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: Favorite suspect/s? - by GUT 49 minutes ago.
Doctors and Coroners: Eddowes' gut cut - by Wickerman 3 hours ago.
Shades of Whitechapel: Dennis Nilsen - by Pcdunn 6 hours ago.
Maybrick, James: Diary Handwriting - by Abby Normal 6 hours ago.
Maybrick, James: Mike Barrett Interview - September 1995 - by DirectorDave 7 hours ago.
Maybrick, James: Mike Barrett Interview - September 1995 - by DirectorDave 7 hours ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Maybrick, James: Diary Handwriting - (15 posts)
Doctors and Coroners: Eddowes' gut cut - (11 posts)
Maybrick, James: Too Sensible & Competent - (10 posts)
Maybrick, James: Acquiring A Victorian Diary - (8 posts)
Maybrick, James: Diary Quirks - (5 posts)
Maybrick, James: Mike Barrett Interview - September 1995 - (4 posts)

Wiki Updates:
Robert Sagar
Edit: Chris
May 9, 2015, 12:32 am
Online newspaper archives
Edit: Chris
Nov 26, 2014, 10:25 am
Joseph Lawende
Edit: Chris
Mar 9, 2014, 10:12 am
Miscellaneous research resources
Edit: Chris
Feb 13, 2014, 9:28 am
Charles Cross
Edit: John Bennett
Sep 4, 2013, 8:20 pm

Most Recent Blogs:
Mike Covell: A DECADE IN THE MAKING.
February 19, 2016, 11:12 am.
Chris George: RipperCon in Baltimore, April 8-10, 2016
February 10, 2016, 2:55 pm.
Mike Covell: Hull Prison Visit
October 10, 2015, 8:04 am.
Mike Covell: NEW ADVENTURES IN RESEARCH
August 9, 2015, 3:10 am.
Mike Covell: UPDDATES FOR THE PAST 11 MONTHS
November 14, 2014, 10:02 am.
Mike Covell: Mike’s Book Releases
March 17, 2014, 3:18 am.

Go Back   Casebook Forums > Ripper Discussions > Witnesses

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #21  
Old 05-11-2008, 08:39 PM
Christine Christine is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 291
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by paul emmett View Post
Hello, Christine.

If Phillips made a very serious mistake, what about Bond? Phillips put ETD between 5:00 and 6:00; Bond put it between 1:00 and 2:00. Shows this isn't an exact science.
Very good point. Do we know what Drs. Bond and Phillips were basing their assertions on? Bond seems to have been looking at rigor, which is less reliable than temperature.

By 8:30 in the morning there must have been a lot of people around and enough light to see by. Given all the people who seemed to be aware of the comings and goings in Miller's Court at 4:00 AM, Jack must have been peeping out the window to look for a time to make a run for it, not to mention risking someone peeping in to see whether Mary had earned enough to pay her rent....
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 05-11-2008, 08:41 PM
Christine Christine is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 291
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dougie View Post
Christine
Not having known either of them,I cant answer that,but in 1888 Im guessing to a large part "estimated time of death" might have been mostly educated guesswork.Did the temperature of the room play any part in the estimated time of death?i.e the fire ...or lack of.
regards
I don't know, we're past my areas of expertise. But certainly by the LVP they had the technology (i.e., reasonably good thermometers) to do this; I just don't know when they first did it.

There are so many things that they could have done better, had they only known....
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 05-11-2008, 08:50 PM
paul emmett paul emmett is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 370
Default

Yes, Bond used rigor, and I can't recollect ever hearing about temperatures with respect to any of the victims.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 05-11-2008, 08:59 PM
Simon Wood Simon Wood is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 4,244
Default

Hi All,

It would be interesting to know the subject of conversation between Doctor George Bagster Phillips and C.B. Stuart-Wortley, under-secretary for the Home Office, at the House of Commons on the evening of November 9th 1888.

Regards,

Simon
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 05-11-2008, 10:15 PM
richardnunweek richardnunweek is offline
Superintendent
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,221
Default

Thanks everyone,
For at least discussing what is a valid point, ie.. 'The last witness'
Bob, has the belief that I have raised this thread to enhance my theory, to which I ask 'What Theory Bob?.
I have always on Casebook stood by my conviction 'Joseph Barnet number one suspect' but this thread is not about that individual, it is about the last named witness, in the last [assumed] Whitechapel murder, that being Mrs Caroline Maxwell, who swears on oath at Mjks Inquest that she spoke to the already dead woman...which medical opinion suggested, ...this is obviously impossible, but she was adamant dispite warning from the coroner that her evidence was not acceptable to medical reports.
My argument is therefore, unless Mrs Maxwell is drained of intelligence, her statement should be very much considered, and this being the case then that witness, actually saw a possible suspect in 'Market porter' and if one takes that possibility, then a morning murder [ after 9am ] is very much 'on'
Regards Richard.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 05-11-2008, 11:28 PM
paul emmett paul emmett is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 370
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by richardnunweek View Post
My argument is therefore, unless Mrs Maxwell is drained of intelligence, her statement should be very much considered, and this being the case then that witness, actually saw a possible suspect in 'Market porter' and if one takes that possibility, then a morning murder [ after 9am ] is very much 'on'
Regards Richard.
Hi, Richard. I know we have "discussed" this before because I like Maxwell, but not a later killing because of the fish and the fire and the mutilations and the Doctors and the time. But let me add just one more reason that is most relevant to this thread. It's hard for Maxwell to be the last witness because if she saw MJK, it seems logical that Lewis did too. And that sighting would, in turn, make the time frame even more unlikely.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 05-12-2008, 06:51 AM
Barnaby Barnaby is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 676
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Simon Wood View Post
Hi All,

One question we cannot avoid isó

What are the consequences of Caroline Maxwell being right?

Regards,

Simon
I'll play along. Suppose the body is not Kelly's. Outside of escape from royal persecution , do Joe and Mary have anything practical to gain by not correcting this mistake?
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 05-12-2008, 06:34 PM
Jon Guy Jon Guy is offline
Superintendent
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Blighty
Posts: 2,719
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Hinton View Post
And she did know MJK,
Now donít you think that if that did happen somebody would have seen her? What about the customers in the pub? What about the person who served her the drink? What about the people standing next to her? It is physically impossible for all that to happen and no-one sees her.
Hi Bob

Good points raised,but whomever Maxwell thought was Kelly that morning also seems to have disappeared.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 05-12-2008, 09:36 PM
paul emmett paul emmett is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 370
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Barnaby View Post
I'll play along. Suppose the body is not Kelly's. Outside of escape from royal persecution , do Joe and Mary have anything practical to gain by not correcting this mistake?
Hello, Barnaby.

I'll play along too, although I am anxious to see what Simon would say. I'd start with MJK's rapid fall from grace, from the west side to the east, to suggest something was amiss. Too bad she did not like the part in France. Was she, I wonder, financed ahead of time? And then there's Mccarthy. It's not that she would need to bolt to escape the arrears, but the more I read on old John, the more I am uncertian about the kind of web MJK might have been trapped in in Miller's Ct. McCarthy doesn't seem like a man you'd want to owe your soul to.

We can, of course, only speculate, but at least these possibilities don't entail any Dukes.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 05-12-2008, 10:14 PM
perrymason
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I think the thread premise is a good one... however I think some of the conclusions you make Richard aren't,.. with respect to Caroline Maxwell, George Hutchinson, and his suspect.

As Bob pointed out early on...there is no reason to suggest that speaking only twice to someone...from an unknown distance, over the course of 4-6 months, qualifies her as even a passing acquaintance of Marys, and she is therefore not someone who could be considered an infallible witness regarding Mary Kelly. The easiest way to assess her statement however, is to do the math. If Maxwell saw Mary, then she is not killed until after 9am, maybe later. The body that was in bed at 1:30pm had rigor onset, and it increased during the exam. Her statement is at odds with the medical data.

We dont know who she saw, or when it actually was, only that it almost certainly wasnt Mary Kelly on the morning of November 9th, 1888. There is only one way Caroline could be accurate...If she saw Mary at the date and time specified, and someone else is already dead in Marys bed,... because the medical evidence suggests that the woman examined at 1:30 had been dead for a minimum of 4 hours, but maybe as many as 8 hours.

So now you have a hungover Mary just wandering around, oblivious to the fact someone is cut to pieces in her room.If your going to suggest a conspiracy, at least have Mary in on it, rather than stumbling around vomiting.

Because Caroline Maxwells account is only accurate if the woman in the bed at 1:30pm isnt Mary Kelly.....but gets identified as her by her lover, her landlord, Bowyer, and anyone else who actually knew her... well.

The last man seen with Mary Jane Kelly is still the same man its been since November 16th, 1888....Blotchy Faced Man, seen by Mary Ann Cox at approx 11:45pm on November 8th, entering Marys room with her.

Best regards.
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 09:38 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.