Mr Blotchy

[Lewis C]

"He wore a black billycock hat, rather tall, and had on a collar."

I would normally think that he means here that the man, not the hat, was rather tall, but he had previously said that the man was 5' 5", so I'm not sure.

[Wickerman]

Not sure how I managed to miss this...
'Liz Stride seen with someone who had 'sandy eyelashes'...Things that make you go hmmmm

"Two laborers, J. Best and John Gardner were going into the Bricklayer's Arms Public House on Settles street, north of Commercial Road and almost opposite Berner Street. As they went in Stride was leaving with a short man with a dark mustache and sandy eyelashes."

Not sure about "sandy", but you will find an extensive report of this in the Evening News of 1st oct.

https://www.casebook.org/press_reports/evening_news/18881001.html

At the mortuary our reporter saw three men who had their suspicions raised on Saturday night by the conduct of a man and a woman in Settles-street, Commercial Road.

J. Best, 82, Lower Chapman-street, said: I was in the Bricklayers' Arms, Settles-street, about two hundred yards from the scene of the murder on Saturday night, shortly before eleven, and saw a man and woman in the doorway. They had been served in the public house, and went out when me and my friends came in. It was raining very fast, and they did not appear willing to go out. He was hugging her and kissing her, and as he seemed a respectably dressed man, we were rather astonished at the way he was going on with the woman, who was poorly dressed. We "chipped" him, but he paid no attention. As he stood in the doorway he always threw sidelong glances into the bar, but would look nobody in the face. I said to him, "Why don't you bring the woman in and treat her?" but he made no answer. If he had been a straight fellow he would have told us to mind our own business, or he would have gone away. I was so certain that there was something up that I would have charged him if I could have seen a policeman. When the man could not stand the chaffing any longer he and the woman went off like a shot soon after eleven.

I had been to the mortuary, and am almost certain the woman there is the one we saw at the Bricklayers' Arms. She is the same slight woman, and seems the same height. The face looks the same, but a little paler, and the bridge of the nose does not look so prominent.

THE MAN.

The man was about 5ft. 5in. in height. He was well dressed in a black morning suit with a morning coat. He had rather weak eyes. I mean he had sore eyes without any eyelashes. I should know the man again amongst a hundred. He had a thick black moustache and no beard. He wore a black billycock hat, rather tall, and had on a collar. I don't know the colour of his tie. I said to the woman "that's Leather Apron getting round you." The man was no foreigner; he was an Englishman right enough.

John Gardner, labourer, 11, Chapman-street, corroborated all that Best said respecting the conduct of the man and the woman at the Bricklayers' Arms, adding "before I got to the mortuary to-day (Sunday) I told you the woman had a flower in her jacket, and that she had a short jacket. Well, I have been to the mortuary, and there she was with the dahlias on the right side of her jacket.

I COULD SWEAR

She is the same woman I saw at the Bricklayers' Arms, and she has the same smile of her face now that she had then.

[Chava]

Not sure how I managed to miss this...
'Liz Stride seen with someone who had 'sandy eyelashes'...Things that make you go hmmmm

"Two laborers, J. Best and John Gardner were going into the Bricklayer's Arms Public House on Settles street, north of Commercial Road and almost opposite Berner Street. As they went in Stride was leaving with a short man with a dark mustache and sandy eyelashes."

[Wickerman]

There is ample evidence within the accounts given by Sarah Lewis and "Mrs Kennedy" that they are in fact one person Wickerman. You know this Im sure. Yet you continue to give this a 2 different women with virtually identical statements and actions spin. Youll note that of the 2, only Sarah gave Inquest testimony.

Michael, I've posted the list of differences between the stories of both women several times. Contrary to what you seem to think, there is no satisfactory argument to make Lewis & Kennedy into the same woman. No-one believed this at the time, it's merely another modern 'invention' in order to avoid considering Kelly went out again after Blotchy.

[Michael W Richards]

Sorry I missed this, but yes there are several reports. The more detailed account is to be found in the London Evening News of 10 Nov. 1888.

https://www.casebook.org/press_reports/evening_news/18881110.html

"On Thursday night Gallagher and his wife retired to rest at a fairly early hour. Their married daughter, a woman named Mrs. Kennedy, came home, however, at a late hour. Passing the Britannia, commonly known as Ringer's, at the top of Dorset street, at three o'clock on the Friday morning, she saw the deceased talking to a respectably dressed man, whom she identified as having accosted her a night or two before...."

"Mrs. Kennedy is confident that the man whom she noticed speaking to the woman Kelly at three o'clock on Friday morning is identical with the person who accosted her on the previous Wednesday. Both she and her sister are most positive in their assertion that they could at once identify the man if they saw him."

There is also one report in the Times of 12 Nov. that Abberline had interviewed Mrs Kennedy.

There is ample evidence within the accounts given by Sarah Lewis and "Mrs Kennedy" that they are in fact one person Wickerman. You know this Im sure. Yet you continue to give this a 2 different women with virtually identical statements and actions spin. Youll note that of the 2, only Sarah gave Inquest testimony.

[Wickerman]

According to the Illustrated Police News of 17 November, 1888, Mrs Kennedy said that she did not know one of the two women and that the other was poorly-dressed.

She was not reported to have identified either as Kelly.

Do you know of another report?

Sorry I missed this, but yes there are several reports. The more detailed account is to be found in the London Evening News of 10 Nov. 1888.

https://www.casebook.org/press_reports/evening_news/18881110.html

"On Thursday night Gallagher and his wife retired to rest at a fairly early hour. Their married daughter, a woman named Mrs. Kennedy, came home, however, at a late hour. Passing the Britannia, commonly known as Ringer's, at the top of Dorset street, at three o'clock on the Friday morning, she saw the deceased talking to a respectably dressed man, whom she identified as having accosted her a night or two before...."

"Mrs. Kennedy is confident that the man whom she noticed speaking to the woman Kelly at three o'clock on Friday morning is identical with the person who accosted her on the previous Wednesday. Both she and her sister are most positive in their assertion that they could at once identify the man if they saw him."

There is also one report in the Times of 12 Nov. that Abberline had interviewed Mrs Kennedy.

[Michael W Richards]

It would seem that some things linger here despite the fact that they cannot possibly be legitimate clues. So,.... Mary Kelly was seen by someone we can verify she knew at 11:45pm entering her room. She was, according to that witness, very drunk. The man accompanying her had a "Blotchy" Face. She was heard to be singing in that room every time Mrs Cox passed by her door, until shortly after 1am. Elizabeth Prater entered the house via the stairs in the tunnel at 1:30am. Marys room was dark and quiet at that time. No witness sees Mary leave. Those are the ONLY people we know were actually there that night to that point in time and that actually knew Mary. Beyond that we have Sarah Lewis claiming something, Hutchinson claiming something and Carrie Maxwell claiming something essentially impossible by the TOD estimates. We have zero corroboration for any of those claims. We dont know Hutchinson actually knew Mary, only that waiting 4 days to come forward suggests he wasnt giving his statement to help the police. We dont know he was even there, unless we accept Sarah Lewis that she saw someone watching the courtyard at around 2:30. We dont know Carrie Maxwell knew Mary, or that Mary knew her well enough to call her by her first name. We dont know that Sarah saw Wideawake man at around 2:30.

But we do know that Saturday afternoon Warren thought it beneficial...for the first time in this crime spree.... to offer a Pardon for Accomplices.

Blotchy is the only suspect for this murder, but he may have just been responsible for getting her home and ensuring she went to sleep. Wideawake might be a better suspect in that case.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

In my view, Astrachan is not a suspect because Mrs Kennedy saw Kelly outside the Britannia about 3:00 am.
Kelly was murdered after 3 o'clock, around the time of the cry of "murder".

According to the Illustrated Police News of 17 November, 1888, Mrs Kennedy said that she did not know one of the two women and that the other was poorly-dressed.

She was not reported to have identified either as Kelly.

Do you know of another report?

[chubbs]

Thanks for all that, Jon - and for the welcome.

So, we seem to be left with two alternatives. Either Mary Jane picked someone up in the street, after 3.00am and took him back to her room, or he entered her room when she was in it (asleep or awake, nobody knows).

In my imagination, as she was seen by Mrs Kennedy, it's marginally more likely that she encountered him in the street and took him back to Miller's Court, (ooops, as you just said!). If that's the case, she may not have known him from Adam, so my idea that she probably knew her killer could be total nonsense.

The more I think about this series of murders, the more unsure I become. I just pray that a massive clue surfaces before I die.

[Sam Flynn]

This is where I normally remind the reader that a Mrs Kennedy claimed to have seen Kelly outside the Britannia (at the end of Dorset St.) about 3:00am. If this is true then Astrachan must have left, so he wasn't the killer.

And this is normally where I remind Wickerman that "Mrs Kennedy's" story is so close to that of Sarah Lewis as to be almost identical, and that "Mrs Kennedy" was either a liar who embellished Sarah Lewis's story and passed it off as her own, a mistake/mixup by a press agency, or else "Kennedy" was an alias for Sarah Lewis herself.

[Wickerman]

Apologies if I'm covering old ground - I'm new here and I defy anyone to read this entire massive and amazing forum. So please be gentle with me if my thoughts are incorrect, illogical or covered elsewhere.

Welcome!
Ah, we've been covering 'old ground' for decades, we're used to it

Timeline of events leading to the murder of MJK:
11.45pm - Mr Blotchy and an already-drunk Mary Jane Kelly go into her room at Miller's Court. He is carrying a pail of beer. She starts singing inside the room.
1.00am - Mary Jane Kelly is heard, still singing in her room.
2.00am - Mary Jane Kelly and another man go into her room Miller's Court, according to George Hutchinson.

That last time (2.00am) is roughly when Kelly met Hutchinson in Commercial St.
Hutchinson was passing the Whitechapel church down on Whitechapel High Street about 1:50-55, according to his statement. Everything that happened from this time onward to him leaving Dorset Street (about 3:00am) is estimated. Plus, he does say he stood around for about 45 minutes (apparently, he didn't have a watch) before he left. So his vigil is presumed to have began about 2:15, which must be when Kelly & Astrachan disappeared from his sight up the passage to Millers Court.
So I would change your 2:00 to 2:15.

3.00am - George Hutchinson states that he leaves the area at 3.00am, so the 2nd man was there for at least an hour.
4.00am - Elizabeth Prater and Sarah Lewis, in separate rooms, hear a cry of 'murder'. This is probably the time Mary Jane Kelly is murdered.

This cry of murder was variously claimed to have been heard between 3:30 - 4:00, so it is not an exact marker.

My thoughts:
Firstly, does anyone know if prostitutes in Victorian London were hired by the hour, or were paid by result? - serious question, as you can see below.

From what we've read, they were paid in advance for the act itself, estimated to have taken 15-30 mins. Usually taking place outside in some dark alley. As Kelly had a room she may have charged more, as the comfort of a bed needs to be included. Kelly did ask for 6d (six pence) from Hutchinson so this may have been her fee, as opposed to the standard 4d for a quicky in some dark alley (referred to as a 'knee-trembler')

1. The 1st man (Mr Blotchy) clearly left MJK's room before 2.00am. He spent less than 1hr 15mins in her room. Did he pay for an hour?

No-one can say for sure. If her client had brought beer, or even provided her with food (where had she eaten the fish & potatoes?), and as the night was wet, so presumably slow for business, Kelly may have let him stay longer than normal.

2. The 2nd man (was it also Mr Blotchy?) went back with MJK to her room at 2.00am. Probably not Blotchy, if we believe Hutchinson's description. He may also have left within an hour, if indeed he'd bought 'an hour's worth'. (If he did leave before 4.00am, he may have left the door unlocked, but if he didn't leave he was the murderer.)

If he didn't leave then yes, he had to be the murderer.
This is where I normally remind the reader that a Mrs Kennedy claimed to have seen Kelly outside the Britannia (at the end of Dorset St.) about 3:00am. If this is true then Astrachan must have left, so he wasn't the killer.
There are other reports that seem to indicate Kelly did leave her room after 3:00, but as the inquest did not pursue that line of questioning then we are left with a host of uncertainties.
Although, Bowyer (McCarthy's labourer) did claim to see a man in the court around 3:00am that morning. He doesn't mention seeing Kelly so this man (Astrachan?) could have been leaving.
The press report said Bowyer described this man to police.

3. Someone murdered MJK at approximately 4.00am.

• It could have been Mr Blotchy returning.
• It could have been the man 'seen' by George Hutchinson.
• It could have been someone else entirely, who simply turned up at approx 4.00am, went in through an unlocked door, strangled* the sleeping, drunk MJK (who woke up and cried, "Murder!" as she was being strangled) and then proceeded to carry out his maniacal deeds.

4. Whoever killed MJK, I believe he must already have known her, as a friend, an acquaintance or as a customer.


*Edit - or he may have just cut her throat?

Lot's of "could have's", right?
I'm more inclined to believe Kelly did leave her room, wandered up to the Britannia, was seen by Mrs Kennedy. Possibly picked up the man who was also there (previously reported to have been accosting women in the street). Took him back to her room (this being after 3:00am), and she was murdered by him sometime between 3:30 - 4:00 am. A time consistent with those cries of 'murder'.
However, there are no certainties.

[chubbs]

Apologies if I'm covering old ground - I'm new here and I defy anyone to read this entire massive and amazing forum. So please be gentle with me if my thoughts are incorrect, illogical or covered elsewhere.


Timeline of events leading to the murder of MJK:
11.45pm - Mr Blotchy and an already-drunk Mary Jane Kelly go into her room at Miller's Court. He is carrying a pail of beer. She starts singing inside the room.
1.00am - Mary Jane Kelly is heard, still singing in her room.
2.00am - Mary Jane Kelly and another man go into her room Miller's Court, according to George Hutchinson.
3.00am - George Hutchinson states that he leaves the area at 3.00am, so the 2nd man was there for at least an hour.
4.00am - Elizabeth Prater and Sarah Lewis, in separate rooms, hear a cry of 'murder'. This is probably the time Mary Jane Kelly is murdered.



My thoughts:
Firstly, does anyone know if prostitutes in Victorian London were hired by the hour, or were paid by result? - serious question, as you can see below.

1. The 1st man (Mr Blotchy) clearly left MJK's room before 2.00am. He spent less than 1hr 15mins in her room. Did he pay for an hour?

2. The 2nd man (was it also Mr Blotchy?) went back with MJK to her room at 2.00am. Probably not Blotchy, if we believe Hutchinson's description. He may also have left within an hour, if indeed he'd bought 'an hour's worth'. (If he did leave before 4.00am, he may have left the door unlocked, but if he didn't leave he was the murderer.)

3. Someone murdered MJK at approximately 4.00am.

• It could have been Mr Blotchy returning.
• It could have been the man 'seen' by George Hutchinson.
• It could have been someone else entirely, who simply turned up at approx 4.00am, went in through an unlocked door, strangled* the sleeping, drunk MJK (who woke up and cried, "Murder!" as she was being strangled) and then proceeded to carry out his maniacal deeds.

4. Whoever killed MJK, I believe he must already have known her, as a friend, an acquaintance or as a customer.


*Edit - or he may have just cut her throat?

[Batman]

I think Macnaughten liked the idea that if a suspect coincidentally vanished or died or was put away that this explains why JtR 'stopped' with MJK. Druitt, Kozminski...

[Varqm]

Look at the inquests again,who was the witness in the position to give a positive ID? Unless they had another witness who had a good look at the "suspect" and was not included in the inquests which I doubt,the inquests were clear enough and this was not the case.From those in the inquests only Mary Ann Cox said "I should know the man again, if I saw him.".PC William Smith could only say "but I did not notice him much." but perhaps he could.James Brown's man was facing the wall and Long saw the man fron the back.Schwartz (2 versions in one day,Sept.30) and Hutchinson were flaky witnesses and dropped.Swanson on Schwartz and Abberline on Hutch were wrong,at least on the day their opinions were written.
Lawende was used in Sadler's case and was their only witness - he had doubts and "Oh No" he could identify the man again and could not give a positive ID,Cohen or Kosminsky.

As posted before,What was the basis why the "suspect" was in the ID in the first place,if the "reasons" were masturbation,eating from the gutter and attack sister with a knife,or even roam at night,these are mild and not evidence.And they had all those years to mention the other evidence against him but always returned to those "reasons" which means there were no other reasons.Not really a positive ID.
Did the witness told Anderson' verbally he won't testify against the suspect because he was a fellow Jew or was it just a hunch/read?.
He did not say the witness verbally told him which would made it definite/unassailable proving his "detractors" wrong, so it was a hunch,
especially if Lawende was the witness.
So Anderson did not have a good basis for saying "positive ID" and "ascertained fact".

---

[J6123]

But it should be noted that no other police officers who were involved in the investigation ever mention anything about this so called ID parade. Now to me I find that very strange. Who escorted the so called suspect to the seaside? Surely not Anderson and Swanson on their own. There is nothing recorded anywhere to show it actually happened other than in these two officers later ramblings.

It should also be noted that Macnaghten was Swanson's immediate superior yet he mentions nothing, and I would have expected him to have known. In fact he eliminates the suspect he named as Kosminiski.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Hello Trevor,

Yes, it is indeed strange, although Mac does mention that Kosminski was said to strongly resemble the man seen by a City PC near Mitre Square. Do you think some records could have been lost or some information suppressed? Do you think there could have been some 'unofficial' goings on? Anderson said in his book he was almost tempted to disclose the identity of the murderer and of the pressman who wrote the letter, and in relation to that Swanson wrote 'known to head officials at Scotland Yard', and Swanson underlined the word "head" twice. So could it be that this ID parade was a pretty secret affair?

Yes, Mac went for Druitt over Kosminski I believe? He got Druitt's age and occupation wrong if I remember correctly, and he favoured the 'suicide' explanation for the murders ending.