Mr Blotchy

[New Waterloo]

Hello Trevor,

According to Spicer he arrested the suspect and took him to Commercial Street police station where his identity was established as a 'respectable Doctor'. I just cannot understand why this witness is disregarded. It seems to me that his suspicions were overridden by senior officers when it was established he was a Doctor. Even if that is not the case there are many (Hutchinson) for example who some believe and some do not but it is not fair for everybody to override was ex PC Spicer has said. Yes it may be make believe but give his evidence of what he states happened that night a chance. It is not correct to just ignore what a witnesses is saying or perhaps we do.

[Michael W Richards]

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.

I just addressed this fantasy elsewhere, but let me just ask this..Why no Mrs Kennedy at the Inquest? You dont want the answer to be because she is actually Sarah, but that IS the answer. The cops knew it, which is why no Kennedy at the Inquest. The papers coverage are responsible for your delusions, so dont blame me for pointing them out.

[Chava]

Just out of interest, what was 'Mrs Kennedy' doing out by herself at 3.00 am?

[Wickerman]

I just addressed this fantasy elsewhere, but let me just ask this..Why no Mrs Kennedy at the Inquest?

Because Kennedy didn't see the loiterer (Hutchinson?), Lewis did.
The coroner was interested in the man seen loitering in Dorset St. that is clear from the inquest testimony of Sarah Lewis.
The inquest was closed early, for all we know Kennedy might have been scheduled for the next day, with others.

You dont want the answer to be because she is actually Sarah, but that IS the answer. The cops knew it, which is why no Kennedy at the Inquest. The papers coverage are responsible for your delusions, so dont blame me for pointing them out.

Lewis & Kennedy have:
- different names.
- different addresses.
- different stories on Friday.
- arrived at Millers court at different times.
- saw different people.
- Lewis was a friend of the family (at No.2)
- Kennedy was the daughter of the family (at No.2)

And yet, you want them to be the same person?

[Wickerman]

Just out of interest, what was 'Mrs Kennedy' doing out by herself at 3.00 am?

She wasn't asked. People were out all night round the clock, coming or going to work.

[Chava]

She wasn't asked. People were out all night round the clock, coming or going to work.

I know she wasn't asked. But I wonder what she did. Possibly a barmaid who had to stay after to clean the place up? Women in the North worked all hours in the mills. But there weren't too many mills in Whitechapel.

[Lewis C]

This man is wearing a tall Billycock hat.


I'm not saying your wrong, but maybe, maybe not.

Given this and what you said in your follow-up post, it seems to me that "rather tall" probably is a description of the hat rather than of the man.

[Wickerman]

I know she wasn't asked. But I wonder what she did. Possibly a barmaid who had to stay after to clean the place up? Women in the North worked all hours in the mills. But there weren't too many mills in Whitechapel.

There is no obvious indication as to whether Mrs Kennedy worked or not, or if so what her work was. However, in the Wednesday story when Kennedy was out in the evening with Sarah Lewis we do read in the Evening News that "the stranger refused to stand Mrs Kennedy and her sister a drink".

Given the fact this was Victorian London no respectable female with any morals will ask a strange man to buy her a drink. This observation suggests to me both Kennedy & Lewis were part-time prostitutes. It was the custom for prospective clients to buy their 'lady' a drink to start things off. The subsequent line that he offered to invite one of them down a dark ally pretty much confirms his intentions.

[SuspectZero]

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.

This will cause some controversy, but I believe that Mr. Blotchy is none other than former PC George Compton. 5'8" - blotchy complexion and a former member of H Division up until July 1888 when he retired from the force at 45. Hauled into two different police stations on 2 consecutive days for suspicion of being JTR and before you ask how do I know he had a blotchy complexion, it's right in his discharge papers.

[Michael W Richards]

Because Kennedy didn't see the loiterer (Hutchinson?), Lewis did.
The coroner was interested in the man seen loitering in Dorset St. that is clear from the inquest testimony of Sarah Lewis.
The inquest was closed early, for all we know Kennedy might have been scheduled for the next day, with others.



Lewis & Kennedy have:
- different names.
- different addresses.
- different stories on Friday.
- arrived at Millers court at different times.
- saw different people.
- Lewis was a friend of the family (at No.2)
- Kennedy was the daughter of the family (at No.2)

And yet, you want them to be the same person?

You really so want this to be true you overlook the obvious when making your arguments. Both women went to the same house? Ahem. The variances in the stories is enough proof that different women gave them, but to you, they went to the same house so they are one woman? Now we have a delayed testimony suggestion to support them being 2 women? They were 2 women Wick, but only 1 was there and saw anything. The other, your Mrs Kennedy, is either a wanna be witness or its a bunch of slightly muddled up stories by one woman.

Unless you produce a document that states there was plan to have more than a single day of testimony with Kennedys name as a witness on a subsequent day, please stop trying to make this 2 women notion work for yourself. Its unproductive and not working. Yes there were variances, because 2 women gave 1 story...but the one who knew it best was at the Inquest because it was her story.

[Wickerman]

You really so want this to be true you overlook the obvious when making your arguments. Both women went to the same house? Ahem.

That's what friends do, they go to each others house, especially when one is grieving.
The coroner even asked Lewis about her staying at the Keylers house, "until what time?".
At least the court was not confused about Lewis staying at the Keylers - the court knew Lewis was not their daughter.
Everyone at the time knew there were two women.
Why are you having trouble?

Lewis & Kennedy were together on the streets on the Wednesday prior to the murder, so they were friends.
On this occasion, Friday, Lewis said she had a row with her husband/partner, so she left to go to her friends house.
You never had an argument with a woman and she walks out?
Where do they go?, parents or friends? Maybe she had no parents, or perhaps her best friend was closer, especially at that time of night.

The variances in the stories is enough proof that different women gave them, but to you, they went to the same house so they are one woman? Now we have a delayed testimony suggestion to support them being 2 women? They were 2 women Wick, but only 1 was there and saw anything. The other, your Mrs Kennedy, is either a wanna be witness or its a bunch of slightly muddled up stories by one woman.

No idea what that is supposed to mean.

Unless you produce a document that states there was plan to have more than a single day of testimony with Kennedys name as a witness on a subsequent day, please stop trying to make this 2 women notion work for yourself. Its unproductive and not working. Yes there were variances, because 2 women gave 1 story...but the one who knew it best was at the Inquest because it was her story.

The document is there, you've been reading it for years, do you know what adjourn means?.
Following the testimony of Dr Phillips, we read:

The jury: had no questions to ask at this stage, and it was understood that more detailed evidence of the medical examination would be given at a future hearing.

Finally, after the last witness (Abberline) the coroner then addressed the Jury to tell them that in his opinion there is no need to adjourn for a future hearing.

The Coroner (to the jury): The question is whether you will adjourn for further evidence. My own opinion is that it is very unnecessary for two courts to deal with these cases, and go through the same evidence time after time,....
It is for you to say whether you will close the inquiry to-day; if not, we shall adjourn for a week or fortnight, to hear the evidence that you may desire.

It was already expected there would be a second hearing, "it was understood" that more evidence would be given at a future hearing.