Coincidence?

[Michael W Richards]

My perspective is that a semi-homeless alcoholic prostitute attempting to blackmail a man who was messily butchering semi-homeless alcoholic prostitutes would never agree to meet this homicidal maniac alone at 1;30 in the morning. If Eddowes had arranged a meeting with the Ripper, she would have brought John Kelly.

My perspective is that a woman who thinks she is about to gain a large wad of cash would not spend hours pawning a pair of boots and trying to bum money off of her daughter. She would arrange to meet her blackmail victim in the middle of the day, in a place where there were witnesses, she would bring along the man she is living with, and he would be armed.

My perspective is that Catherine Eddowes was not a suicidal idiot.

Thanks for sharing, if you were Catherine Eddowes at that point in time and at that place, your insights would be invaluable. As it is your just putting your own sensibilities on a situation that is unclear and on a woman who you really know nothing about. My comments stem from basic human nature.. so they area applicable no matter who the specific individual was.

[Michael W Richards]

Catherine Eddowes was a poverty-stricken, semi-homeless prostitute, not a character in s spy thriller. If she wanted to pass a message on to John Kelly, she would have turned to him and said "John, if something happens to me, I want you to go see Mary Jane Kelly at 13 Millers Court."

Why are you and everyone forgetting that a witness says Kate claimed to know a killer? That's enough to get her killed by that same killer. Simple math...that seems elusive to some people for some reason.

[Wickerman]

Why are you and everyone forgetting that a witness says Kate claimed to know a killer? That's enough to get her killed by that same killer. Simple math...that seems elusive to some people for some reason.

Because it is hearsay?

[packers stem]

I checked and sourced them.

Eddowes was born in 1842. Keely was born around 1863.

The 1891 Census of England and Wales shows there were over 900 women living in London named Mary Kelly and who who were born between 1840 and 1870. If the Ripper was targeting Mary Kelly, but had no idea what she looked like, he could have killed hundreds of Mary Kallys and not gotten the right one.

who is Keely?
Twice you've mentioned the name now .

So ,i've produced evidence that there were around 125 Mary Kelly's in the entirety of London , in the 1891 census born between 1850 and 1870..... which anybody is free to check.
You are suggesting in the previous 10 years around 800 were born !
Maybe you should reproduce the evidence

[Sam Flynn]

Another 2 coincidences....1: Mary Kelly 1871 living in Cleveland street born Glamorgan

And 2 : Thomas Kelly living at 13 Millers Court in 1891 born 1856 Spitalfields Dockside Labourer.

Just shows how common the name Kelly was.

[Fiver]

So ,i've produced evidence that there were around 125 Mary Kelly's in the entirety of London , in the 1891 census born between 1850 and 1870..... which anybody is free to check.

And I have produced evidence that the 1891 Census of England and Wales shows there were over 900 women living in London named Mary Kelly and who who were born between 1840 and 1870. I linked to a geneology site, which anyone is free to check, while you provided a screenshot. I suspect the discrepancy is due to your source only counting people within a mile (or perhaps less) radius of the center of the City of London.

[Fiver]

Why are you and everyone forgetting that a witness says Kate claimed to know a killer? That's enough to get her killed by that same killer. Simple math...that seems elusive to some people for some reason.

I am well aware that a newspaper article claimed that a witness claimed that Eddowes claimed to know who the killer was. That same edition of the paper mentioned four other people who were also sure they knew who the Ripper was. If Eddowes did actually say that, she was one of dozens of people who claimed to know who the Ripper was. If the Ripper was killing everyone who claimed to know who he was, there would have been dozens more victims and a lot wider range of victim types.

[Al Bundy's Eyes]

I am well aware that a newspaper article claimed that a witness claimed that Eddowes claimed to know who the killer was. That same edition of the paper mentioned four other people who were also sure they knew who the Ripper was. If Eddowes did actually say that, she was one of dozens of people who claimed to know who the Ripper was. If the Ripper was killing everyone who claimed to know who he was, there would have been dozens more victims and a lot wider range of victim types.

Why is this mystery witness quoted in the paper taken as gospel? We analyse and critique every word said by everyone else, but someone says Kate knew who the killer was and it's taken as fact? And then we construct an entire senario from it where Kate decides to embark on what must be the daftest blackmail scam ever devised.
Of course, if the witness was wrong, lying, mistaken the whole scam falls on its arse, tied to the fact that it also depends on the killer being wealthy.

[packers stem]

And I have produced evidence that the 1891 Census of England and Wales shows there were over 900 women living in London named Mary Kelly and who who were born between 1840 and 1870. I linked to a geneology site, which anyone is free to check, while you provided a screenshot. I suspect the discrepancy is due to your source only counting people within a mile (or perhaps less) radius of the center of the City of London.

Afraid not
Every part of London you can think of .
I couldn't create an account on your link as it wanted me to be a member of a church but here's a link and a site that everyone can use ....

https://www.findmypast.co.uk/search/...don%2c+england

[Michael W Richards]

The mere fact that 6 Dorset Street is mentioned in connection with a "Jane Kelly" is an eyebrow raiser, the fact that she is next "Mary Ann Kelly" is also. No matter how many Mary Kellys you find in the census its a moot point...there was only 1 that we know of in Dorset Street.

[Michael W Richards]

Because it is hearsay?

What isn't hearsay in these cases Jon? All we can hope for is corroboration, and I agree, aside from the superintendent of the casual ward in Shoe Lane it seems she mentioned this to no one else... that came forward. They are in desperate straights, she said they barely had money to get back to London, and with the boots gone they are running out of clothing to hock. I think this was her plan to deal with that, they had nothing tangible to sell but she thought she had information people would pay for. Be it Police or whomever. I think the reason John doesn't go looking for Kate right away is because he knew what she was planning, and wanted no part of the dangerous folks involved. Ive perused the press again on this murder and I don't see Kelly or anyone else refer to a loving relation between him and Kate, a pleasant one without disagreements seems to have been the case. I believe they acted as a team, not man and wife, and therefore Kate would not be inclined to represent herself as Kelly to anyone based on her relationship with John. If people assumed it, so be it, but I don't read any pseudo marital vibe in the comments.

[Sam Flynn]

The mere fact that 6 Dorset Street is mentioned in connection with a "Jane Kelly" is an eyebrow raiser, the fact that she is next "Mary Ann Kelly" is also. No matter how many Mary Kellys you find in the census its a moot point...there was only 1 that we know of in Dorset Street.

...what about Fashion Street, where the actual fictitious "Mary" lived? The one who lived in Dorset Street was simply "Jane".

We can be as selective or creative as we like, the fact of the matter is that we have to munge together two fake names/addresses - one given to the police, and the other to a pawnbroker, for God's sake - and ignore or add details to make "Mary Jane Kelly" of "26 Dorset Street"... and ignore the fact that she lived in 13 Miller's Court.

[Michael W Richards]

...what about Fashion Street, where the actual fictitious "Mary" lived? The one who lived in Dorset Street was simply "Jane".

We can be as selective or creative as we like, the fact of the matter is that we have to munge together two fake names/addresses - one given to the police, and the other to a pawnbroker, for God's sake - and ignore or add details to make "Mary Jane Kelly" of "26 Dorset Street"... and ignore the fact that she lived in 13 Miller's Court.

Let me ask you...if mail had been sent to Mary Kelly c/o 26 Dorset, would she have received it? Millers Court was accessed from the rear of #26 Dorset or the tunnel, Marys room in the rear of #26 was that access point from that house to that court. Either address would reveal her. Her room in every sense, structurally or otherwise, belonged to the house, not the court.

[Al Bundy's Eyes]

...what about Fashion Street, where the actual fictitious "Mary" lived? The one who lived in Dorset Street was simply "Jane".

We can be as selective or creative as we like, the fact of the matter is that we have to munge together two fake names/addresses - one given to the police, and the other to a pawnbroker, for God's sake - and ignore or add details to make "Mary Jane Kelly" of "26 Dorset Street"... and ignore the fact that she lived in 13 Miller's Court.

Munge? What a cromulent term!

[Sam Flynn]

Let me ask you...if mail had been sent to Mary Kelly c/o 26 Dorset, would she have received it?

That's not the point. Every single resident and visitor to Miller's Court referred to it as such, and there was even a cast-iron sign over the archway that advertised it as "Miller's Court".

6 - yes, six - Dorset was at the other end of the street... and 6 Fashion St - let's not forget - was a couple of minutes' walk away on the opposite side of Commercial Street.