which Barnett was it.

[richardnunweek]

Hi.
Just a observation, which needs to be addressed.
Maurice Lewis claimed to have seen Mary Kelly in The horn and plenty, between 10pm-11pm Thursday 8TH, she was with another woman , and Dan, the latter being the man who she had lived with until recently,and who sold oranges in the markets.
According to Barnett, he last saw Kelly around 730pm 8TH, so that being correct would mean it was not him that he saw but Barnett's brother Dan , as he initially said, and Lewis mistook him for Kelly's ex, which is understandable as they most likely would have been all together at times.
However why did not Dan come forward to describe events, we have no knowledge of him being questioned,or giving evidence at the inquest.
Maybe it was Barnett, and he still played cards back at his lodgings , but why did he lie about seeing Mary after 730pm?
Many will say Mr Lewis is a unreliable source, but if one uses behaviour patterns, truth does emerge from a lot Lewis states, for instance..I was playing pitch and toss in the court around 10am, [ an illegal game[.
Why admit that, just for the hell of it?
He clearly knew Kelly had been involved with a Barnett,he knew Julia, and he would hardly involve the man he called Dan in his fairy -tales...
This has not been discussed before, so I have brought it to attention.
Regards Richard.

[Heinrich]

...
Maurice Lewis claimed to have seen Mary Kelly in The horn and plenty, between 10pm-11pm Thursday 8TH, she was with another woman , and Dan, the latter being the man who she had lived with until recently,and who sold oranges in the markets.

Maurice Lewis, a tailor, reported seeing Kelly at about 10:00 a.m. on 9th November in a pub, just 45 minutes before he badly mutilated body was discovered at her home. This statement was rightly dismissed by the police since it did not fit the accepted time of death; moreover, it could not be corroborated by any other witness.

Many will say Mr Lewis is a unreliable source ...

Include me.

[Phil Carter]

Hello Heinrich,

'accepted time of death'?

Please do correct me if I am wrong, but the Coroner, amazingly, terminated the inquest without a 'time of death' recorded.

So any previous thought by anyone, especially unofficial estimates, cannot be called the 'accepted time of death'.

Best wishes

Pěl

[Heinrich]

Hello Heinrich,

'accepted time of death'?

Please do correct me if I am wrong, but the Coroner, amazingly, terminated the inquest without a 'time of death' recorded.

So any previous thought by anyone, especially unofficial estimates, cannot be called the 'accepted time of death'. ...

Considering the gross mutilation of Mary Kelly's body discovered at 10:45 that morning, there is no possible way under the sun that she had been drinking in a pub at 10 o'clock. Anyone who says different was either lying or remembering a blurred vision through an alcoholic stupor.

[lynn cates]

times

Hello Heinrich. Gareth Williams once posted a medical estimate of the time for each of MJK's mutilations.

Have you checked into that?

Cheers.
LC

[richardnunweek]

Hi Heinrich,
When discussing Mr Lewis and his sightings, I was referring to the evening of the 8TH between 10-11pm, when he claimed to have seen Mary drinking with Dan and some women, one of them named Julia.
She was medically alive at that point, and is irrelevant to the alleged morning fiasco.
My point was if he saw Joe Barnett,then that person was being dishonest, when he said he never saw Kelly after 730pm.
If he was being honest, then clearly Joe's brother Dan was her drinking companion, but we have no record of him being interviewed by the police,or reported in the press.
I was suggesting...that one would have thought, he would have been able to fill in a few gaps ,but apparently he did not.
His alleged sighting in the morning would be relevant ,only if Maxwell's version was factual.
The actual mutilation of poor Kelly, may not have taken as long as many adhere to, it didn't take long to make a real mess of Eddowes , if one multiplied that by 5, the killer could have left the court , with minutes to spare.
Regards Richard.

[Heinrich]

Hello Heinrich. Gareth Williams once posted a medical estimate of the time for each of MJK's mutilations.

Have you checked into that?

I don't know about this, Lynn.

Hi Heinrich,
When discussing Mr Lewis and his sightings, I was referring to the evening of the 8TH between 10-11pm, when he claimed to have seen Mary drinking with Dan and some women, one of them named Julia. ... His alleged sighting in the morning would be relevant ,only if Maxwell's version was factual.

His sighting of Mary Kelly having a jolly time in a pub less than an hour before her cold mutilated body was discovered in her home makes him an unreliable witness.

The actual mutilation of poor Kelly, may not have taken as long as many adhere to, it didn't take long to make a real mess of Eddowes , if one multiplied that by 5, the killer could have left the court , with minutes to spare.

There is no good reason to believe Mary Kelly was murdered only minutes before the discovery of her remains.

[lynn cates]

link

Hello Heinrich. Thanks.

Here is the link, post #2. Give it a go!

http://forum.casebook.org/showthread.php?t=3775

Cheers.
LC

[richardnunweek]

Hello Lynn,
For argument sake, lets say that Mr Lewis saw Kelly around 10am on the 9TH, in Ringers,
Around ten would be most likely , not precise,It could be 950-1010am, if the former, both Mary and a man[ maybe Maxwell's market porter] could have been back in her room by 1005am, and her killer out and gone by 1035am, leaving a full ten minutes [ or so] before Bowyers visit.
We should not forget our Jack worked very rapid, and he hardly hung around at Mitre square on the 30TH?.
I have never understood, why so many people have entertained the thought that the Ripper made himself at home in room13, he would have been in a frenzy, desperate to achieve his aim ,and get the hell out of there.
I almost get the impression many have, the killer, lighting a fire, making tea, and toast , during a long leisurely blood bath.
I do not subscribe to that, and I agree with Sam Flynn's interpretation.
Regards Richard.

[The Good Michael]

I almost get the impression many have, the killer, lighting a fire, making tea, and toast , during a long leisurely blood bath.
I do not subscribe to that, and I agree with Sam Flynn's interpretation.
Regards Richard.

Richard,

How bout something inbetween breakneck pace and a weekend in the Hamptons? The butchering that was done in that room, combined with the initial attack, killing, repositioning or placing upon the bed, the stoking of a fire, the navigation of a light source into a place where he could see what he wanted to do, and the removal of a heart and stacking of meat on a table; all this took more than 10 minutes. No doubt of that. If the man was a butcher by profession and absolutely used to cutting meat quickly and removal of organs and didn't need a fire and all was done with no extraneous actions. 10 minutes might be possible.

Mike

[lynn cates]

time

Hello Richard. Thanks. I, too, think the event may not have taken so long as many imagine.

"We should not forget our Jack worked very rapid, and he hardly hung around at Mitre square on the 30TH?"

Of course, this assumes that both assassins were the same.

Cheers.
LC

[richardnunweek]

Hi Lynn,
That is the 64 thousand dollar question...
The way I see it is, if the killer was the same, then I ask myself a question?
Why did he change his MO?
He killed indoors..
Was it because he was worried about getting caught in the act , because of the extra police, and public awareness, or was it because he had accosted Kelly in daylight,and could not commit his normal habit, of darkness, and escape patterns?
To kill in a room , with only one escape route, without knowing if he would be disturbed, was far worse then Hanbury street, where the fences would allow an alternative, from it's passage way.
If Kelly was not killed by the Ripper, and was indeed a cunning copycat, again I must ask myself a question?
What reason to copy the murderers mutilation methods.
If killed by a client out of disagreement, why not a normal kill, strangle,or cut throat. why go the Ripper way.
The answer I get, is the Mary's killer was not intending to kill her , but once the act was done, and possibly being someone very close to the victim, rather then be a suspect by the police, he went Ripper fashion.
I get the impression that her killer was used to Millers court, and its habits, and that room was not alien to him.
So if this murder was not the same as Eddowes , that is one explanation.
However lets go the obvious way, she was killed by Jack, and later then it is normally considered,
Regards Richard.

[richardnunweek]

Hi Mike,
If nothing else this thread may get people asking .
''How long would the millers court murder take''?
Rather then attempt to do a Sam Flynn [ which was excellent] how about taking Maurice Lewis's word for it, and have the murder take place shortly after 10am.
It would then mean around 30 minutes, about 6x longer then Eddowes,
I would say that's about right.
Regards Richard.

[lynn cates]

lover

Hello Richard. Thanks. If MJK was a copycat, someone was a POOR copyist.

"possibly being someone very close to the victim, rather than be a suspect by the police, he went Ripper fashion."

I can live with this. A former lover--especially one who later felt betrayed--would fit the bill. That is why I cannot take Fleming off the table.

Cheers.
LC

[Heinrich]

Hello Heinrich. Thanks.

Here is the link, post #2. Give it a go!

http://forum.casebook.org/showthread.php?t=3775

I am not an expert in maniacal butchery, Lynn, but only 16 minutes to do all the damage subjected by Mary Kelly lacks face validity.

The thread is, I regret to state, yet another red herring because the claim of Maurice Lewis to have seen Mary Kelly the night of the murder in a pub and then again seeing her minutes before her mutilated body was discovered smacks of idle yarn-spinning. More to the point, there is no corroboration of Lewis' fanciful accounts.