Tailkinker

Answer: As the Ripper was never caught and interrogated, it can never be said with absolute certainty that Kelly was one of his victims. Her death does, however, fit the pattern of Ripper murders quite well with regard to time, general location, methodology and class of victim. There was also a noted trend of increasing levels of mutilation as the murders went on, so, while the damage was considerably more extensive that the previous killings, that also fits with a noted trend of the Ripper murder - it's also worth considering that, as Kelly was apparently his final kill, he may well have wanted to sign off with a particularly grand statement, hence the extreme level of mutilation to the body. This would also explain why the attack uncharacteristically took place indoors - what Jack had in mind for Kelly would take a considerable period of undisturbed time, more than could be guaranteed in an on-street attack. It's also believed that Jack had been interrupted during the murder of Elizabeth Stride on his previous night of violence some weeks earlier - this could also have led him to alter his modus operandi to ensure that this would not be repeated. So, no, it cannot be stated categorically that Kelly was a victim of Jack the Ripper, however the evidence suggests a high probability that this was the case, enough so that many people consider this to be a fact.

Tailkinker ★

Answer: Kelly regularly spent time with several other prostitutes, as we see in the film, but there's no particular evidence that Kelly was acting in a sort of mentor role to any of them. There is, however, evidence that Kelly did share a room with another prostitute, so the fictional 'Ada' may have some small basis in fact. However, none of the reports of Kelly's murder give any indication that there was any doubt about the identity of the victim.

Tailkinker ★

Answer: In the original book, Merrick's appearance is used to show William Gull's education, expertise as an anatomist and that he recognises and respects cultural diversity - Gull assures Merrick that, had he been born in India, he would be worshipped as a descendant of the elephant-headed god, Ganesa. In this spirit, Gull even offers the victim of his first Ripper slaying to Ganesa as a sacrifice, as Indians make a sacrifice to Ganesa at the beginning of an important enterprise. Merrick is present as a vehicle to establish the rich nature of Gull's character. When it comes to the film, however, this subtlety is completely lost - it seems very much that the scriptwriter noted Merrick's appearance in the book and felt that it would be cool to include the character in his script. As such, as you point out, it does feel that Merrick's presence, stripped of the subtleties of the book, is almost entirely pointless.

Tailkinker ★