Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Wilson vs Bierman - A Victorian Rashomon

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    p.p.s.

    Originally posted by Anna Morris View Post
    Interesting.

    My problem with Hutch's man is that Mr. A. is over dressed in preparation to commit a gory murder in a small room. He must have taken off a number of articles of clothing. Did he count them to make sure he put them all back on again and left nothing behind? Or we can argue that Mr. A. could not have been Jack, except the police seemed to be looking for someone like Mr. A. and they seemed to reject Blotchy's description. Our idea of what Jack looked like is basically Mr. A.
    I forgot:

    'they seemed to reject Blotchy's description'

    How do you mean?
    Like not taking him as seriously?

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Daniel Cazard View Post
      I forgot:

      'they seemed to reject Blotchy's description'

      How do you mean?
      Like not taking him as seriously?
      It's something in a news article of the time. A fellow saw and followed a man of Blotchy's description then went to the police and told them where the man lived. The police were not interested.

      There has been a lot of discussion on this at times and theorizing that the man that looked like Blotchy may even have been working with the police, thus they knew this particular man was not the killer.

      There are other things, however. In James Tully's book about James Kelly ("Prisoner 1167"), he goes into depth about James Kelly's mother-in-law's house being searched, etc. soon after MJK's murder.

      James Kelly had the basic look, like PAV and others that have been suggested. In around 1902 Abberline thought Kozlowski could well have been Jack. Kozlowski looked like these others, not Blotchy. I know of no instance where authorities said they were looking for a man who looked like Blotchy.

      The closest I can find to that is Walter Dew's memoir where he says the MJK's killer was the "man with the beard" last seen with her early in the morning. But I feel Walter Dew is just about useless on the matter of JtR. He may have said this man had a brown beard but I don't remember. The only real reason to think he refers to Blotchy is the time frame he suggests.
      The wickedness of the world is the dream of the plague.~~Voynich Manuscript

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Anna Morris View Post
        It's something in a news article of the time. A fellow saw and followed a man of Blotchy's description then went to the police and told them where the man lived. The police were not interested.

        There has been a lot of discussion on this at times and theorizing that the man that looked like Blotchy may even have been working with the police, thus they knew this particular man was not the killer.

        There are other things, however. In James Tully's book about James Kelly ("Prisoner 1167"), he goes into depth about James Kelly's mother-in-law's house being searched, etc. soon after MJK's murder.

        James Kelly had the basic look, like PAV and others that have been suggested. In around 1902 Abberline thought Kozlowski could well have been Jack. Kozlowski looked like these others, not Blotchy. I know of no instance where authorities said they were looking for a man who looked like Blotchy.

        The closest I can find to that is Walter Dew's memoir where he says the MJK's killer was the "man with the beard" last seen with her early in the morning. But I feel Walter Dew is just about useless on the matter of JtR. He may have said this man had a brown beard but I don't remember. The only real reason to think he refers to Blotchy is the time frame he suggests.
        Hi Anna,

        thanks.

        You don't have a link to the article, by any chance? I've either forgotten or am unaware of it.

        But generally, you're probably right. And to be frank, I'd share the disinterest for Blotchy Man as the perp. That doesn't mean, though, that I'd condone an investigation that hadn't been thorough; any person seen with Mary that night should have been sought out for questioning.

        'Prisoner 1167' is yet another book I've still to read, especially considering that James Kelly had been the 1st person ever I'd looked at at the very beginning of deeper preoccupation with the case - very quickly disregarding him as a suspect, but being fascinated with his life.

        I agree about Walter Dew, even though I cannot help liking him, meaning my impression of him (that would be the impression all that is known about him is making on me, I cannot do a Walter Dew-impression).
        Then again, he's a reminder of quite a few cops of the time having had quite odd recollections of certain details of the case.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Phillip Walton View Post
          I have some doubts as to whether Kelly was a Ripper victim. Its possible that whoever killed her dressed it up to look like a Ripper killing. If it wasn't the Ripper the most likely suspect is Barnett, with the help of Hutchinson who helped him by laying a false trail. The Ripper himself could even have been dead by November 1888. This is only my theory and I put the possibility of it at no more than 20%.
          Hello,
          I'm still interested in your arguments, should you still be listening.
          See also --> below.

          I've collected my thoughts on the matter and posted them here:

          http://www.jtrforums.com/showthread....759#post304759

          Comment


          • #20
            I think Hutchinson's story and description of astrakan man are to good to be true. If he was lying the question is why? That he was present on the evening of the murder there is little doubt and he was extensively questioned by the police for seven hours before they decided that he was not the killer. The other main suspect is Joseph Barnett who was living with Kelly until shortly before her murder. He claimed that he left because Kelly was selling herself on the streets but we only have his word for it. A possible explanation is that Barnett was pimping off of Kelly and that she threw him out and this is the motive for the murder. Hutchinsons part in all this was either he was acting as lookout for Barnett or was blackmailing him and created his story to throw the police off of the scent. It is also strange that after the murder of Eddowes the ripper waited over a month before killing Kelly, his urge to kill would have been so strong that he took the risk of killing two on one night. If we assume that Kelly was not a ripper victim it might be worthwhile looking at the first four killings without taking the Kelly killing into account to see if there is a link that is absent from the Kelly murder.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Phillip Walton View Post
              I think Hutchinson's story and description of astrakan man are to good to be true. If he was lying the question is why? That he was present on the evening of the murder there is little doubt and he was extensively questioned by the police for seven hours before they decided that he was not the killer. The other main suspect is Joseph Barnett who was living with Kelly until shortly before her murder. He claimed that he left because Kelly was selling herself on the streets but we only have his word for it. A possible explanation is that Barnett was pimping off of Kelly and that she threw him out and this is the motive for the murder. Hutchinsons part in all this was either he was acting as lookout for Barnett or was blackmailing him and created his story to throw the police off of the scent. It is also strange that after the murder of Eddowes the ripper waited over a month before killing Kelly, his urge to kill would have been so strong that he took the risk of killing two on one night. If we assume that Kelly was not a ripper victim it might be worthwhile looking at the first four killings without taking the Kelly killing into account to see if there is a link that is absent from the Kelly murder.
              I certainly agree with you that Hutch's whole story begs quite a willingness for credulity. And that he was lying is a good possibility. If he was a liar, that didn't necessarily make him a murderer. The question is indeed why, why would he be lying. Several possibilities have been suggested over the years, having been her murderer is one of them. I can't favour any of them as approaching certainty, so my answer is I just don't know.

              Meanwhile anything linking Barnett and Hutchinson as complicit in Mary's murder can only be conjection created by the two men's respective relations and/or connections to Mary, as well as to the crime scene. It's a resulting image. I'm not saying that it's impossible, but we don't have Barnett at or near the crime scene by anyone's testimony. That we cannot be sure about his exact whereabouts is not quite enough; this would go for numerous other people as well.

              As for his motive having been dumped, and this possibly in connection of his having pimped her out: the latter would only, but not much, make sense if it had been exclusively about money, she would have been good enough with taking out to the streets in search for clients on her own then; she had been seen bringing home a client, Blotchy Man, by a witness.
              But being dumped, can it be a motive for murder, yes, but more often it is not, and until we have something more conclusively pointing that direction I wouldn't use the mere possibility for turning him into a serious suspect. I've been dumped in my life. I recall two of these where I definitely wished to kill the respective ex. They are alive.

              I wrote a little in this respect, the murder and mutilations as per motive, and which appear better and worse ones, in that llittle Kelly-effort, it's linked further down this thread, also about what I think makes Kelly a probable JtR-victim.

              'It is also strange that after the murder of Eddowes the ripper waited over a month before killing Kelly, his urge to kill would have been so strong that he took the risk of killing two on one night.' -
              I'm not quite sure if I understand you here. If we count Liz Stride in, then 2 victims would have been Eddowe's night. Or do you mean that if he would have killed next time after such a long wait he would have killed twice in that night? Sorry, I'm not well enough acquainted with him on a social level, so I wouldn't be able to tell, I would doubt that that's a given, however.
              Also, not strange at all. Simply telling us another story than a murderer would have told us who'd have killed by a beat, e.g. every full moon. We tend to forget that none of the intervals are actually that long. A month can pass by quickly, depending what you do and what happens, and we know of a lot of serial killers whose intervals are much, much longer than that.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Daniel Cazard View Post
                Hello everyone,

                As I looked at Rose Bierman's account again, I thought we don't only have a different set of information on what happened that night, but also possibly about the relationship of these two women.
                So I felt compelled to write this little musing I've attached.

                Tell me what you think,
                have a good weekend
                Hi Daniel

                I just read your OP and attached article. It was an interesting read.

                I also liked the link to Roshomon, which led me to Wikipedia. I hadn't heard of that Japanese movie which is listed as an early great. I'll watch it - many thanks !

                I've also found Deb's research very interesting into who was Ada Wilson.

                In summary, she was a prostitute as Rose mentions different men visiting her.

                When the man ran out, Rose said Ada was "partially dressed" so he appeared to attack her in the middle of something.

                Rose said she had seen the man before, so he was a regular. It seems unlikely he was her ex-husband as Ada would have said something about that when she screamed.

                Ada's statement that she was robbed by a. Man who knocked on the door asking for money was a lie to cover the truth that she was a prostitute.

                If this was an early attack by JTR, then is suggests a scenario that he discovered he had syphillis (which Deb's research found Ada had) and came back to retaliate. This could have led to a vendetta against prostitutes.

                However, keen to explore more on the description of the man - 25-35 y.o, fair, sunburnt face, moustache.

                What does sunburnt mean ? Unusual at time of year ? Medical condition ?

                All the best
                Craig

                Comment

                Working...
                X