No known suspect pre 1895 was Jack the Ripper

[Phil Carter]

Hello Jonathan,

Thanks for the comments and the replies.
Yes, I do realise what you are saying of course. However, it could be argued that there are also indications because of comments that the Millers Court murder was the last one, comparatively quickly afterwards, of indication of a possible other known internal view. I personally may not agree with this possible view though.

kindly

Phil

[Jonathan H]

But is it comparatively quickly?

I would argue that not until Griffiths, in 1898, was it being authoritatively claimed that the two or three year investigation was really just the brief 'autumn of terror'; to make it look as though the police knew at the time that Kelly was the final victim.

Macnaghten concealed from the public, via Griffiths and Sims, that the inconvenient timing of Druitt's demise forced the reign of terror to be truncated. That the police were chasing a phantom. He saved that revelation for his memoirs which were ignored then and mostly now too.

Until 1898, Coles was the 'final' one and police were hauling in Lawende to give Grant the once-over as late as 1895 -- and he said yes!

[Heinrich]

Heinrich,

Writing a short paragraph or book-length essay based on your interpretation of testimony does not make it so. But since you do not understand that or don't care to appreciate that circumstance I see no point continuing the discussion. Enjoy.

Don.

I made a case for the prosecution of Joseph Barnett based on the evidence. It is consistent with what this network is for.
If issuing snide comments and being rude to members is your idea of a discussion, it is one I don't share.

[Robert]

Hi Heinrich

I don't see how you can know that Joe and Mary quarrelled on the night of her murder. And I don't think Joe said that he had refused to give her money, just that he was very sorry that he had no money to give her.

[Trevor Marriott]

Trevor,

Heres your cornflake choker, you are right! I cant prove it.

However, you last few lines are utter piffle. For obvious reasons to all....apart from you apparently.

Oh, is it the rage to put everything in bold when shouting?

Monty

It was you who suggested that there may have been something on kosminski in the missing or lost files which is an excuse you are using to prop up the rapidly diminishing marginalia.

I merely suggested that if there was "never" anything recorded on him at any time and in any file, then what you say is not relevant. I cant see how you can say its piffel all very logical.

[Trevor Marriott]

In my opinion, the police probably issued false statements to the press.

RH

Well isnt issuing a false statement the same as telling a lie, because for sure they lied when they all went public with suspect names in later years.

[Monty]

It was you who suggested that there may have been something on kosminski in the missing or lost files which is an excuse you are using to prop up the rapidly diminishing marginalia.

I merely suggested that if there was "never" anything recorded on him at any time and in any file, then what you say is not relevant. I cant see how you can say its piffel all very logical.

You wouldn't Trevor, you are blinkered.

Monty

[Heinrich]

Hi Heinrich

I don't see how you can know that Joe and Mary quarrelled on the night of her murder. And I don't think Joe said that he had refused to give her money, just that he was very sorry that he had no money to give her.

Joseph Barnett stated at the inquest in answer to the coroner's question whether he left Mary Kelly on good terms that he had, then, mentioned that he did not give her money. It is of some significance that he mentioned money as if to imply that it supported his notion that refusing money would help keep them on "very good terms". This claim of being on good terms is hollow, given their history. He said he had told Mary Kelly that he no money to give her and that he was sorry. I deduce from this that he was answering a request for money and since his inability to give her money and her need to prostitute herself as a consequence was the old wound which had caused them to separate, again, in his own words "on very good terms", there is the making of an argument. Admitting to "objecting" to her getting money from prostitution and leaving her for this reason as well as his admission that they had "quarrels" is sufficient reason to believe this topic was a raw nerve and possibly the last straw on the night in question. Having quit living with Mary Kelly only 10 days before the murder was discovered and yet continuing to hang around also suggests he would not let go, much in the manner of a stalker.

[robhouse]

Well isnt issuing a false statement the same as telling a lie, because for sure they lied when they all went public with suspect names in later years.

I am sorry Trevor, but who exactly ever went public with Kozminski's name? Please enlighten me.

Rob H

[Robert]

I'm sorry, Heinrich, but what you originally said was quite definite and I don't see how you have substantiated it. What you said was :

I would have charged him with the murder of May Kelly on the grounds that he.....had admitted to having argued with Mary Kelly on the night of the murder...

[Rubyretro]

This claim of being on good terms is hollow, given their history

.
Not at all.

He said he had told Mary Kelly that he no money to give her and that he was sorry. I deduce from this that he was answering a request for money and since his inability to give her money and her need to prostitute herself as a consequence was the old wound which had caused them to separate, again, in his own words "on very good terms", there is the making of an argument.

Certainly, there was a cause for arguments. However, I think that I'm right in saying that Joe and Mary moved into Miller's Court together (? No time to check this), and they had lived together before taking the room ? Yet there is a spot next to the Ten Bells known as 'Mary's corner' because she used to
soilcit there. I wouldn't think that this sobriquet was coined in only ten days leading up to Mary's death.

What's more, Mary's friends were apparently prostitutes.

So, I think that the suggestion is that Mary prostituting herself was never a
consequence of any inability of Joe's to earn money -but something that she did to get a fast few bob to pay for drinks when he was at work or miniscule 'luxuries' that she fancied.

I think that your image of Joe 'hanging around' and refusing to 'let go' in the 'manner of a stalker' is your personal interpretation. Another interpretation might be that Mary was very upset when he moved out...no more cosy letter reading by the fire, no more tender companionship...but although he still felt some responsibility towards her, he couldn't stand the thought of being dependant on her (and her 'job' ) for his money.

Just another personal interpretation -but equally as valid.

[Heinrich]

I'm sorry, Heinrich, but what you originally said was quite definite and I don't see how you have substantiated it. What you said was :

I would have charged him with the murder of May Kelly on the grounds that he.....had admitted to having argued with Mary Kelly on the night of the murder...

On direct examination in a court of law, Robert, I would have put it to Joseph Barnett that he had argued with Mary Kelly about money and her prostitution on the night of the murder. I would have noted for the benefit of the jury that the only topic of conversation which Barnett admitted to in his statement to the coroner was his refusal to give her money and that this was what they argued about on the night he separated from her less than a fortnight previously. I would have characterized the the last meeting of Joseph Barnett and Mary Kelly as an argumentative one in keeping with his admission of quarrels over money and prostitution and I expect the jury would have made due note of this in their deliberation.

.
Not at all.
....
.... I think that the suggestion is that Mary prostituting herself was never a
consequence of any inability of Joe's to earn money ....

In his initial statement to the police, Joseph Barnet said, "I have been living with Marie Jeanette Kelly who occupied No.13 Room Millers Court. I have lived with her altogether about 18 months, for the last eight months in Millers Court, until last Tuesday week (30 ulto) when in consequence of not earning sufficient money to give her and her resorting to prostitution, I resolved on leaving her."

I think that your image of Joe 'hanging around' and refusing to 'let go' in the 'manner of a stalker' is your personal interpretation.

Quite so, Rubyretro, one that is consistent with him being the killer.

[Lechmere]

Although I'm slightly bemused at why this Barnett discussion is taking place on this thread, I would suggest that 'Mary's Corner' was so-named, if it ever had any actual popular usage, after her death.

[Heinrich]

Although I'm slightly bemused at why this Barnett discussion is taking place on this thread, I would suggest that 'Mary's Corner' was so-named, if it ever had any actual popular usage, after her death.

The thread starts with the sentence, "The police had no idea pre 1895 who the perpetrator was." Since they had interviewed Joseph Barnett for four hours on the day Mary Kelly's body was discovered, it is my contention that they should have had a jolly good idea who was the killer.

[Wickerman]

.
Yet there is a spot next to the Ten Bells known as 'Mary's corner' because she used to soilcit there.

I would dearly like to know the source of that claim. I had read Kelly was known to solicit elsewhere.

Thanks, Jon S.