If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
The expression (to ill-use) has been already discussed, and refers beyond doubt to physical violence.
I very much doubt that Venturney would have reported this if it were only words.
That's BS. It means to treat someone poorly. Being treated poorly can be defined differently by different people. It could include physical abuse, but that would be the absolute worst case scenario.
That's BS. It means to treat someone poorly. Being treated poorly can be defined differently by different people. It could include physical abuse, but that would be the absolute worst case scenario.
Mike
In such context ? With this kind of people ?
You amaze me...
I think we have to be open minded about the interpretation, without any corroboration.
My instinct is that Joe Barnett would have done something had MJK been seen to be bruised as the result of a physical beating. Of course, we might have heard nothing because no one mentioned it - but I am constantly being told how upright and honest Joe was....
I am not aware of mention of OLD bruises on Mary's body by the medicos after her death - but would they have been noticed given the extent of the mutilations.
On the other hand, if Joe DID NOT act to defend his lover, maybe that played a part in his separation from MJK.
On balance though, I think Flemming is most likely to have come round, or met MJK somewhere, and tried to persuade her to return to him. When she refused, he used bad language to her, called her names etc - which hurt her emotionally. I suspect Barnett never knew anything about it - but it might explain why he thought she was afraid of someone (though I think someone more powerful, like a Morgenstern might have been involved there)
Pure speculation, of course. But I think it is useful to consider the possibilities.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Comment