A Theory -The access to Mary Kelly

[Bridewell]

Either Or

He had a longish dark coat on, not an overcoat, and he had a pot of ale in his hand

So who established a "pot" meant a pail and not a mug, and by what source?

A pot is a mug, jug or glass, a pail is a bucket.

Hi Jon,

And a can is a can - a metal item. Her inquest testimony is as you have outlined, but her witness statement - the earlier reference - says:

"the man was carrying a quart can of beer".

So how did she identify the contents as beer? I would contend that she assumed the contents were beer because of the nature of the container - a beer can. A quart container needs a handle to be easily portable in one hand. Mrs Cox didn't specifically say the item was a pail - but she didn't say it was a tankard either = and the image I posted was of a 19th century 'tin' beer bucket. I think the pail type of 'can' is more likely than a mug, but I concede that either is possible in the context.

[Wickerman]

Sally

Of course. Which exactly why we ought to consider applying our critical faculty when assessing witness testimony; rather than taking it at face value; because, as we can see, due to the many inconsistencies and contradictions inherent in witness testimony, doing that leads us precisely nowhere.

I'm all for that approach. Taking what a witness say's about an incident at face value is the norm. Then, we consider what we know about the incident from other sources, or what we learn about the incident from modern research and apply reason.
If we can demonstrate the witness to have been mistaken then we show why, if we cannot then we are bound to accept the story.

On what grounds do we do otherwise, answer me that.
Without due cause, what reason do we have to reject the story?

Yes, that's right. However, the accuracy of that historical record cannot be taken at face value.

True.
The historical record is what was recorded about the event at the time, whether the record is wholly true, or entirely factual is another matter entirely.
What I was saying was a little different.

I said, no matter what modern interpretations are promoted today, what Hutchinson, Lewis & Kennedy said is part of the historical record of the Whitechapel murders. Our ever changing, in many cases ill thought out interpretations, are not part of the historical record of the Whitechapel murders.

Actually, we don't know what she was doing, do we? We make assumptions.

We don't know, but we have statements which tell us. If we choose to reject these statements and replace them with our own hypotheses then we are just re-writing history to suit our own agenda's.

Did anybody suggest that she was out looking for laundry?

At the time? No.
Did anyone suggest Kennedy was an invented witness?

Incidently, your other "invented witness's", Mrs Paumier & Sarah Ronay apparently did their civic duty, they managed to get the weirdo arrested.

"A man was arrested last night in Whitechapel on suspicion of having committed the Dorset-street crime. He was pointed out to the police by some women as a man who had accosted them on Thursday night and whose movements excited suspicion. He was taken to Commercial-street police-station, followed by an immense crowd."
The Northern Echo, 10 Nov. 1888.

If I'm not mistaken that was the Britannia-man, aka Bethnal Green botherer, hauled in and questioned.

Now the police knew his face, no wonder he never killed again.


Best Wishes, Jon S.

[Wickerman]

Hi Jon,

And a can is a can - a metal item. Her inquest testimony is as you have outlined, but her witness statement - the earlier reference - says:

"the man was carrying a quart can of beer".

So how did she identify the contents as beer? I would contend that she assumed the contents were beer because of the nature of the container - a beer can. A quart container needs a handle to be easily portable in one hand. Mrs Cox didn't specifically say the item was a pail - but she didn't say it was a tankard either = and the image I posted was of a 19th century 'tin' beer bucket. I think the pail type of 'can' is more likely than a mug, but I concede that either is possible in the context.

Thankyou Colin, yes.

Why do you think the Coroner described the container as a "can", he never saw it.

Mrs Cox did see it, she described it as a "pot".

Who is most likely to be right?

Regards, Jon S.
P.S. I used to have a pewter beer mug when I was a teenager, that could be either a "can" or a "pot".

[Wickerman]

duplicate - sorry

[Garry Wroe]

Granted, there could have been lots of Blotchy men about, but the fact that the one seen by Galloway is evasive when he notices he has been spotted does suggest he may have seen THE Blotchy.

As subsequent newspaper reports revealed, Mike, the Blotchy lookalike was an undercover policeman.

[Abby Normal]

Thankyou Colin, yes.

Why do you think the Coroner described the container as a "can", he never saw it.

Mrs Cox did see it, she described it as a "pot".

Who is most likely to be right?

Regards, Jon S.
P.S. I used to have a pewter beer mug when I was a teenager, that could be either a "can" or a "pot".

It could also be a parrot or a screwdriver, or whatever else you wanted to call it but it wouldn't be an accurate description.

Blotchy was carrying a metal container of beer-a pot, a can a pail, that was a common at the time for buying beer to go.

Why do you focus on such meaningless minutia sometimes Wick?

[GregBaron]

Life is meaningless...

Why do you focus on such meaningless minutia sometimes Wick?

The whole point of Casebook is meaningless minutia Abby. C'mon now...




Greg

[Abby Normal]

The whole point of Casebook is meaningless minutia Abby. C'mon now...




Greg

Im going to start a thread on how many Tumbletys can dance on the head of a pin

[lynn cates]

minutiae

Hello Abby, Greg. If you'll forgive the observation, it is sometimes PRECISELY the minutiae that breaks the case.

Q: What was the phrase overheard at Phoenix Park (falsely attributed to Sir Freddy) which linked Joe Brady to the attempted murder of Dennis Field and an eventual break in the former case?

Cheers.
LC

[Wickerman]

Im going to start a thread on how many Tumbletys can dance on the head of a pin

What type of 'pin' would that be, a hat pin, a hair pin, push-pin, or a bowling pin?



Regards, Jon S.

[Abby Normal]

What type of 'pin' would that be, a hat pin, a hair pin, push-pin, or a bowling pin?



Regards, Jon S.

HAHA!! Now thats funny. Good one wick and I appreciate your sense of humor!

[Sally]

Or a Bobby Pin?

Maybe not...

[GregBaron]

How minute can we go...

Im going to start a thread on how many Tumbletys can dance on the head of a pin

I would suggest that for every 100 dancing Tumblety's we would have 114 Feigenbaum's, 107 Isenschmidt's and 102 Druitt's...

Hello Abby, Greg. If you'll forgive the observation, it is sometimes PRECISELY the minutiae that breaks the case.

Q: What was the phrase overheard at Phoenix Park (falsely attributed to Sir Freddy) which linked Joe Brady to the attempted murder of Dennis Field and an eventual break in the former case?

Hi Lynn,

I don't know the answer but I'd guess that it illustrates your point. And yes, I agree that minutia can break the case.

The particular minutia that we are talking about here concerns Blotchy's beer container. Obviously, it was never found, so assuming the sighting was accurate, he must have taken it with him. Why? Well, he either had more beer which probably means he wasn't in the room very long or he knew it might be used as evidence. The latter is obviously the more intriguing suggestion...

Feel free to further minimize the discussion....



Greg

[lynn cates]

villain

Hello Greg. Thanks.

It was, "Ah! You villain."

Cheers.
LC

[Bridewell]

Witness Statement

Thankyou Colin, yes.

Why do you think the Coroner described the container as a "can", he never saw it.

Mrs Cox did see it, she described it as a "pot".

Who is most likely to be right?

Regards, Jon S.
P.S. I used to have a pewter beer mug when I was a teenager, that could be either a "can" or a "pot".

Hi Jon,

I wasn't talking about what the coroner said, but to answer your question, the person most likely to be right is Mrs Cox who in her witness statement, taken by the police on the day of the murder , referred to the man as carrying "a quart can of beer". I too had a pewter tankard but I've never heard anyone refer to such an item as a 'can'.