Where does Joseph Fleming fit into the equation?

[GUT]

G'Day Ben

I don't think we will ever agree if this is MJK's Joe Fleming or not.

So for NOW I will try to bow out of the argument.

Sorry if my criticism seemed offensive or personal it was never intended that way, just as I never intended to take sides.

I just can't agree with your reasoning, but that's what makes Jacky so interesting.

If we all agreed we wouldn't be here would we.

GUT

[Ben]

Oh dear - it' lucky I can multi task Ben.

Yes, you can. You can write inflammatory posts designed to ignite long-buried squabbles with me AND you can attempt to respond to the mountain of criticism to which your going-down-badly suspect theory is currently being subjected.

Well done.

And no, the height entry was not "frequently referred to". It was written down once.

Hi Gut,

It does you a considerable disservice - after I've made two apologetic posts to you and after you've criticised me for being "condescending" - to then endorse the antagonistic remarks of someone who regularly goes out of his way to goad me. My acceptance that this Fleming is the one Kelly knew is based on their compatible biographical details, as researched by others, and the near-impossibility that this compatibility is mere coincidence. This is accepted by many others, most of whom do not have a preferred suspect and don't even get involved in suspect theorizing. And it isn't an "argument" ("not too strong" or otherwise) that such an extreme height and weight is incompatible with "good" bodily health - it's a medical reality.

[GUT]

G'Day Lechmere

Yep I'd picked up on that, and it seems to me (and I may be misreading Ben) that that is the crux of his objection to 6'7" and his inability to accept that this was not MJK's Joe Fleming. Because to me his argument about the weight being inconsistent with a notation "Good Health" is not too strong. But that seems to me to be an issue we will never see eye to eye on. BTW why couldn't the Good Health be wrong or the weight wrong IF IF IF the height is.

GUT

[Lechmere]

Oh dear - it' lucky I can multi task Ben.
As GUT says, to make your theory work, the clear, unambiguous and frequently referred to height entry MUST be wrong. So you try and convince your self that it is wrong.

GUT to add a layer of complication Ben thinks that Hutchinson was really Fleming as well. No kidding.

[Ben]

Last time I checked, Scott!

[Scott Nelson]

And I'm a lanky lad at 6'5".

Are you really Ben?

[lynn cates]

minority

Hello Gut. Thanks.

"That's where we differ. I'm not "happy to count the height an error" BECAUSE it is written in black and white, just because it doesn't fit some other theory."

No more am I. Because:

1. I am not comfortable DISMISSING anything.

2. Not sure what theory this would fit.

Instead, I'd suggest taking the story cum grano salis. After all, weren't many blokes that tall in the neighbourhood.

Cheers.
LC

[Ben]

The only reason that this Joe Fleming MUST be MJK's Joe Fleming is because we can not at this point find another Joe Fleming in Bethnal Green in the building trade,

No, Gut.

The determination that this particular Fleming must be Kelly's Fleming is based on the fact that their biographies tally to the extent that it would enormously and implausibly "coincidental" if they were unrelated, and it would mean that there was another mason's plasterer from Bethnal Green named Joseph Fleming around at that time. Have you researched the threads which discuss the only other potential Joseph Flemings who appear in the various census records?

You keep stating 11 Stone, the records range up to 11 stone 8

This is for the purpose of illustrating the fact that he was recorded as being in good health at 11 stone, which is barely possible if he wad 6'7".

It's tempting to go round in pointless circles with this one. All we're doing is repeating the entire thread again.

Regards,
Ben

[GUT]

BTW

You keep stating 11 Stone, the records range up to 11 stone 8

GUT

[GUT]

G'Day Ben

The only reason that this Joe Fleming MUST be MJK's Joe Fleming is because we can not at this point find another Joe Fleming in Bethnal Green in the building trade, this is circular reasoning that to me isn't logical. We also can't at this stage find her husband in Wales, that doesn't mean he doesn't exist, that we can't find another Joe Fleming doesn't mean one doesn't exist.

The relevance of dad is that someone stated Joe was too thin to be strong enough to be a plasterer, that was my point, which I didn't spell out well enough.

Re revising my opinion on his weight Nope.

Thanks

GUT

[Ben]

Hi Barnaby,

Many thanks for your message. You raise some excellent points, and I'm particularly interested to hear of your personal experience.

Hi Gut,

Barnaby has given you good cause to revise your mistaken impression that malnutrition always equates to severe weight loss, which I trust you'll take on board.

Please don't keep insisting that he was "just under the normal weight range" or "a bit thin". He was most certainly nothing of the sort if he was 6'7" and 11 stone in weight. That would give him a BMI of 17.4 which is significantly underweight, potentially dangerously so.

You say you've been lurking for ages before posting and that you're thoroughly well-informed on the Fleming discussions, but have you studied the evidence that connects this particular Fleming with the recorded particulars of Kelly's ex-boyfriend? The Joseph Fleming at the inquest was described as a mason’s plasterer with Bethnal Green connections, and Fleming/Evans is the only person who fits that bill, as he does perfectly.

The argument that the entry is black and white and must, therefore, be true does not properly embrace the total incompatibility between a height of 6'7", a shockingly low weight (for that height) of 11 stone, and reportedly "good" bodily health. They are wholly incompatible, indicating that a mistake must have occurred.

If we are going to quote personal experiences my dad is 5'11" and 8 1/2 stone but spent his entire working life throwing around 150 lb bags of flour and Kegs of beer until in his 70's, yet one reason to given to doubt the veracity of the records was that Joe wouldn't be able to work as a plasterer.

How is this relevant?

5'11" is considerably shorted that 6'7", and there was certainly go guarantee that lifting bags of flour and beer barrels involved poky rooms and low ceilings, whereas a 6'7" plasterer working in the low ceilings of the Victorian East End would obviously have experienced considerable problems.

Regards,
Ben

[GUT]

G'Day Lynn

Thanks for the welcome.

That's where we differ. I'm not "happy to count the height an error" BECAUSE it is written in black and white, just because it doesn't fit some other theory.

Could he have killed ONE woman, maybe, not 5 or more.

Even one I find it hard to accept no one noticed but would not rule it out totally.

My biggest problem is with dismissing the height because it makes him a bit thin when his health is described as good.

GUT

[lynn cates]

height

Hello GUT. Welcome to the boards.

"But if we accept the record as correct this is NOT Jack. Because sure as tooting someone would have noticed if there was a 6'7" stalker going around killing women."

What of A woman?

Of course, I am happy to count the height an error, but it IS written in black and white.

Cheers.
LC

[GUT]

G'Day Barnaby

But food was not exactly plentiful to the very poor in East End 1890's.

But the real point is that the records show Fleming was 6'7" and the only reason given to doubt this is that he would be just under a normal weight range.

So my real argument is that this makes it unlikely that he was Kelly's Joe Fleming and just because we can't find another is no reason to disregard the evidence we have.

If we are going to quote personal experiences my dad is 5'11" and 8 1/2 stone but spent his entire working life throwing around 150 lb bags of flour and Kegs of beer until in his 70's, yet one reason to given to doubt the veracity of the records was that Joe wouldn't be able to work as a plasterer. The arguments do not stack up.

GUT

[Barnaby]

To follow up, I did some work at a methadone clinic about a decade ago and saw lots of people living on the fringes of society but did not see many people who were terribly thin. On the contrary, most were normal to overweight. Many of their diets, however, would be considered horrible. Some survived on the dollar menu at McDonalds (and $4 a day to get your calories from double cheesburgers for a heroin addict is cost effective!). Most people with little money in societies where food is plentiful still find ways to maintain a caloric surplus.