A Theory -The access to Mary Kelly

[Lechmere]

But that same sketch presents someone of very unmilitary appearance.

[Bridewell]

Never mind, Bridewell.

I seldom do.

We're here now, nicely entrenched in yet another Hutchinson debate.

In which participation is entirely optional.

[Wickerman]

Hi Bridewell,
Isn't necessary to provide "proof" that Hutchinson was lying in order to demonstrate the strong likelihood that he was. Other discredited witnesses, such as Matthew Packer and Emmanuel Violenia, weren't "proved" to have been lying either,.....

I think you should tell it like it is.

Packer was proven to have lied by his own words. First he claimed he saw no-one and nothing suspicious. Then, four days later, he claimed he served a man & woman, who then stood about in the street.
The police concluded that Packer is not a reliable witness.
By his own words he was proven to have lied, what we don't know is, which story was the lie, and which was the truth.


Violenia was sussed out under questioning:
"Subsequently, cross-examination so discredited Violenia's evidence that it was wholly distrusted by the police, and Pizer was set at liberty".

Neither case is applicable to Hutchinson.

And, I still need to know about your reliable press source.

Regards, Jon S.

[DRoy]

What are some more of the odd things said during MJK's inquest that don't quite seem to make sense but could help us establish the access to MJK?

- Bowyer commented on how he had to move the curtain in order to see inside MJK's room yet Mary Ann Cox states that the blinds were down. And what about the coat that Maria Harvey left there and was apparently covering the broken window? Maybe MJK had both blinds and a curtain but since Mary Ann Cox saw blinds at 11:45pm on thursday evening and Bowyer only moved a curtain on Friday morning (no mention of the coat) then perhaps this is a clue about the access to MJK?

- Regarding Maria Harvey's coat she left with MJK, she is quoted by the Daily Telegraph as saying this about it..."saw the black overcoat in a room in the court on Friday afternoon". Odd thing to say "in a room" since she knows she left it in MJK's room on Thursday. She also stayed with MJK for two nights so she must know what room she was talking about. And was it hanging over the window or not?

- Three witness (the only ones that describe anyone around the scene of the murder) all testify to seeing a "stout" man. Mary Ann Cox testified to seeing "a short, stout man" at 11:45pm Thursday evening. Sarah Lewis describes seeing "a stout-looking man, and not very tall." at 2:30 am on Friday morning. Caroline Maxwell testified to seeing MJK talking to a man outside the Britannia public house at approximately 8:45 am on Friday morning and describes the man as "a little taller than me and stout" (she apparently was between 5'2" & 5'5"). Whether the stout man was the same person or not is speculation but still interesting.

- Sarah Lewis was staying at #2 Miller's Court and at "nearly four" heard "murder" being shouted at her door (which is directly across from MJK's room). Elizabeth Prater staying above MJK heard "Oh murder!" between 3:30 & 4:00 am. So we have two people who would be the closest to MJK's room hearing almost the same thing at approximately the same time. However, Julia Vanturney who lived at #1 Miller's Court (also directly across from MJK's room) didn't hear anything (except as per the Morning Advertiser's version of the inquest states "I heard a strange sound with some door, which was not like the way in which the deceased used to shut the door." This could have been Blotchy slamming the door in Mary Ann Cox's face)

- McCarthy says MJK was behind 29s and lived there 10 months yet Barnett says they only lived there about 8 months. It makes me wonder if the time discrepancy is where the 29s comes from as they would be behind over six weeks rent. It also makes me wonder whether McCarthy was aware of the break-up or not. Would knowing about it make McCarthy somehow force MJK to take on a paying roommmate to ensure he made his 4s 6d a week plus the 29s already owed?

- Mary Ann Cox watches MJK & Blotchy enter the room but does not mention anything about them putting their arm through the broken window to unlock the door. Did MJK normally not lock the door when she wasn't home? Barnett makes it sound like they used to lock it hence they used the broken window. Did Cox miss them use the window or did she just not include it in her testimony? Perhaps they used the door because there was someone living/staying with MJK and was also home at the time?

There are more discrepencies but don't necessarily have to do too much with access to Mary.

Cheers
DRoy

[Wickerman]

Hi DRoy.

What are some more of the odd things said during MJK's inquest that don't quite seem to make sense but could help us establish the access to MJK?

- Bowyer commented on how he had to move the curtain in order to see inside MJK's room yet Mary Ann Cox states that the blinds were down. And what about the coat that Maria Harvey left there and was apparently covering the broken window? Maybe MJK had both blinds and a curtain but since Mary Ann Cox saw blinds at 11:45pm on thursday evening and Bowyer only moved a curtain on Friday morning (no mention of the coat) then perhaps this is a clue about the access to MJK?

Seeing as how Mrs Harvey had just brought the coat to Kelly's home, perhaps the only way to keep it clean was to hang it off the end of the curtain rod, or a nail? Harvey was supposed to be in the 'laundry' business, perhaps they had recently washes it (or part of it) and it was hanging up to dry?

- Regarding Maria Harvey's coat she left with MJK, she is quoted by the Daily Telegraph as saying this about it..."saw the black overcoat in a room in the court on Friday afternoon". Odd thing to say "in a room" since she knows she left it in MJK's room on Thursday. She also stayed with MJK for two nights so she must know what room she was talking about. And was it hanging over the window or not?

I'd hazard a guess that's just the reporters poor choice of words.

- Three witness (the only ones that describe anyone around the scene of the murder) all testify to seeing a "stout" man. Mary Ann Cox testified to seeing "a short, stout man" at 11:45pm Thursday evening. Sarah Lewis describes seeing "a stout-looking man, and not very tall." at 2:30 am on Friday morning. Caroline Maxwell testified to seeing MJK talking to a man outside the Britannia public house at approximately 8:45 am on Friday morning and describes the man as "a little taller than me and stout" (she apparently was between 5'2" & 5'5"). Whether the stout man was the same person or not is speculation but still interesting.

In that case, you'd have to wonder if he ever slept..

- Mary Ann Cox watches MJK & Blotchy enter the room but does not mention anything about them putting their arm through the broken window to unlock the door. Did MJK normally not lock the door when she wasn't home? Barnett makes it sound like they used to lock it hence they used the broken window. Did Cox miss them use the window or did she just not include it in her testimony?....

Or maybe she made it up?
If she didn't know their procedure of reaching through the window then she couldn't claim that was what she saw.

I had read elsewhere (a long time ago) that many of these types of tenants didn't bother locking the door when they were out, they had nothing to loose. They only locked the door once inside, for safety.
Maybe it's correct or not, I don't know, but that would satisfy the problem.

Regards, Jon S.

[Wickerman]

DRoy.
Just to add one more question to your list. Mrs Cox was asked if the steps she heard at 6:15 might have been a policeman.

Was the Coroner just assuming the police patrolled Millers Court, or did he know for sure they did?
If the police never did patrol the court, Cox could have replied by saying "we never seen no copper down the court all the years I lived there", or something along those lines. Is that because the police did patrol the court?
If they did, where was he?

Regards, Jon S.

[Simon Wood]

Hi All,

Apparently there was a gas lamp in Millers Court.

What follows are much later reminiscences (20s and 30s), but the mechanics of the operation remained the same.

"Street lighting was by way of gas lamps and the old lamplighter would come every evening carrying his big long pole with the hook on the end, open up the glass panel at the top of the lamp post, and turn on the gaslight, returning in the morning to turn it off again.

"The gas street lights were lit each evening and extinguished in the morning by the lamplighter."

So that's two visits to Millers Court - once on the evening of November 8th, and again on the morning of November 9th.

As far as I know, nobody asked the lamplighter what he might have seen or heard.

Regards,

Simon

[Wickerman]

Hi All,

Apparently there was a gas lamp in Millers Court.

What follows are much later reminiscences (20s and 30s), but the mechanics of the operation remained the same.

"Street lighting was by way of gas lamps and the old lamplighter would come every evening carrying his big long pole with the hook on the end, open up the glass panel at the top of the lamp post, and turn on the gaslight, returning in the morning to turn it off again.

"The gas street lights were lit each evening and extinguished in the morning by the lamplighter."

So that's two visits to Millers Court - once on the evening of November 8th, and again on the morning of November 9th.

As far as I know, nobody asked the lamplighter what he might have seen or heard.

Regards,

Simon

Thankyou for that Simon.

That would suggest the gas was not charged to McCarthy, so the lamp was a city utility?
Does that also suggest Millers Court was not private property, so, could have been patrolled by the police?
With the sign over the passage being a municipal sign I assumed the court was not private property.

Thanks, Jon S.

[The Good Michael]

That would suggest the gas was not charged to McCarthy, so the lamp was a city utility?
Does that also suggest Millers Court was not private property, so, could have been patrolled by the police?
With the sign over the passage being a municipal sign I assumed the court was not private property.

Hi Jon,

Are you referring to the passage only, or to the court? I would assume that the court, because all the property in it seemed to be owned by McCarthy and a partner (brother in law? Can't remember), would have been the responsibility of the owner, but the passage could have been a public utility. I don't know any of this for a fact, however.

Mike

[Wickerman]

Thanks Mike.
I'm really fishing for info. hoping someone has researched this. I had thought McCarthy was responsible for that lamp, but thanks to Simon, this does not appear to be the case, unless the gas line source was changed between 1888 and the 1920's.

Regards, Jon S.

[Sally]

That would suggest the gas was not charged to McCarthy, so the lamp was a city utility?
Does that also suggest Millers Court was not private property, so, could have been patrolled by the police?
With the sign over the passage being a municipal sign I assumed the court was not private property.

Jon

Millers Court was probably not private property - in much the same way that Dorset Street (e.g.) was not private property. So, Millers Court gets a municipal street sign in much the same was as any other street or court. The property within the court, however, would have been (and was) privately owned, in general; as in any other street. The situation is much the same today - property law hasn't changed much in that respect. So, the lamp in the court would most likely have been a public lamp.

[Michael W Richards]

Hello all,

Regarding the issue of whether the door was locked when Mary went out....it would seem by Ms Cox's remarks that Mary had left her spring latch ON, meaning that it wouldnt engage when the door was closed. That seems reasonable if you consider that she went out drinking and wouldnt want to fumble around using the broken pane access method when she returned.

Which brings up a good point with thread relevance....if Blotchy was let out by Mary, then its probable she would dis-engage the latch, allowing it to lock. If Blotchy let himself out, would he also do that? If the killer found the room open, would he think to ensure that the door locked behind him? If the killer found the room locked and Mary Kelly was unknown to him, would he have found the pane and tried to access the latch himself? If Mary went out after letting Blotchy out, would she set the latch or not?

My suspicion is that the room was left unlocked a fair bit due to the hassle with the window...which we hear Barnett used to access the room, not Mary. Whether Mary opened the door for the killer, or whether he opened it himself... if unlocked,..(unlikely if Mary let Blotchy out), the killer released the latch when he left, locking the door.

Why would the same killer that left carved bodies in public for anyone coming along to easily find, secure the door to room 13?

Cheers

[DRoy]

Hi Jon,

Seeing as how Mrs Harvey had just brought the coat to Kelly's home, perhaps the only way to keep it clean was to hang it off the end of the curtain rod, or a nail? Harvey was supposed to be in the 'laundry' business, perhaps they had recently washes it (or part of it) and it was hanging up to dry?

Maybe. I do recall reading somewhere that the coat was used to block the cold out because of the broken panes. What about the curtain and blinds?

I'd hazard a guess that's just the reporters poor choice of words.

It was from the inquest so you'd hope it would be as close as possible

In that case, you'd have to wonder if he ever slept..

If I was either the murderer or an accomplice to a murder I don't know how much I'd sleep through the night.

Or maybe she made it up?
If she didn't know their procedure of reaching through the window then she couldn't claim that was what she saw.

I'm not saying she did but something doesn't seem right. You're right, maybe she didn't know the procedure but as someone who testified at the inquest you'd think she'd share as much info as possible since Blotchy was the last known person to be with her.

I had read elsewhere (a long time ago) that many of these types of tenants didn't bother locking the door when they were out, they had nothing to loose. They only locked the door once inside, for safety.
Maybe it's correct or not, I don't know, but that would satisfy the problem.

I read that too, however it doesn't seem realistic especially during the WM. Elizabeth Prater who lived above MJK barricaded the door with two tables and she didn't have broken windows to worry about. Since the room wasn't empty and had Maria Harvey's clothing in it, I think it's unlikely she left her door open.

Just to add one more question to your list. Mrs Cox was asked if the steps she heard at 6:15 might have been a policeman.

Was the Coroner just assuming the police patrolled Millers Court, or did he know for sure they did?
If the police never did patrol the court, Cox could have replied by saying "we never seen no copper down the court all the years I lived there", or something along those lines. Is that because the police did patrol the court?
If they did, where was he?

Interesting point. I'd guess that it would be quite rare for a policeman to go into the court. We are talking about Dorset being one of roughest areas where Elizabeth Prater states that cries of murder are not unusual. There apparently was a row earlier in the evening in the court so even if police did patrol the area I would assume it wouldn't be too often.

Cheers
DRoy

[DRoy]

Hi Michael,

Regarding the issue of whether the door was locked when Mary went out....it would seem by Ms Cox's remarks that Mary had left her spring latch ON, meaning that it wouldnt engage when the door was closed. That seems reasonable if you consider that she went out drinking and wouldnt want to fumble around using the broken pane access method when she returned.

I don't see where Cox is saying anything about the door latch. We also don't know if she went out drinking. We know she was drunk yes but maybe she went out looking for clients and got drunk instead (or both).

My suspicion is that the room was left unlocked a fair bit due to the hassle with the window...which we hear Barnett used to access the room, not Mary.

Hassle? Abberline said this at the inquest "Barnett informs me that it has been missing some time, and since it has been lost they have put their hand through the broken window, and moved back the catch. It is quite easy."

Why would the same killer that left carved bodies in public for anyone coming along to easily find, secure the door to room 13?

We've been debating that question a long time Michael!

Cheers
DRoy

[DRoy]

Hi Simon,

As far as I know, nobody asked the lamplighter what he might have seen or heard.

Simon,

Wouldn't the lamplighters be the most common witnesses for every crime that happened after dark? MJK was apparently murdered between 3am and 4am so would the lamplighter still be lighting lamps or is that around the time he'd have to go back out and start distinguishing them?

DRoy