Casebook: Jack the Ripper - Main
   

Introduction
Victims
Suspects
Witnesses
Ripper Letters
Police Officials
Official Documents
Press Reports
Victorian London
Message Boards
Ripper Media
Authors
Dissertations
Timelines
Games & Diversions
Photo Archive
Ripper Wiki
Casebook Examiner
Ripper Podcast
About the Casebook

Most Recent Posts:
General Suspect Discussion: Suspect battle: Cross/Lechmere vs. Hutchinson - by Fisherman 3 minutes ago.
General Suspect Discussion: Suspect battle: Cross/Lechmere vs. Hutchinson - by MrBarnett 13 minutes ago.
Mary Jane Kelly: Mary Kelly, the Scouser? - by MayBea 24 minutes ago.
General Suspect Discussion: Suspect battle: Cross/Lechmere vs. Hutchinson - by Fisherman 32 minutes ago.
General Suspect Discussion: Suspect battle: Cross/Lechmere vs. Hutchinson - by MrBarnett 1 hour and 8 minutes ago.
Catherine Eddowes: A problem with the "Eddowes Shawl" DNA match - by RockySullivan 2 hours ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Catherine Eddowes: A problem with the "Eddowes Shawl" DNA match - (42 posts)
General Suspect Discussion: Suspect battle: Cross/Lechmere vs. Hutchinson - (38 posts)
General Discussion: Pet theories - (13 posts)
Mary Jane Kelly: Mary Kelly, the Scouser? - (5 posts)
General Victim Discussion: The London City Missionary in Whitechapel - (4 posts)
Scene of the Crimes: Berner Street help - (4 posts)

Wiki Updates:
Joseph Lawende
Edit: Chris
Mar 9, 2014, 10:12 am
Online newspaper archives
Edit: Chris
Mar 6, 2014, 11:56 pm
Miscellaneous research resources
Edit: Chris
Feb 13, 2014, 9:28 am
Charles Cross
Edit: John Bennett
Sep 4, 2013, 8:20 pm
Donald Swanson
Edit: Chris
Dec 9, 2012, 3:40 pm

Most Recent Blogs:
Mike Covell: Mike’s Book Releases
March 17, 2014, 3:18 am.
Mike Covell: A Study in Red – The Secret Journal of Jack the Ripper
March 3, 2014, 3:42 am.
Mike Covell: Almost there….
January 24, 2014, 4:05 am.
Mike Covell: Jack the Ripper - Year in Review 2013
December 28, 2013, 7:31 am.
Mike Covell: Jack the Ripper At Last? - Review
December 9, 2013, 2:08 am.
Mike Covell: From Whitechapel to Whitefriargate
November 27, 2013, 4:15 am.

Go Back   Casebook Forums > Ripper Discussions > Victims > Mary Jane Kelly

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #41  
Old 03-04-2012, 08:19 PM
Debra A Debra A is offline
Superintendent
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Yorkshire England
Posts: 2,010
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cogidubnus View Post
Hi Debra

Yes I'm aware the average age for women for a formal marriage was 25.1 years...what I'm genuinely not aware of is how that figure was calculated...was that first marriages only? If it included second marriages, did it include the huge second marriage bulge (particularly among Jewish women), of the 1870/1880s?

From various websites it appears that formal marriages could be concluded at an age as low as 11/12 years...I really don't know...one site I visited even suggested a theoretical 7 years old for a bride (but did mercifully say the marriage could only be legally consumated at 16 years)...I really don't know...

But significantly, among the vast number of other things I don't know, is whether the Kelly/Davies "marriage" actually formally took place, and if it did, where it might've been concluded, and using what names...
Hi Dave,
Perhaps the figures were calculated by including 2nd marriages also, I couldn't say for definite they weren't. I still don't think it was that common from my own research experiences, but I can't prove it statistically.

The legal age for marriage for a female was 12 I think, but a 12 year old could not marry without parental consent, which was needed right up until the age of 21 as I understand it. A woman marrying at age 21 or above was classed as full age on certificates up until a certain period when it then became common to include an age (another thing which could skew the marriage age figures I guess).

If MJK was not legally married I don't understand why she suddenly felt embarrassed enough to lie about being married to the collier, to Barnett? She was forthcoming in telling him of her other relationships and co-habitations, she also started living with Barnett the day after she met him on the streets and never married him. It wasn't as if it would have been a shock to Barnett to find she hadn't been legally married to the collier when she lived with him? Why the need to lie?

I just don't get it. I think she may have been older than she let on to Barnett.

Debs
__________________
,,`,, Debs ,,`,,
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 03-04-2012, 08:58 PM
Cogidubnus Cogidubnus is offline
Assistant Commissioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: West Sussex UK
Posts: 3,039
Default "It's me age doctor..."

Quote:
I just don't get it. I think she may have been older than she let on to Barnett.
Hi Debra

Yes I suspect you're right - it was on that hunch I was looking back as far as 1870 for Kelly/Davies on the Welsh Colliery disaster website - why couldn't she marry a miner called Spoonwackett ?

All the best
Dave
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 03-05-2012, 01:08 AM
Robert Robert is offline
Casebook Supporter
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 3,381
Default

Hi Debs

The story of the tragic marriage to the collier, the tragic death of her husband and (perhaps) the delay in being paid compensation, necessitating the switch to prostitution, all might have been calculated to arouse Barnett's sympathy and make him feel protective towards her. She would have been saying, "It's only bad luck that forced me to go on the streets." Maybe she spun this yarn to every man she met.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 03-05-2012, 02:36 AM
DanaeChantel DanaeChantel is offline
Constable
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 65
Default

It appears to me that MJK was rather, not so much vague about her past, but that she possibly lied about her past and her age and could have even fabricated the entire story of being married to a collier just for sympathy from Barnett or from anyone for that matter. Did anyone ever actually see a letter from her supposed "brother"? Maybe he wasn't her brother but a friend or a lover perhaps, or he was someone she cared for as a brother. How does anyone know her siblings lived on London? Did she speak of them to anyone? Its odd that they would not have attended her services, even if they were ashamed.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 03-05-2012, 02:40 AM
lynn cates lynn cates is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 12,350
Default right

Hello Danae.

"It's odd that they would not have attended her services, even if they were ashamed."

Precisely!

Cheers.
LC
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 03-05-2012, 04:13 AM
DanaeChantel DanaeChantel is offline
Constable
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 65
Default

Yes exactly! Back in those times it was easy to lie/and or change your name or even ones identity alltogether. Computers and fingerprinting and the like were not available during those days and times. Maybe MJK didn't even have siblings or maybe she had been a ward of the court, or an orphan. She could have said anything to anyone and it possibly would not have been questioned. It doesn't appear that she had many friends other than the prostitutes she associated with or men she dated/serviced. I feel she may have altered her past altogether. Had she siblings or even a brother, I feel certain he would have come to claim her belongings and at the very least assist in her burial as all her siblings would.

I don't think she had anyone to be truthful. What parents she did have were probably dead.

Did McCarthy try to contact her brother??
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 03-05-2012, 04:30 AM
lynn cates lynn cates is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 12,350
Default identity

Hello Danae. Yes, it's almost as if she were a person with her identity changed.

Reminds me of a witness protection program where an informant is given a "new identity."

Cheers.
LC
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 03-05-2012, 05:16 AM
DanaeChantel DanaeChantel is offline
Constable
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 65
Default

I would be willing to bet that this is what happened or possibly she had committed a crime in another town or another part of London. Nothing about her really makes much sense. The other victims families were found and contacted to my recollection and it wasn't really hard to find the other victims families. A lot was known about the other victims, such as how many children they had, husbands, etc. Nothing is really known about MJK. I personally believe she was hiding something.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 03-05-2012, 12:58 PM
richardnunweek richardnunweek is offline
Chief Inspector
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,925
Default

Hi Danae,
According to McCarthy's great grand-daughter, Mary's brother [ who was in the army] was contacted, and belongings were parcelled up and sent on .
It would appear that he was rather anxious that all of this might hinder his army prospects.
Regards Richard.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 03-05-2012, 09:16 PM
Debra A Debra A is offline
Superintendent
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Yorkshire England
Posts: 2,010
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert View Post
Hi Debs

The story of the tragic marriage to the collier, the tragic death of her husband and (perhaps) the delay in being paid compensation, necessitating the switch to prostitution, all might have been calculated to arouse Barnett's sympathy and make him feel protective towards her. She would have been saying, "It's only bad luck that forced me to go on the streets." Maybe she spun this yarn to every man she met.

Hi Robert,
Yes,that definitely has more of a ring of truth about it. Thanks.
__________________
,,`,, Debs ,,`,,
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 08:52 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.