Where does Joseph Fleming fit into the equation?

[Ben]

my personal guess would be that the character of fleming was cleared or eliminated from the enquiry back in 1888

With respect, Lechmere, that's a very bad guess indeed, given how utterly without foundation and likely to be wrong it is. He was a known user of an alias who moved into the district in late 1888, and there is no evidence that anyone in Whitechapel knew him by his real name. It's important to be realistic about the sheer numbers of people living and working in that part of the East End. Even if someone from Bethnal Green did bump into Fleming on the streets of Whitechapel, why would s/he need to discover that he was using an alias?

I'd rather avoid going through the whole explanation again, but there is very little doubt - virtually none at all, in fact - that Kelly's Fleming and the Claybury/Stone patient were one and the same. Moreover, it can be satisfactorily deduced from the evidence of Mrs. McCarthy, Mrs. Venturney and Barnett that all were referring to the same individual. Yes, there are still many grey areas, as you'd fully expect from a 120-year-old case, but what we do have is of far greater incriminating value than the little we have on other "suspects" touted as such. If he isn't a "major or serious suspect", I'd like to see who is, and don't say Cross/Lechmere, because virtually everyone will disagree!

There is no evidence that the police were still looking for Fleming in 1893, especially after top brass had decided they already had their man, and even if they did find him, there was no possibility of determining guilt or innocence at that late stage. So this is an absolute non-problem with Fleming's candidacy.

If Fleming had been sought (as sensibly he would have been, unless he was eliminated as a person of interest for some other reason – such as that Barnett was mistaken) and the search was unsuccessful, then I think one of the policemen would have mentioned it in their reminiscences

Nah, you can forget that too.

There would have been hundreds of people suspected during the course of the investigation who were either never traced or never proved innocent, and if every police official who recorded memoirs wrote something along the lines of "Oh what a bugger it was that we never found so and so" about every one of these, you can expect a truly dizzy amount of paperwork. Moreover, most of the officials who wrote memoirs had very strong suspect theories of their own. If their suspects were guilty, as they believed, their failure to pinpoint someone like Fleming would hardly have been relevant.

Had Fleming been found, it would have made the news - definitely. The newspapers would have caught onto it and interviewed Fleming for details of his relationship with Kelly. He would have been the source of immediate and widespread interest, even if he was "eliminated" as a suspect. The fact that none of this happened is an indisputable indicator that he wasn't tracked down at the time of the murders.

I'm afraid your reasons for dismissing Fleming as a suspect are all very flawed indeed, and demonstrably so.

All the best,
Ben

[DVV]

Serial killers do live and can have ex-girlfriends.
MJK didn't know Fleming was a serial killer, that's all (my opinion).
The Dorset Street murder is both a Ripper-murder and sort of a domestic affair.

edit : Kemper's mother wasn't exactly a young student, but she was killed by the "co-ed killer".

[Phil H]

As for flying into a rage, no-one heard enraged voices that night.

Certainly Barnett and MJK had furious rows, if the broken window panes say anything. But arguments can come in many forms - and perhaps the killer "snapped" when away from her (I'm assuming here "Jack" did not kill MJK), returneds urreptitiously and knew enough to get in - opening the door through the pane, to avoid waking her.

A thought did occur to me that what Prater heard was not a cry of "Murder!" but a Kelly, groggy with sleep, awaking and saying, "Morgen?"

a bruiser of an ex-boyfriend will often rough up the girlfriend (Kelly) first in an attempt to persuade her, but as a last resort deal with the opposition (Barnett).

You may know much more about this than do I, Wickerman. I don't for a moment accept that as the only possibility.

Killing the girlfriend gets the ex-boyfriend nowhere.

So no boyfriend has EVER killed his girlfriend? No. The BOLDED statement is not true. People can "snap" andact in ways they later regret. If an ex-lover killed Kelly it might have been because he had recognised that she would never come back to him.

Phil

[Digalittledeeperwatson]

FLEMING, pardonnez-moi

All the French in the world can't get you any tea in China. And what's wrong with the word Morgenstern? There is a great song by that title. 'Morgenstern ach scheine auf das Antlitz mein Wirf ein warmes Licht auf mein Ungesicht Sag mir ich bin nicht alleine Hässlich, du bist hässlich'. So Fleming was 6'7". So what? Tall people can't mutilate? Heh heh.

[lynn cates]

chapped lips

Hello David. Le fait d'embrasser trop? (heh-heh)

Cheers.
LC

[Wickerman]

Because, by the time Mary was killed, Barnett was no longer in the picture.

Perhaps Fleming thought it was his time to get back with Mary, she rejected him and he flew into a rage.

curious

If you recall, they had separated before, and Barnett was still visiting Mary, so clearly they were just having another 'time-out'.
As for flying into a rage, no-one heard enraged voices that night.

***
Regardless of any poster who seems to think he has the grasp of a PhD on the subject, a bruiser of an ex-boyfriend will often rough up the girlfriend (Kelly) first in an attempt to persuade her, but as a last resort deal with the opposition (Barnett).

Killing the girlfriend gets the ex-boyfriend nowhere.

[DVV]

The Sheldens I think use Flemming and that's good enough for me.

Splendid. As an historian, you obviously should chose the primary source : his birth certificate, the censuses, etc.

His name was Fleming, and his father was also Fleming. As was his grandfather.

On Barnett and Flemming, I think even today (in Britain at least) a man would be seen as less than a man, if his partner were threatened or abused (in any way) and he did nothing. As i understand the culture of the East End in 1888 such a reputation would not be a good thing to have.

And that's perhaps why Barnett didn't say a word about that at the inquest.
Venturney did.
At any rate, Barnett doesn't seem to have controlled MJK. He looks like a good guy easily deceived.

My reference to Morgenstern was to the man MJK was said by Barnett to have feared.

Morgenstern is indeed a dreadful name.

[Phil H]

The Sheldens I think use Flemming and that's good enough for me.

On Barnett and Flemming, I think even today (in Britain at least) a man would be seen as less than a man, if his partner were threatened or abused (in any way) and he did nothing. As i understand the culture of the East End in 1888 such a reputation would not be a good thing to have.

My reference to Morgenstern was to the man MJK was said by Barnett to have feared.

Phil

[curious]

Though it could be argued, if jealous, why not kill Barnett instead?

Because, by the time Mary was killed, Barnett was no longer in the picture.

Perhaps Fleming thought it was his time to get back with Mary, she rejected him and he flew into a rage.

curious

[DVV]

If Flemming was 6'7"

Hi Dig

Me fais pas rire. J'ai les lèvres gercées.
And it's Fleming, not Flemming.

[DVV]

I am well aware of that. It does not imply, however, that Barnett knew Flemming ill-used his lover. If he did, then he witheld something.

As you said, this is all speculation - I agree. However, we know for sure that Barnett KNEW what was still going on between Mary and Fleming. And apparently did nothing about it. The simple fact that Fleming was still seeing Mary, that she told Barnett she was fond of Fleming, must have been hard to swallow. It's in my opinion possible that he knew Fleming was jealous (!!!) and occasionally violent. I suspect he was afraid of Fleming. At least, that how I read it.
I don't advise any fellow to date my wife. Even not Joe the Ripper.

Morganstern is out of the picture.

Why please?

Simple. Because nobody said at the inquest that Morganstern used to visit MJK, to ill-use her, to give her money. And nobody said either that Mary was very fond of him. And I'm not aware of him having been caged in an asylum during 28 years.
And because it's a Fleming thread.

[Scott Nelson]

Because Morgenstern didn't want his posterior kicked either. Neither guy was that stupid.

[Digalittledeeperwatson]

Well.....

If Flemming was 6'7" and crazy and violent, that might explain why Barnett never did anything about it. Or at "MJK"s request. Or he did do something about it and was not really interested in mentioning assault in public. And I agree with Phil H here, why no Morgenstern?

[Phil H]

Barnett knew she was "very fond of him" and that he "used to visit her".

I am well aware of that. It does not imply, however, that Barnett knew Flemming ill-used his lover. If he did, then he witheld something.

Morganstern is out of the picture.

Why please?

Phil

[DVV]

Barnett knew she was "very fond of him" and that he "used to visit her". Morganstern is out of the picture.