Blotchy

[caz]

It takes more than a few hours at the police station in the hope of getting a confession to make a case against a murderer, Caz.

Indeed, which is why they must have satisfied themselves there was no case and Barnett was no murderer. They would have taken the time and trouble otherwise to make that case and take a highly dangerous man out of society before he could fillet his next unfortunate girlfriend. For starters, if Barnett's alibi for the murder night had not stood up to scrutiny, they'd have been very happy bunnies.

Love,

Caz
X

[Heinrich]

Indeed, which is why they must have satisfied themselves there was no case and Barnett was no murderer.

You seem to be saying that anyone interviewed by the police and subsequently released must be innocent. Killers have often been questioned by the police and released only to be successfully prosecuted at a later time, perhaps when another murder has happened.

They would have taken the time and trouble otherwise to make that case and take a highly dangerous man out of society before he could fillet his next unfortunate girlfriend.

Your confidence in the Metropolitan police is astonishing, especially in light of the fact that they failed to protect the victims or catch the killer.

For starters, if Barnett's alibi for the murder night had not stood up to scrutiny, they'd have been very happy bunnies. ...

Joseph Barnett did not have an alibi as he admitted being the last person to have been seen with Mary Kelly in her dwelling on the night of her murder.

[lynn cates]

Alibi, and good night.

Hello Heinrich. I think the "alibi" refers to later that night when it was supposed that MJK was slain.

Cheers.
LC

[Robert]

"he admitted being the last person to have been seen with Mary Kelly in her dwelling on the night of her murder."

Not so, Heinrich : Barnett did not "admit" (loaded word) any such thing. He did not say, "I am the last person to have been seen in Mary's room on the night of the murder." And he'd have been lying if he had said it, for Cox saw Blotchy go into her room just before midnight.

[caz]

You seem to be saying that anyone interviewed by the police and subsequently released must be innocent. Killers have often been questioned by the police and released only to be successfully prosecuted at a later time, perhaps when another murder has happened.

No, I wasn't saying that at all. Whenever there is a distinct possibility that a murder is a domestic (and the police were well aware of that possibility in the case of MJK - don't let anyone fool you into thinking otherwise), the partner or ex-partner will not be let completely off the hook unless or until he can be conclusively eliminated. That is how they often manage to prosecute domestic killers successfully at a later date, when they become complacent and make a mistake, thinking the police have lost interest.

I only have confidence in Abberline and co, in as much as they would love to have had the excuse - any excuse - to question Barnett further and put more pressure on him to break, if only he had not been cleared as a result of their investigations. That's just stating the bleedin' obvious. They may have made all sorts of mistakes, or could have done some things much better, but they were used to domestic murder and they wanted, more than anything, to catch the bugger who did this. The fact that they failed to protect the victims or catch their killer is much more likely to have been because there was nothing to link them, than because the boyfriend was responsible and they missed all the clues.

Love,

Caz
X

[Heinrich]

Hello Heinrich. I think the "alibi" refers to later that night when it was supposed that MJK was slain. ...

There was no consensus as to the exact time of death, Lynn.

"he admitted being the last person to have been seen with Mary Kelly in her dwelling on the night of her murder."

Not so, Heinrich : Barnett did not "admit" (loaded word) any such thing. He did not say, "I am the last person to have been seen in Mary's room on the night of the murder." And he'd have been lying if he had said it, for Cox saw Blotchy go into her room just before midnight.

"Blotchy" did not admit he was with Mary Kelly. In fact he never existed.
On the other hand, Barnett did say he was with Mary on the night of the murder and was seen with her.

... Whenever there is a distinct possibility that a murder is a domestic ... the partner or ex-partner will not be let completely off the hook unless or until he can be conclusively eliminated. That is how they often manage to prosecute domestic killers successfully at a later date, when they become complacent and make a mistake, thinking the police have lost interest. ...

Several serial killers have been interviewed by the police and released only to be charged at a later time. Sometimes all it takes to stop a killer is a session of questioning with the police.

[Robert]

(sigh) Heinrich, if Barnett had said, "I am the last person to admit to having been seen alone with Kelly in her room," then he'd have been telling the truth.

If he had said, "I admit it, I was the last person to be seen alone with Kelly in her room," then he would probably have been lying (given that he knew of Cox's testimony). I see no reason to doubt the word of Cox.

[lynn cates]

Die Zeit.

Hello Heinrich.

"There was no consensus as to the exact time of death, Lynn."

True--and there still is not. The earliest is Bonds'; the latest, Maxwell's. But Barnett's visit seems to precede ALL these times.

Cheers.
LC

[Heinrich]

(sigh) Heinrich, if Barnett had said, "I am the last person to admit to having been seen alone with Kelly in her room," then he'd have been telling the truth.

If he had said, "I admit it, I was the last person to be seen alone with Kelly in her room," then he would probably have been lying (given that he knew of Cox's testimony). I see no reason to doubt the word of Cox.

You are making Barnett's admission too complicated, Robert. A witness placed him in Mary Kelly's dwelling and he did not deny this. No one else, even imaginary people like Blotchy Carroty, who were claimed to have been with Mary later ever corroborated their presence at the scene of the crime.

"There was no consensus as to the exact time of death, Lynn."

True--and there still is not. The earliest is Bonds'; the latest, Maxwell's. But Barnett's visit seems to precede ALL these times.

This presents no problem for me accepting that Barnett murdered Mary Kelly, Lynn.

[Sally]

No one else saw the man with the blotchy face and a carroty moustache, Abby.

Ah. So Blotchy was made up. Would you care to offer an explanation for his invention, Heinrich?

Or is it a case of making the pieces fit the theory?

[Heinrich]

Ah. So Blotchy was made up. Would you care to offer an explanation for his invention, Heinrich?

Or is it a case of making the pieces fit the theory?

No one corroborated Mary Cox's concoction of Blotchy Carroty, Sally, so, for me, her story is not credible.

[Bridewell]

Corroboration & Credibility

No one corroborated Mary Cox's concoction of Blotchy Carroty, Sally, so, for me, her story is not credible.

Hi Heinrich

Why is a person's story not credible because no-one corroborates it?

If only one person witnesses an event ,their account cannot be corroborated. In no way can that be seen as proof that the event they claim to have witnessed did not occur IMHO.

Regards, Bridewell

[Sally]

No one corroborated Mary Cox's concoction of Blotchy Carroty, Sally, so, for me, her story is not credible.

I think that's because it suits your belief in Barnett's guilt, Heinrich. Others did corroborate Barnett's presence that night -you know, the thing we call an 'alibi'. Yet that corroboration doesn't appear to convince you.

And anyway, you didn't answer the question - why did Cox invent Blotchy? There appears to be nothing whatever for her to gain by doing so. Unless you think differently?

[Heinrich]

Hi Heinrich

Why is a person's story not credible because no-one corroborates it?

Bridewell, eye witness accounts are notoriously unreliable so we have to weigh several aspects.
i) What is the character of the witness?
Mary Cox had a criminal record for assault and had done time.
ii) What were the conditions at the time?
A dark miserable wet night.
iii) Did the witness know the person she was identifying?
Mary Cox never saw Blotchy Carroty before or since the murder.
iv) Does the testimony have corroboration?
No one else saw this man.

If only one person witnesses an event ,their account cannot be corroborated. In no way can that be seen as proof that the event they claim to have witnessed did not occur IMHO. ...

In this case, it is easier to believe that Blotchy Carroty never existed except in the imagination of Mary Cox.

[lynn cates]

alibi

Hello Heinrich.

"This presents no problem for me accepting that Barnett murdered Mary Kelly, Lynn"

Very well, but then talk about lack of alibi is otiose.

Cheers.
LC