Where does Joseph Fleming fit into the equation?

[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

[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 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]

Absolutely, Gut, and no hard feelings.

All the best,
Ben

[GUT]

G'Day Ben

Doesn't mean I won't be back when I think arguments don't add up

GUT

[The Good Michael]

If this turned out not to be THE Fleming, there would be no one arguing about his height to weight ratio on his worst day in the loony bin. He would be a forgotten tall guy. Even the exceptionally healthy Peter Crouch would have forgotten him, though birds of a feather they be.

Mike

[richardnunweek]

Hi.
Lets take the view that Fleming was indeed 67''. then is upper body weight of 164 pounds, would surely maker him on the tubby side, especially in 1888.
There are reports of seeing descriptions of ''rather stout'' etc, but none of exceptionally tall..
I agree that the Fleming in the institute has the hallmarks of being the Joe Mary Kelly knew,and if he was 6'7'', was obviously not on the scene in Kelly's life immediately prior to her death, for he would have stood out one thinks...
If there has to be one suspect with credibility , it has to be the Joe Fleming who was incarcerated , we have here.a man certified insane, who had a persecution complex, that was intimately known to the last victim of 'Jack the Ripper'.
What other suspect has ever come that close?
Regards Richard.

[Michael W Richards]

Hi.
Lets take the view that Fleming was indeed 67''. then is upper body weight of 164 pounds, would surely maker him on the tubby side, especially in 1888.
There are reports of seeing descriptions of ''rather stout'' etc, but none of exceptionally tall..
I agree that the Fleming in the institute has the hallmarks of being the Joe Mary Kelly knew,and if he was 6'7'', was obviously not on the scene in Kelly's life immediately prior to her death, for he would have stood out one thinks...
If there has to be one suspect with credibility , it has to be the Joe Fleming who was incarcerated , we have here.a man certified insane, who had a persecution complex, that was intimately known to the last victim of 'Jack the Ripper'.
What other suspect has ever come that close?
Regards Richard.

Hi Richard,

The part in bold above is something Ive been considering for some time now, we may be able to identify Joe the plasterer from Marys past, but who is to say whether the Joe in Marys life in addition to Barnett is the same man?

Cheers

[Wickerman]

Hi Richard,

The part in bold above is something Ive been considering for some time now, we may be able to identify Joe the plasterer from Marys past, but who is to say whether the Joe in Marys life in addition to Barnett is the same man?

Cheers

Barnett was aware of Fleming, but doesn't seem to be aware of another man in her life named Joe.

[Sally]

Hi Richard,

The part in bold above is something Ive been considering for some time now, we may be able to identify Joe the plasterer from Marys past, but who is to say whether the Joe in Marys life in addition to Barnett is the same man?

Cheers

Hi Michael,

For what reason should we consider that Joseph Fleming may not have been the 'other' Joe?

We know that there was a pre-existing relationship between Kelly and Fleming. We can not say the same for any other mooted candidate.

Unless there is a compelling reason to think otherwise, Fleming remains by far the strongest candidate for the 'other' Joe.

[Ben]

Great posts from Richard and Sally here.

Richard - I entirely agree that you're not likely to do much better than Fleming in terms of suspects. He had a history of mental illness, moved into the heart of the murder district during the "Autumn of Terror", and reportedly "ill-used" the most brutally murdered and mutilated victim in the ripper-attributed series.

Even the exceptionally healthy Peter Crouch

...Who is "exceptionally healthy" because he wasn't found wandering the streets as a lunatic pauper before being committed to an asylum for the rest of his days, Good Mike.

Regards,
Ben

[richardnunweek]

Hi,
We have a Joe in Barnett,
We have a Joe in Fleming.
We have another Joe that allegedly she was fond of.
It is not unreasonable to suggest, that this Joe was a different person entirely.
Maybe she had a liking for men named Joe, or just coincidental .
If Joe Fleming was 6'7'', it seems strange that nobody has mentioned the rare height especially Barnett, when he mentioned him as a ex beau, it would be reasonable to suggest that Kelly would have informed her live in partner , that she went out with a giant...
Somewhere we have an explanation , it would be fair to say that if Fleming was just 67'', we have a strong suspect, for the murder of Kelly,and maybe the entire series.., but if not, maybe the other Joe was responsible, whoever he may be...
Regards Richard.

[Michael W Richards]

Hi Michael,

For what reason should we consider that Joseph Fleming may not have been the 'other' Joe?

We know that there was a pre-existing relationship between Kelly and Fleming. We can not say the same for any other mooted candidate.

Unless there is a compelling reason to think otherwise, Fleming remains by far the strongest candidate for the 'other' Joe.

If I recall Sally it was Julia that Mary spoke about this other Joe to, and she said that this other Joe sometimes "treated her ill", compared with Barnetts being "nice" her. I dont recall any contentious remarks concerning her relationship with Joe the plasterer and I recall a witness stating that she believed Fleming wanted to marry her.

Its not inconceivable that the other Joe wasnt Fleming,... I agree with Richard, his height would have made him memorable if seen with Mary anywhere near the courtyard. For example, there is a Joe Issacs who moved into Little Paternoster Row a few days before the murder, a short walk from Marys, and he acted weird while he was there culminating with a strange behaviour that Thursday night..he went out and didnt return. Left his violin bow there. And he wore a coat trimmed with astrakan no less....

Point being that there may be many intriguing answers to the question who was the Kelly/Barnett triangles third person. Her death, as in no other Canonical case, suggests an intimacy that is not characteristic of the murders prior to Mary. Which suggests someone she may have known well..which would be contrary to someone who picks up strange lone women on the street at night with the pretense of commerce....which the first 2 murders certainly indicate.

Cheers

[Sally]

Hi Michael,

If I recall Sally it was Julia that Mary spoke about this other Joe to, and she said that this other Joe sometimes "treated her ill", compared with Barnetts being "nice" her.

Yes, Julia Venturney. She is reported to have said this:

...she told me she was very fond of another man named Joe and he had often ill-used her because she cohabited with Joe [Barnett].

And then in her inquest statement, that Kelly was married and fond of another man called Joe who visited her and gave her money - somewhat different to her initial statement.

If we consider Venturney's first statement, it clearly implies a relationship of some duration with the 'other' Joe. Venturney gives us the reason for the ill-use - jealousy. Fleming is the strongest candidate in this case because we know from other sources that he had a serious long term relationship with Kelly. There is absolutely no evidence, on the other hand, that she had any other established relationship with another man named Joe.

Its not inconceivable that the other Joe wasnt Fleming,... I agree with Richard, his height would have made him memorable if seen with Mary anywhere near the courtyard

.

I agree with Richard that his height would have made him memorable, if he was 6'7". I still think, as I have always thought, that we should approach that figure cautiously. Despite the various attempts there have been on this thread to assert that 6'7" wasn't particularly out of the ordinary, it was.

For example, there is a Joe Issacs who moved into Little Paternoster Row a few days before the murder, a short walk from Marys, and he acted weird while he was there culminating with a strange behaviour that Thursday night..he went out and didnt return. Left his violin bow there. And he wore a coat trimmed with astrakan no less....

Oh yes (sigh...) 'Joseph Isaacs', the bane of my life

I wondered when he'd crop up.

Firstly, there is no evidence that he was ever known as 'Joe' - that's your assumption. Secondly, he (generally) lived in the immediate district in any case, so he hardly 'moved in', except to new lodgings. Thirdly, he always 'acted weird' - he had a reckless streak and is not to be taken too seriously. Fourthly, the press suggested that he wore an Astrakhan coat - not impossible, since even I'll concede that he liked a bit of bling - but also not to be taken too seriously, since the press had their own, obvious reasons for bumping up the Kelly case. The whole speculation here that this man May have been been Hutchinson's Astrakhan Man and the 'other' Joe to boot has little evidential basis.

And remember, there is a contemporary press report which puts him in prison at the time of Kelly's death - which, if substantiated, takes him off the streets and out of the running for Hutchinson's flashy Jew.

Point being that there may be many intriguing answers to the question who was the Kelly/Barnett triangles third person. Her death, as in no other Canonical case, suggests an intimacy that is not characteristic of the murders prior to Mary. Which suggests someone she may have known well..which would be contrary to someone who picks up strange lone women on the street at night with the pretense of commerce....which the first 2 murders certainly indicate.

I agree, there may be intriguing answers to the Kelly/Barnett triangle - not least that it may have actually been a square. I also agree that her death does suggest an 'intimacy'; and yes - that could derive from her having known her killer intimately. On the other hand, it could simply be the consquence of time and opportunity for a serial killer to fully enact fantasies that a few snatched minutes on the streets simply didnt' allow.

[caz]

Hi Caz,

If Dr. Patterson was in the habit of making a note of people's heights using the longer "_ft_in" description, while one of his colleagues preferred to record them in inches only, the former could easily have written "6 ft 7 in" in haste, and without giving it much (or any) thought.

Hi Ben,

This is what I cannot agree with. Your argument that 6 ft 7 would have been distinctly unusual at the time is what would make it difficult - not easy - for anyone transcribing someone's height to make a one-off mistake like that. He'd be more likely to have mistranscribed 60-something inches as 6 ft something in every instance if he didn't give a thought to the figures he was transferring. In fact, the very process of changing the format to introduce ft would argue against haste or thoughtlessness. Would you argue that a height of, say, 71" (ie a far from unknown 5 ft 11), could as easily have been misrecorded by the careless Dr. P as 7 ft 1? I very much doubt it, yet there are only 6 inches in it.

Love,

Caz
X