Domestic or lunatic?

[Natalie Severn]

Hi David and Sam,
First off Sam,I wasnt talking about him "calling her names" ,but possibly,if her pimp, taking her earnings.
Anyway,what I seem to remember here is that not long before she died she was believed to have gone back to the Breezers Hill lodgings with a man thought to have been Joe,both of them arriving at 2am.I cant remember at this moment where I got this from but someone like Mrs Phoenix,who had once known her well was said to have reported it I think!
I dont actually think it does sound like Joe Fleming was her pimp,because whats been forgotten or glossed over here is that Mary was reported to have been very fond of Joe and he of her,so much so that -Mrs Phoenix[?]believed he would gladly have married her.
Moreover, Mary was already suffering the effects of her excessive alcohol intake when "asked to leave " Breezers Hill,as well as moonlighting from Paternoster Row,both landlords having found her behaviour intolerable.So I doubt very much Joe was much different and that he also probably found her pretty unmanageable "when in drink"---thats no excuse for him to have hit her though---if he did, ----but Mary"s word in all this may not be completely reliable.
Salut David!
Norma

[DVV]

The verb is also widely associated with Pizer, famous for "ill using" the unfortunates.
Interestingly, Swanson writes:
"Leather Apron who it appeared have been levying blackmail and ill using them [the whores]"
That certainly means that he was said to use violence/cruelty to "levy blackmail".

Amitiés,
David

[Sam Flynn]

"Ill-using" means to treat someone with cruelty, and the word was used by the police - if I recall correctly - in connection with Schwartz's evidence, to describe what "Broadshouldered Man" was said to have done to Liz Stride. It's worth noting that, in the context of Kelly, "Joe" is said to have "ill-used" her because she was living with Joe Barnett. Somehow I don't think that this amounted to calling her names.

[DVV]

Hello Norma,
though it's difficult to prove it, the way he may have "ill-used" Mary is likely to have something to do with violence. And a certain capability for violence towards women is almost inevitably part of a pimp's outfit (sorry for this awful English!).
The fact that he moved to Whitechapel in August 1888 is not to be forgotten.
And not only he entered the loony bin, but he died in an asylum.
Indeed, it was only one year after the JtR murders that he started his "lunatic career" and was regularly admitted and discharged in various institutions.
So I agree that he looks a curious character...not to say more.

Amitiés,
David

[Natalie Severn]

Hi All,
I dont think he would have gone to the police if Mary was his ex girl friend and she was murdered nearby and he had been over to her place fighting with her.I reckon he would have kept well away as anybody in such a situation may have done---out of fear of being arrested,fitted up, found guilty and hanged.
He doesnt necessarily come across so far as definitely being "violent".We know Mary herself could be pretty violent when in her cups,smashing windows etc.All we hear of Fleming is through a friend of Mary allegedly being told by Mary, that a man she had once been very fond of had "ill-used"--- her.She didnt say he had hit her.Perhaps he had ill-"used" her---by acting as her pimp at some time,had taken her money,whatever-that would also be "ill-using".
But I think Joe Fleming is a curious character,changing his name,entering the loony bin etc.We could certainly do with knowing more about him thats for sure.
Norma

[DVV]

Living in Whitechapel and having had a consistent relationship with Kelly, Fleming had some reasons to go to a police station and make a statement there.
First, this would have cleared him from any possible suspicion.
And had he nothing to do with the murder, he could at least provide interesting information about Mary's past and background (indeed, press reports in november dealt with that).
He could also hope to gain some money from newspapers.
But he kept hidden, so to say (given the fact that the police may have more or less tried to trace him).

At best, this guy disliked publicity very much.
At worst, he had something to hide...or had already come forward under the alias of Hutchinson.

[DVV]

Joking apart, the recent and extensive discussions about Hutch had become quite muddled and confusing, and I don't think that a possible idendification of Hutch and Fleming will add to the confusion.
Quite the reverse.

Amitiés,
David

[DVV]

Hello Sam,
Believe it or not, I was thinking of you when I called to a "more rational-minded person than I"!
Then you came and add some fun...
Nice ruff time for me!

[Sam Flynn]

And then we would have 2 names (Fleming, Hutchinson)
3 suspects (Fleming, Hutchinson and "Fletchinson"

...you forgot "Hutching". Depends on who got to each murder scene first

[DVV]

And then we would have 2 names ([B]Fleming, Hutchinson[B])
3 suspects (Fleming, Hutchinson and "Fletchinson"
and 6 (more or less)different theories:
1: Fleming as Kelly's murderer
2: Fleming the Ripper
3: Hutch as Mary's murderer
4: Hutch the Ripper
5: Fletchinson as Kelly's murderer
6: Fletchinson the Ripper

Lost my head a little bit, here, hmm?
Need a more rationnal-minded person than I, for sure!

[DVV]

Hey David,

I'd say not. As you sensibly acknowledged at the beginning of this thread, Fleming's candidacy is not Hutchinson-dependant. It's not even Kelly-dependent. As a locally-based man who moved to Whitechapel when he did, the references to violence, the subsequent committal to a mental asylum, the superficial similarity with witness sightings, he has enough going for him already to put him ahead of most named suspects. Adding in the Kelly factor, and the possibility of a link with Hutchinson only enhances it.

Best regards,
Ben

Agreed 200 percent!

[Ben]

Hi Fisherman,

Not really. The fewer the changes the more credible, as far as I´m concerned, Ben. If we use the logic that every change opens up for accepting more changes, we´ll have Lizzie Borden as a suspect sooner or later.

No, no. My point is that you can't have Jack the Ripper changing only in the way that you want him to change, and rule out the possibility of him changing in other respects too. That goes for all of us.

And anyhow, I think that the difference between 45 minutes surveillance from a spot where you could be readily seen differs a whole lot from the type of deeds the other killings were.

Firstly, we only have it on the dubious authority of Hutchinson himself that he was there for 45 minutes, and secondly, we don't know how much surveillance took place at earlier crime scenes. We just don't have the relevent information. It follows, however, that different crime venues often call for different approaches, as we learn from Ted Bundy and others.

And if Fleming WAS out of job, could that be a very handy explanation to why he was forced to spend his time in a common lodging house like the Victoria Home?

Possibly, but it wasn't the case that the Victoria Home was a mecca for anyone who found themselves out of a job. There were hundreds of other lodging houses in the locality, including many nearer Bethnal Green. Any number of factors could have prompted Fleming to relocate to the Victoria Home, including a desire to be closer to a woman he ill-used for living with another man.

An interesting tidbit here is that Daniel Barnett, Joe's older bro, lodged in the Victoria Home at the same time.

Best regards,
Ben

[DVV]

DVV still does not think it is a long stretch to accept that moving into a common lodging house in August 1888 on Flemings behalf points to a murderous disposition.

All the best,

Fisherman
(who will be leaving the computer for now, but I shall return early tomorrow - with interest)

Well, if Fleming has something to do with the case, his status has to be that of a suspect...
As far as I know, he is not a victim, not a police official, and not a witness (at least by the name of Fleming).
And since we discuss here his suspect's status, and only since this, it is not a so long stretch...etc etc...

As to your suggestion why Mary swould have left Fleming, it sounds, especially because Fleming seems to have sometimes changed work (plasterer, costermonger, dock labourer...)

Amitiés,
David
Da

[Ben]

Hey David,

I'd say not. As you sensibly acknowledged at the beginning of this thread, Fleming's candidacy is not Hutchinson-dependant. It's not even Kelly-dependent. As a locally-based man who moved to Whitechapel when he did, the references to violence, the subsequent committal to a mental asylum, the superficial similarity with witness sightings, he has enough going for him already to put him ahead of most named suspects. Adding in the Kelly factor, and the possibility of a link with Hutchinson only enhances it.

Best regards,
Ben

[Fisherman]

Ben writes:

"if we're prepared to accept that he altered the type of venue in which to commit his crimes, we ought really to make the same sort of allowances for the way in which he approached his victims"

Not really. The fewer the changes the more credible, as far as I´m concerned, Ben. If we use the logic that every change opens up for accepting more changes, we´ll have Lizzie Borden as a suspect sooner or later.

But that is just a general look upon the phenomenon. Specifically there is of course space to allow for changes. And I take your point on my "spur-of-the-moment" suggestion, although I actually entertain the possibility that the deeds may well have been very much exactly that - we do not have Long´s or Lawendes men nailed to the exact murder spots and we have rough time estimates in most cases. And anyhow, I think that the difference between 45 minutes surveillance from a spot where you could be readily seen differs a whole lot from the type of deeds the other killings were.

DVV still does not think it is a long stretch to accept that moving into a common lodging house in August 1888 on Flemings behalf points to a murderous disposition.
I still do.
One thing to consider is that it is said that Fleming and Kelly were still fond of each other, whereas it has often been suggested that Barnett meant nothing much more to Kelly than money.
But Flemings job as a plasterer would have earned him a nice salary, comparatively. So why settle for a fish porter?
Could it be that Fleming for some reason was out of job? Maybe that was what urged Mary to accept Barnett´s advances? And if Fleming WAS out of job, could that be a very handy explanation to why he was forced to spend his time in a common lodging house like the Victoria Home?
Just a thought, DVV. But not too long a leap ...

All the best,

Fisherman
(who will be leaving the computer for now, but I shall return early tomorrow - with interest)