MARY KELLY

** 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 **

MARY KELLY

Casebook Message Boards: Ripper Victims: General Discussion: MARY KELLY

Author: richard nunweek Sunday, 02 July 2000 - 04:14 pm
Most experts agree that Mary Kelly was killed round 4am. How can it be that Mrs Maxwell's statement can be easily dismissed? Amongst her statement she quoted she looked like she was suffering from a heavy cold @ 8.15am. George Hutchinson stated at 2.30am Mary Kelly said 'oh i have lost my hankerchief', how would Mrs Maxwell have known Kelly's condition if she had not seen her? Also, any help to a few questions please: 1. Regarding mary kelly - Alot happened prior to her death (example: she previously had no contact with her family and suddenly receives letters from her mother and contact from her brother. She was also rumoured to have association with a blind boy. Does anyone know if she had a son?, and if he was blind?. Is it possible that her real name was Abigail Kelly from Cardiff?) Abigail Kelly was seen by a family friend in london shortly before Mary's death. Also was Mary Kelly killed by someone other that JtR? that is i.e: copycat, because of the 'over the top' style. And was she killed at a later date on the morning of the 9th. And was that the reason why the blood stained sink was seen in Dorset Street with fresh blood. One more point it was not known until 1959 that one person at Mary Kelly's funeral was seen by a teenage girl to have spat at her grave. Only 8 people attended the service - 6 women,1 priest (male) also joseph barnet. The person seen was male. anyhelp grateful. or emailme at richardnunweek@hotmail.com
Author: stephen stanley Sunday, 02 July 2000 - 05:10 pm
Dear Richard, A)There,s been quite a lot of debate over whether MJK was killed later (or not at all), some thinking she actually found the body of the victim and used it to 'disappear' B) I think the 'blind boy' was concerned with someone else and got confused by the newspapers -can't remember who he was concerned with off-hand. C) The 'blood-stained sink' relies on Major Smith's memoirs and appears to relate to the night of the 'Double Event'..If it happenened at all there's nothing to link it to the Ripper. Hope this is of some help, Steve S.
Author: R.J. Palmer Sunday, 02 July 2000 - 06:32 pm
Mr. Nunweek: According to the East London Advertiser the mourners at MJK's funeral included Joe Barnett, a representative of Mr. McCarthy, another gentleman, as well as the priest who performed the service, Father Columban Ellison. The hankerchief observations is clever, but Mrs. Maxwell did not remark at the inquest that Mary had a cold, but rather that she had the horrors of drink on her. Still, there have been some strong arguments in favor of a later time of death posted on these boards, and it's worth looking through the archives. I'm thinking that if someone could trace the mine explosion that happened in Wales in the early 1880s (that killed a fellow named Davis or Davies who was supposedly MJK's husband) then perhaps Mary could be identified at last. Cheers.
Author: Jon Sunday, 02 July 2000 - 06:55 pm
On reflection, the 'sink in Dorset St.' affair would make more sense in connection with Kelly's murder, than with Eddowes. Major Smith seems a little confused in relating details of the Ripper crimes, as do all the other Police officials who try to throw in their 2 penneth-worth, as to who they think the Ripper was. What often gets quoted in his "From Constable to Commissioner" is the following text, from page 153:....in relating the Eddowes murder... "The assassin had evidently wiped his hands with the piece of apron. In Dorset Street, with extraordinary audacity, he washed them at a sink up the close, not more than six yards from the street. I arrived there in time to see the blood-stained water." People have often commented on that statement above, and ridiculed him for adding this otherwise unknown little detail. And accused him of making it all up. However, there is a remote possibility that Smith was telling the truth. If we accept Smith was simply confusing two events, and we can hardly argue that Smith would not have been present at the Kelly crime scene. We do know for sure that the City was represented by Dr Gordon-Brown. And such high officials as Robert Anderson were present also. It is therefore possible that, if for nothing else than an extention of due curtesy that Smith was invited or given access to the crime scene. Then Smith may have seen blood in the sink in Millers Court (though not bloodstained water). Or it may simply have been something he thought was blood. It is unfortunate that no other press report refers to blood in the sink, at Millers Court. The reason for the above caution is because a statement in the same memoir on page 161. Smith is quoting Sir Robert Anderson "the Ripper could go and come and get rid of his blood-stains in secret"....then Smith continues, possibly refering to three seperate crimes: "On three occations - the only three of which I can give reliable details - there was no need to provide the murderer with hot water and Sunlight soap. In Berners Street he did not mutilate the woman, and probably had very few blood-stains about him; in Mitre Square he used the woman's apron; and in Dorset Street he carefully washed his hands at the sink" Regards, Jon
Author: Leanne Perry Sunday, 02 July 2000 - 07:18 pm
G'day Richard, Where did you read of the rumour about Kelly's 'association with a blind boy'? The name 'Kelly' was a very popular Irish name. Bruce Paley says: 'At some point, Kelly's father came to London, in search of her, but she avoided seeing him, possibly out of shame and resentment.' and 'She had once remarked to a friend that her parents had "discarded her"' Mary Kelly was Catholic! At age 16, Kelly married a collier, who was killed in a mining accident. She then went to stay with a cousin, who was evidently a prostitute. Barnett said "She was following a bad life with her cousin". When she was 20 or 21, she arrived in London, to work out of a West End brothel. I wonder if she could have had a child to her husband, and had him adopted out, when her husband died? Maybe the guy who spat on her grave, was Joseph Barnett! Leanne!
Author: Caroline Anne Morris Monday, 03 July 2000 - 05:09 am
Hi All, The JtR A-Z explains the 'blind boy' story on page 267 of the 1996 revision, under Alice McKenzie. This murder victim was rumoured to have gone to a music hall with a blind boy named George Discon. The boy believed that Alice arranged to meet a man she'd talked to at the music hall, and so met her death. The story, in the Pall Mall Gazette, was garbled in The Sun five years later into a story about MJK. Love, Caz
Author: Harry Mann Monday, 03 July 2000 - 06:23 am
Having lived in a court similar to that of Millers court,I think it highly likely that a cry of murder heard there originated in the court itself.Such places act very much like an echo chamber,especially at night.The inner area seems insulated against noise from outside,and noise inside seems unable to escape the buildings surrounding the court. H.Mann.
Author: richard nunweek Monday, 03 July 2000 - 03:24 pm
Thanks for your comments. according to MJK her brother Henry in the presence of Barnet called on her out of the blue. No trace of a Henry Kelly has been found in the regiment in which he served. Has anybody tried to trace a Henry Muir. Brother of William Muir who was married to Abigail Kelly in 1881? and emigrated to Kansas City. He could be the Soldier!! Basically my theory on this is Abigail Kelly returned to England, ended up in London, under an alias known as MJK. Family friend spotted her, correspondance started from her family. any opinions please thanks
Author: Leanne Perry Tuesday, 04 July 2000 - 01:53 am
G'day Richard, Correction: Joeseph Barnett told of a brother having once visited Kelly, but otherwise it appears that she had no contact with her family. Not 'according to MJK...', unless she could speak while she was dead! Bruce Paley has researched Barnett/Kelly for over 15 years, and says that: 'Kelly had come from a stable family background. Born in Limerick, southwest Ireland, around 1864, she had six brothers and at least one sister.' I don't think she changed her name from 'Abigial'. If she wanted to change her name, to avoid her familys Catholic preaching, she probably would have changed her surname! Leanne!
Author: Leanne Perry Tuesday, 04 July 2000 - 08:27 am
G'day, Correction: JOSEPH BARNETT! Leanne!
Author: richard nunweek Tuesday, 04 July 2000 - 05:15 pm
According to the 1861 census Abigail Kelly aged 2, daughter of Dennis Kelly a marine storekeeper. John Rees, a family friend saw Abigail Kelly in June that year and by the description of the dead woman that is Mary Kelly, and the location, was convinced the dead woman was that of his ex-servant Abigail. richard
Author: Leanne Perry Tuesday, 04 July 2000 - 06:43 pm
G'day Richard, I believe 'Kelly' was a very common name, back then. What do you mean 'by the description of the dead woman that is Mary Kelly'? there wasn't much left of her to give a discription from! I think John Rees, might have panicked! Leanne!
Author: Christopher T George Tuesday, 04 July 2000 - 11:32 pm
Hello Richard: I don't know where you got your information from but numerous researchers have tried without success to fill in the details on Mary Jane Kelly's background and earlier years. The best information we have comes from Joe Barnett and even that may not be entirely accurate because Mary Jane Kelly almost certainly embroidered upon her past as did many of these women who became victims. Who is this John Rees? You say Rees was a "family friend." A family friend of whom? Are you saying Mary Jane Kelly was in Kansas living under the name of Abigail Kelly? I should very much doubt that that was so. The West End/Paris scenarios sound more likely, and no one has mentioned previously that she was in the United States. I may be wrong but Abigail does not sound like a good Irish Catholic girl's name. I think you are misled in this line of enquiry but I welcome the thoughts of others and your clarification of these points. Chris George
Author: Wolf Vanderlinden Wednesday, 05 July 2000 - 01:11 am
Richard, et all, Several people have already answered some of your questions but I will try to add to their earlier posts if I may. Mary Kelly did not have a son, blind or otherwise. Caz has explained about the blind boy tale, but the story that Kelly had a son seems to stem from the Times article, 10th Nov.1888, and was picked up by several other newspapers. They claim that she had a had a little boy, aged about 6 or 7 years living with her, the Toronto Globe mentions a ten year old "natural son", but this whole tale seems to be a confusion between Kelly and one Lizzie Fisher. Richard you wrote, "A lot happened prior to her death (example: she previously had no contact with her family and suddenly receives letters from her mother and contact from her brother." I'm not sure where this comes from as we know virtually nothing about Mary Kelly's dealings with her family. Mention of letters from her mother comes from John McCarthy's interview with the Times, mentioned above, in which he states, " Her mother lives in Ireland, but in what county I do not know. Deceased used to receive letters from her occasionally." This hardly sounds like a suddenly renewed relationship with a long lost family. As for her brother, it is from Joe Barnett's written testimony that we learn, "that she had a brother named Henry Serving in 2nd Battalion Scots Guards and known amongst his comrades as Johnto and I believe the Regiment is now in Ireland." As indeed the Scots Guards were serving in Ireland at that time this might point to some sort of contact between Mary and her brother but probably only of the written kind. Paul Begg states that joe Barnett had said that Kelly's brother did indeed visit her but in his inquest testimony, Barnett tells us, "she had 6 brothers at home and one in the army one was Henry Kelly I never spoke to any of them." (the Daily Telegraph, Tuesday, November 13, 1888, has it, "I never saw the brothers to my knowledge") Records of the Scots Guards for this time seem to be incomplete so it is possible that we will never be able to trace Henry "Johnto" Kelly, if indeed that was his, and Mary's, last name. Using what little information that we have from Barnett and others, no trace of Mary Jane Kelly, Ripper victim, can be found with any certainty. Is it possible that her real name was Abigail Kelly from Cardiff? Who knows, but it seems likely from what little we do know that Mary Kelly was originally from Ireland and not from Cardiff, although Leonard Matters incorrectly claimed that she was born there. Barnett tells us that she was born in Limerick and her family did indeed move to Wales when she was quite young but that they moved to Carmarthen or Carnarvon or Carnarvonshire. After the death of her husband she did move to Cardiff for an unspecified length of time before she moved on to London. That her family had returned to Ireland, or had never left it, can be inferred from her mothers letters sent from there and from Mary's statement to Lizzie Albrook that she wished she had money to return to Ireland where her people lived. Was Mary Kelly murdered by a copy cat killer? Very doubtful although some think that she was. It is hard to imagine the mind that needed the release that led to the "glut in Miller's Court" as being anyone other than the serial killer known as Jack the Ripper. In order to argue a copycat killing, one has to argue that two, or more, individuals shared a similar, rare psychopatholgy that up to that point in time had been unheard of and that the two, or more, disappeared into history never to be heard from again. A copycat needs only to cut the victims throat, as in the case of Elizabeth Stride, or add some slight, by comparison, cuts or stabs to the victims body, as in the case of Alice McKenzie. Copycats do not remove a human heart by burrowing up from the bottom of the rib cage, that rare breed, the "ripper" murderer does. As for Mary Kelly's funeral, Tom Cullen mentions the story but describes it as one of the apocryphal tales that Daniel Farson had collected for his 1959 television series, Farson's Guide to the British. Farson received this tale in a letter that he rightly describes as hearsay that cannot be corroborated. It might be true or more likely it is simply one of the hundreds of tall tales that have helped keep the Ripper alive all these years. Wolf.
Author: R.J. Palmer Wednesday, 05 July 2000 - 03:00 pm
Wolf--Interesting post. I won't elevate my own thoughts to the status of a theory, but I've always thought that Jack's fury in Miller's Court might have reflected his frustration at the increased presence of the police and vigilance committees which, quite possibly, kept him out of business for 5 1/2 weeks. Given the chance, he wanted to be emphatic. Just to make sure I understand you, are you saying that Stride and McKenzie were 'copycat' victims, or are you just using them as examples of an MO? Merely wondering. RJP
Author: Christopher-Michael DiGrazia Wednesday, 05 July 2000 - 03:56 pm
I might also add that the indefatigable Neal Shelden (in his very excellent "JTR and His Victims") could also shed no further light on the enigma that is the life of Mary Kelly. I would, however, recommend his slim book as an excellent addition to any Ripper library, and there is also a positive review of it in the latest issue of "Ripperologist." Speaking of which, the latest issue also has a photo of Leanne and Jules, for those of you who've wondered what our Oz cousins might look like. Very nise, as The Man Himself might say. CMD
Author: Jon Wednesday, 05 July 2000 - 07:02 pm
In those scary days ecliped by Jack the Ripper, any woman attacked with a knife to the throat would immediatly be thought of as another Ripper victim. Subsequently, when it is realized that this was not his work afterall, the attack is down graded to a 'copy-cat' killing. This is natural, whether it actually was a copy-cat or not.....we will never know, not until the perpetrator is caught, which is not about to happen. Somewhere, in the dark and vermin infested alley ways, you can faintly hear the whispers of some evil hearted little miscreants, "Oy, just slit 'er frowt, they'll only chalk an'uver one up to Jacky boy"...he say's with a grin. Stride, Coles & McKenzie were all very different from Jack's known(?) victims (Nichols, Chapman & Eddowes) so we are stuck with the label of 'copy-cat' for the others, like it or not.......it just gives people something else to argue about. :-) Regards, Jon
Author: Diana Wednesday, 05 July 2000 - 08:11 pm
Reading the book about Andrei Chikatilo allowed me to see how MO can evolve as the killer gets more in touch with his feelings and desires. Chikatilo's first 6 killings were different from the rest.
Author: Leanne Perry Wednesday, 05 July 2000 - 09:59 pm
G'day Jon, I don't know about Coles and McKenzie, because both those murders happened following those of Nichols, Chapman, Eddowes, Stride and Kelly, but if you saw the 'Causes Of Death' statistics for Whitechapel at the time, you would see that cold-blooded murder, was not common in the district. In 1887, a total of 1,602 deaths, were registered in Whitechapel. These came from disease, accidents and suicide. There was not a single homicide. Then in 1888, all these murders started. I prefer to think of Strides murder, as an unplanned Ripper one! Perhaps she knew something and Jack had to dispose of her, before he killed Eddowes, who also claimed to know something! Leanne!
Author: alex chisholm Wednesday, 05 July 2000 - 10:58 pm
Hi Leanne It may be a small point, I know, but it is one which I feel is worth recognising. There were in fact 2246 deaths recorded in the five sub-districts of Whitechapel in 1887. From this total Joseph Loane discounts 755 non-residents who died in Whitechapel, and adds 111 Whitechapel residents who died out-with the district, to arrive at a total of 1602 deaths of Whitechapel residents. Among these 1602 deaths none are recorded as homicide, but Loane gives no details of cause of death of the remaining 755 non-residents. Nevertheless, I don�t think there can be any doubt that 1888 was an exceptional year. Best Wishes alex
Author: Jon Thursday, 06 July 2000 - 07:45 am
Thankyou Alex Also, if I'm not mistaken, Leanne's quotation of 'Whitechapel' is the political district only, and does not include St George in the East, for the Lipski murder of 1887, nor Spitalfields. Quoting only the Whitechapel area, even for 1888, only lists Nichols as a murder victim. We tend to think of Whitechapel as 'the east end' when politically, of course it is a very small portion of the east end.
Author: Leanne Perry Thursday, 06 July 2000 - 10:00 am
G'day Alex, Bruce Paley's book says: "According to statistics collected in the 'Annual Report on the Sanitary Conditions of Whitechapel' by Joseph Loane, the Medical Officer for Health, there were seventy-one violent deaths in the district in 1887, of which sixty-nine were accidental. Most were the result of suffocation, fractures and contusions, burns and scalds. The remaining two deaths were classified as suicides, one by drowning, the other a poisoning. In all, a total of 1,602 deaths were registered in Whitechapel in 1887. The highest percentages of these came as a result of respitory diseases, followed closely by the constitutional diseases, which include phthisis, cancer, tuberculosis, meningitis and rheumatism.......the third greatest cause of death in the district was zymotic disease, such as diarrhoea and dysentery, diphtheria, venerial disease, and measles, scarlet fever and whooping cough.............out of all of these, only the homicide category showed no entries whatsoever." Leanne!
Author: alex chisholm Thursday, 06 July 2000 - 12:39 pm
Evening All Leanne, I know what Bruce Paley presents in his informative �Simple Truth� but, with regard to death statistics for Whitechapel 1887, he appears to have misinterpreted the report from which he quotes. The actual report confirms there were in fact 2246 deaths recorded in Whitechapel during 1887. 755 residents of other districts died and had their deaths recorded in Whitechapel during that year but, as deaths of non-residents could have no bearing on District Mortality Rates, these 755 were discounted by Loane and do not appear in his breakdown of cause of death. The table reproduced in �The Simple Truth� merely gives cause of death statistics for the 1491 Whitechapel residents who died in the district, together with 111 Whitechapel residents who died in other districts, giving a total of 1602 Whitechapel residents, wherever they died, whose deaths could influence District Mortality Rates. Nevertheless, the discounted 755 non-residents still died in Whitechapel during 1887, making the total recorded deaths in Whitechapel during that year 2246. Jon, although it may not be politically correct, for the purposes of Loane�s report Whitechapel consisted of the five sub-districts of Spitalfields; Mile End New Town (Whitechapel Infirmary); Whitechapel Church (London Hospital); Goodmans Fields, and Aldgate. All of which would, I think, fairly encompass the area of murders in 1888. Best Wishes alex
Author: Jon Thursday, 06 July 2000 - 01:23 pm
Thankyou Alex As the reported deaths for Whitechapel were far too high to be for a single small district (2246?), I appreciate you clarifying the matter. Even so, 2246 deaths in the year breaks down to almost 450 per district...38 per month/dist....10 people died every week, in each district, of one thing or another. (averaging, of course) I think you have to include the 755 deaths in this above averaging, as they may have been taken to the mortuary of the district in which they died. Jon
Author: Wolf Vanderlinden Thursday, 06 July 2000 - 05:19 pm
Hello all. R.J., the copycat question is an interesting one. Do I think that Stride and McKenzie were victims of a copycat killer? Well, yes and no. Depending on your definition of a copycat murderer, Stride isn't, strictly speaking the victim of one. If you use the definition that a copycat is one who purposely commits a crime in order to fool others into believing that his crime is the work of another, more famous killer, or who wants to take on some of the fame or infamy or fear generated by another then Stride is, IMHO, probably not a good candidate. It is possible that Stride's throat was cut rather than, say, her being stabbed to death, because that method of murder was now on everybody's mind but whether this was a conscious attempt to throw suspicion onto the Ripper or not, who can now say with any assuredness. I will point out that if Schwartz did indeed witness the fatal attack on Stride, her drunken attacker made absolutely no attempt to hide himself or his actions, something that in my mind tends to negate a Ripper-like copycat killing. Alice McKenzie, however, is a different matter in that there was an attempt at mutilation, an attempt to copy the Ripper's signature and MO. Either she was a victim of the Ripper or of a copycat killer, there's no two ways about it. The ultimate Ripper copycat killing was, in my mind, the murder of Ellen Bury by her husband William Henry Bury. Bury seemed to go out of his way to connect himself with the Ripper, drawing attention to the similarities between his wife's death and those in Whitechapel by telling the Dundee police that he had come forward because he didn't want people to think that he was the Ripper, and with enigmatic statements to friends and acquaintances. William Beadle, in his Jack the Ripper: Anatomy of a Myth, seems to think that Ellen was aware that her husband was the Ripper or at least suspicious enough that it was she who had chalked the messages, "Jack Ripper is at back of this door.", and, "Jack Ripper is in this sellar." on the walls of their Dundee tenement. Because of her suspicion, Beadle believes that Bury was forced to kill his wife. Why Bury would then leave the accusing chalk messages on the walls before he finally went to the police five days later is beyond me. It seems more likely that it was Bury himself who chalked the messages in an attempt to further connect himself with the fame and fear caused by the Ripper. One final note, I agree totally with Christopher-Michael DiGrazia's opinion of Neal Shelden's excellent Jack the Ripper and his victims. If you want to know more about the canonical victims early lives, especially what might have happened to family members in later years, this work is invaluable. The section on Mary Kelly being the only disappointment in that it reveals nothing new beyond what we already know, a consequence of Kelly's secretiveness (or mendacity) rather than Neal's thorough, and fascinating research. Wolf.
Author: Leanne Perry Thursday, 06 July 2000 - 06:25 pm
G'day Alex, I'm confused about this mate! The quote from Paley's book that I reproduced above, is from his text on page 70. Then there's a photograph of the actual document, on another page, showing where he gets his information from and how he doesn't 'misinterpret' it! The report doesn't confirm that there were 2246 deaths recorded! Are you saying that Loane had 2 reports? If he did then I can accept that information, and assume that Paley's research wasn't thorough enough! Leanne!
Author: alex chisholm Thursday, 06 July 2000 - 07:45 pm
Hi Leanne Sorry about any confusion. I detest statistics, and admit I�m pretty appalling at explaining them. Still I�ll try to make it a bit clearer. Loane only produced one report for 1887. This consisted of a 13 page written evaluation of statistics, with a 12 page Appendix of tabulated statistics. The table reproduced by Bruce Paley, from which he gleans the statistics discussed on page 70 of his book can be found in the Appendix of Loane�s report, entitled �Table M � Whitechapel District Deaths for 1887.� But on the first page of his written evaluation Loane makes it clear that this relates not to total deaths in the district but only to Whitechapel residents whose deaths could influence District Mortality Statistics. Table B �Deaths Registered in the Whitechapel District during the year� records the deaths for each quarter of the year in each sub-district, with a clear total of 2246. I hope that helps Best Wishes alex
Author: Leanne Perry Thursday, 06 July 2000 - 11:31 pm
G'day Alex, Thanks for explaining that! I was just trying to point out that homicide wasn't a common occurance in the year leading up to the Ripper murders. Disease, accidental deaths and suicides were the killers. It wasn't a very safe place, but not because of murderers! Leanne!
Author: alex chisholm Friday, 07 July 2000 - 12:03 am
You�re welcome, Leanne And I certainly agree with you. Despite the vagaries of statistics, I don�t think there can be any doubt that murder, particularly Ripper type murder, was far from commonplace in Whitechapel prior to 1888. Best Wishes alex
Author: Leanne Perry Friday, 07 July 2000 - 06:04 am
G'day Alex, If someone wanted to say eliminate his wife, it would have been far better to make it appear an accidental death! Reading these statistics, under: 'Violent Deaths, Accidental', there were 'Fractures', 'Gunshot-wounds' 'Cut, stab', 'Poison', 'Drowning', 'Suffocation' and 'Otherwise'. There were 17 'Fractures', 11 'Burns', and 24 'Suffocations'. With the police and public all looking out for 'Jack', it would have been too risky! Leanne!
Author: R.J. Palmer Saturday, 15 July 2000 - 01:44 pm
Wolf--I somehow managed to overlook your message above when it was first posted. Thanks for responding to my question, and making some interesting observations about 'copy-cats'. Along a different line, there is some indication that it became a bit of a fad to run around imitating Jack the Ripper in the autumn of 1888. For instance, there is the well-known story of Dr. William Holt. I have also found the following statement in The Saturday Review for 17 November 1888: "Newspaper jabber, and the folly to which it panders, are in the meantime producing their natural fruits in other ways. It is becoming a common thing with practical jokers of the lower orders to flourish a knife a call themselves by the now popular name of the murderer. Numbers of women, not always of the class who have been killed, have been persecuted in this fashion. Everyday the police-courts have cases of this kind before them. It would even appear that among the innumerable fools who will imitate anything one has been found to carry imitation to the length of the actual use of the knife. If in a case of this kind which has recently taken place a conviction is obtainable, it may at least be hoped that the heaviest penalty allowed by law will be inflicted". I have no idea to which incident in early November the writer is referring; maybe someone could offer suggestions. The following week (24 Nov) The Saturday Review continues: "The East End outrage is becoming a standing nuisance. As there may be earnest people silly enough to think that we apply this word to the crimes themselves, we hasten to explain that this is not our intention. By "East End outrage" in this connexion we mean the reports, more or less veracious, of various exhibitions of human inmecility which are now become a stock part of the papers. First, there was the so-called "mysterious outrage on a woman" reported last week, on which we have already sufficiently commented. Then there is the attempted murder in George Street, Spitalfields. Finally, there are the two additions to the list made on Thursday--the "scare" in Brick Lane and the portentious "incident" in Birmingham. As for the George Street outrage there is nothing to be said, except that, if there is any outrage, and a conviction results, it may be hoped that it will bring an adequate punishment. The last two "incidents" are fitter matters for comment. We are not sure that the Brick Lane scare may not be in the main a good sign. It will lead to some god if the wretched women who have been the victims of these outrages do begin to suffer from panics. It will be a wholesome thing for their equally ignoble companions of the male sex and for themselves if they are driven by fear to make their trade impossible to be followed." (The Birmingham incident was merely a foolish man reporting to the police that someone with scratches on his face was talking about the Whitechapel murders). With such vague references it is difficult to trace the events mentioned, but they show, no doubt, that the Whitechapel crimes were morbidly and heavily playing on the public consciousness, and might well have indeed spawned some copy-cats. RJP
Author: Wolf Vanderlinden Sunday, 16 July 2000 - 02:16 am
RJ, as regards to the the Saturday Review article, 24th November 1888, I won't comment on the "mysterious outrage on a woman", "the �scare' in Brick Lane" or " the portentious �incident' in Birmingham" (in which the clock struck thirteen at the exact moment that Lord Henry met his horribly gruesome, yet appropriately humorous, death. "Yes", muttered Holmes, his head surrounded by an acrid blue haze of smoke, "To this day I cannot look at a flowered tea cozy or a yellow budgerigar without having to suppress a shudder."). As for the "George Street outrage" this is the attack on Annie Farmer that had occurred four days earlier in which Farmer was supposedly attacked by a client. Farmers attack has all the elements for a typical false Ripper scare. A Spitalfields prostitute attacked by a knife wielding assailant who cuts her throat. The fact that the wounds were mere scratches most likely inflicted by Farmer herself in some sort of �ripp-off' of her client is besides the point. If it had been a real attack, it would fall into the area of the �typical' copy cat attack. Daniel Farson tells of a Ripper scare in Portsmouth in late November 1888 which culminated on November 26th in the murder of an eight year old boy, Percy Searle. Searle had his throat cut with a blunt pocket knife by a man described by an eyewitness as "a tall thin man who wore a top hat and was carrying a black bag." The eyewitness, an eleven year old named Husband, was eventually arrested and charged with the murder but was acquitted even though the knife found at the scene was proved to belong to him. There is some evidence that Husband and other boys in the area were playing a game of "Jack the Ripper", in this case with a sad and tragic outcome. The point that I am trying to make is that copy cat killings tend to be of this type. The victim is attacked with a knife, there is a wound to the throat and perhaps some other wounds added, as was the case in the death of the boy, Searle. What doesn't happen is the copy cat killer attacks and mutilates with the same ferocity as the "Ripper" type murderer. It amazes me sometimes when people post opinions that they don't believe that Mary Kelly was a Ripper victim. Considering the rarity of this type of sexual serial killer, I have to wonder who else do they think was out there with that same level of deviancy? Because if Kelly wasn't murdered by the Ripper then she was murdered by his twin. Wolf.
Author: Matt_G Wednesday, 06 September 2000 - 12:39 pm
Hello all - first time poster, long time lurker. This thorough rundown of the murder/death statistics from Whitechapel is outstanding. It seems to me that the "oh, murder!" cry would seem to be comparatively rare. The feeling I get from some descriptions of the Whitechapel area is that these crys would be ignored due to their frequency. Is this an exaggeration or was there a severe underreporting of serious crime (which might enable a guy like JtR to commit similar crimes that may be unreported?) Forgive a rookie his stupidity!
Author: Leanne Perry Thursday, 07 September 2000 - 10:28 pm
G'day Matt, The cry of "Oh, murder!" was commonly heard at the time of the Jack the Ripper scare! It was rare before and just after the murder of Tabram, but following the murder of Nichols, the public would have been cautious and a little suspicious of strangers. It was the 'Double Event' that really caused a panic. People thought they saw the Ripper everywhere and there are even stories of men dressing as women, in the hope of catching him. Repeating what I've said before: Violence was common in this rough neighborhood, as people fought to survive, but actual murder was rare. LEANNE!
Author: stephen borsbey Sunday, 10 September 2000 - 06:18 am
hello matt and leanne. i am new to the site. what a great site. iwill be asking questions periodically as i am interested in the victorian era. as they used to say. I remain your obedient servant. steve.
Author: Davidoz Friday, 15 December 2000 - 09:42 pm
Over the mighty city it rolled where streets of wretched vice, the unknown horror did unfold it's cloak...and whistled thrice. For blood is all... is everything. With knife & lantern, clock and bell, the Beast did carve its bloody ring, (and dare I say...a "X" as well!). Eleven horns in all, it showed (it's mortal wound had healed!), by art of cunning did encode the scroll that had been sealed. The Beast did come and go, I fear, it slouched through last night's rain, but left inscribed a mark that's clear, the NUMBER OF IT'S NAME. For Mary was that little lamb whose fleece was white, I know. And everywhere that Mary went the Beast was sure to go.

Add a Message