would tend to work against your theory instead of support it. |
Richard Brian Nunweek
Chief Inspector
Username: Richardn
Post Number: 781
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, April 04, 2004 - 3:17 pm: |
|
Hi,
We should remember that Mrs Cox, saw the man clearly under the light opposite Room 13, so I would persume, this individual, would have been reluctant to commit the act, at that time.
I would suggest that , because of this, he controlled his murderous impulses, and left her after her karoke session, with the full intention, of returning in the morning, to fullfil his act to the full.
The reason I started this thread, was I believe that when witnesses, add imagination such as ' Oh I have lost my Hankerchief' I have got the horrors of drink' and 'All right my love dont pull me along' these people proberly were corrct in their observations[ the latter being not recorded in cox's official statement].
So in a attempt to make sense of all of this, I Would suggest that Kelly could have fell into the rippers arms that night, but because Mrs cox saw him up close , was reluctant to kill her then, therefore she was free to be seen by Hutchinson, and Maxwell.
In this scenerio, she after being seen by Maxwell the second time returned to her room, and because she felt unwell, Hangover, or cold, got back into bed, after lighting her fire , with what ever fuel she had, and then received , a visitor, that being the respectably dressed client she was seen with mayby several times , just before Mrs cox's sighting.
I am suggesting this new approach , simply because, a lot of intresting points connect.
Richard. |
Harry Mann
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Monday, April 05, 2004 - 5:14 am: |
|
A witness,I believe it was Mrs Prater,reported going to her room in Millers Court about one thirty the night of Kelly,s death.She describes the court as being in complete darkness.
Perhaps the light failed or was turned off sometime between midnight and one thirty,or perhaps it was never alight.
Again,as Cox followed Kelly and companion into Millers court,and passed as they entered the room,she would only see the rear of the man's head and not his face.The blotchy face is an item that is perhaps left out of calculations. |
Donald Souden
Inspector
Username: Supe
Post Number: 500
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 06, 2005 - 9:30 pm: |
|
Harry,
Prater did go to her room at 1:30, but she would not have entered Miller's Court to reach her bedroom; it was accessible from Dorset Street. The light she mentioned that was off was that of a lodging house and it by means of that fact that she tried to determine when she had been wakened by the cry of "Murder."
Don.
"He was so bad at foreign languages he needed subtitles to watch Marcel Marceau."
|
Harry Mann
Detective Sergeant
Username: Harry
Post Number: 66
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Thursday, April 07, 2005 - 5:00 am: |
|
Don,
Prater certainly reported that the court was in complete darkness,but again it is witness testimony so can not entirely be relied on.
As you say it was the lodging house light she reported as out when the cry of murder was heard,but as she lived above Kelly,and a window of her room faced the court,I also think she would have reported a light there if one was on.
So that light,if the court had one ,could have been out all night,makeing all of her evidence creditable.
Regards.
Harry. |
|
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.
|
|
|
|
