Mary Jane Wilson

[Debra A]

Hi, Debra,
I have such great respect for your work and views. Would you be willing to evaluate them side-by-side?

Thx,

Velma

Thanks for the kind words, Velma. I think it would be much more interesting if the people suggesting both these scenarios would debate each other.

[Debra A]

So Debra, you would take Barnett's witness statements or non-statements, over the unexplained and extremely compelling lack of a documented death IDing someone as someone else?

Wow! I guess I wasted my time and money ordering the death certificate of the Mary Wilson you found.

You pointed out Alice Carroll was in Ireland in September 1887. Mary Wilson was in Liverpool in October 1887. Big difference.

http://www.jtrforums.com/showthread.php?t=14189&page=7

I was simply pointing out that both groups believe that they may have identified MJK but have also both had to disregarded the evidence given by Barnett in the process. If that upsets you I'm sorry. Perhaps you could have a debate with Phil Carter and Trevor Marriott about it.

[MayBea]

Hi, Debra,
I have such great respect for your work and views. Would you be willing to evaluate them side-by-side?

Yes, by all means, how about evaluating them both on the Mary Kelly boards?

[MayBea]

So Debra, you would take Barnett's witness statements or non-statements, over the unexplained and extremely compelling lack of a documented death IDing someone as someone else?

Wow! I guess I wasted my time and money ordering the death certificate of the Mary Wilson you found.

You pointed out Alice Carroll was in Ireland in September 1887. Mary Wilson was in Liverpool in October 1887. Big difference.

http://www.jtrforums.com/showthread.php?t=14189&page=7

[curious]

Look at it this way, MayBea-the people who are advocating Alice Carroll as MJK are claiming exactly the same thing for the same reasons. Mary Jane Kelly can't have been both women yet both sides are equally adamant their candidate should be taken seriously.
Both sides are also cherry picking information on MJK to make their candidate fit a little better and poor old Barnett is being made out to be a total clueless moron.

Hi, Debra,
I have such great respect for your work and views. Would you be willing to evaluate them side-by-side?

Thx,

Velma

[Debra A]

She's not readily eliminated by the census record. I may just have to order her death record.

You have to admit that she's the last overt match in the BMD Deaths + or - 5years in age.

If she isn't Mary Jane Wilson, then MJW must be taken seriously.

Look at it this way, MayBea-the people who are advocating Alice Carroll as MJK are claiming exactly the same thing for the same reasons. Mary Jane Kelly can't have been both women yet both sides are equally adamant their candidate should be taken seriously.
Both sides are also cherry picking information on MJK to make their candidate fit a little better and poor old Barnett is being made out to be a total clueless moron.

[MayBea]

She's not readily eliminated by the census record. I may just have to order her death record.

You have to admit that she's the last overt match in the BMD Deaths + or - 5years in age.

If she isn't Mary Jane Wilson, then MJW must be taken seriously.

[Debra A]

Thanks very much for those details Liv.

[Livia]

This may be the Mary Wilson mentioned in Deb's post:

Toxteth Park Burials

Name Age Rank Address Buried

WILSON Mary 30 years Wife 8 Modred Street 8 March 1889

Folio Entry C/N Section Grave Class

3293 65853 C 7 626 352 CEM 9/1/13


There are sixteen other people (non-relatives) buried in
Section 7, Grave 626.


Robert Wilson was buried in Walton Park, 13 January 1890.

This Mary Wilson is not listed as a widow.


For future reference:

http://www.toxtethparkcemetery.co.uk/dbase/toxsearch.htm

[Debra A]

This Mary Wilson's age is five years too young, Debra. I wouldn't have ordered her certificate or even looked for her on the 1881 Census.

I only looked at Mary/Mary Jane Wilson/Kellys the right age or one year off. If I couldn't find them in the 1881 Census as someone else, I ordered their certificate.

A more thorough search may be in order, with all the ones covered posted somewhere to avoid duplication of effort.

I'm surprised a mere 4/5 years difference in the recorded age has put you off this one, Maybea. Accuracy of recorded age at death depends on who the informant was and if they knew the deceased exact age. You don't need a birth certificate to register a death and it could be one among probably thousands of entries where the death was recorded (or maybe transcribed) incorrectly. I would think it close enough to be worth a closer look?

[MayBea]

... I was just wondering if you'd ordered this death certificate?-

Deaths Mar 1889
Wilson Mary 30 Toxteth Park 8b 212

This Mary Wilson's age is five years too young, Debra. I wouldn't have ordered her certificate or even looked for her on the 1881 Census.

I only looked at Mary/Mary Jane Wilson/Kellys the right age or one year off. If I couldn't find them in the 1881 Census as someone else, I ordered their certificate.

A more thorough search may be in order, with all the ones covered posted somewhere to avoid duplication of effort.

[Debra A]

And what do you make of the absence of a death record IDing her as someone else?

Hi MayBea. I know you've done a lot of original research and ordering of possible death certificates but I'm not sure if you've posted all the results online so don't know what you have and haven't looked at. I was just wondering if you'd ordered this death certificate?-

Deaths Mar 1889
Wilson Mary 30 Toxteth Park 8b 212

[Disco Stu]

Was this Cleveland Street, Fitzroy Square W or Cleveland Street, Mile End Road E? There were two, one each in West London and East London.Roy

St Marylebone, so it looks to be the Cleveland Street.

[MayBea]

I didn't know there were two Cleveland Streets. I just assumed it was the the Cleveland Street of Scandal fame. Maybe someone can look that up.

As for my suggestion: Margaret was living at the one-time address of Polly Nichols witness, Patrick Mulshaw. She could have joined him or Ellen Holland, or Michael Kidney, or Elizabeth Gold, all witnesses who lived at one time on Thrawl, in their fifteen minutes of fame.

Then again she could have been like Morgenstern and Buki and Fleming who did not come forward, but all of them have been postively IDed and are now confirmed. The men would definitely have come under suspicion.

[Roy Corduroy]

If Margaret lived on Thrawl St. on February 14, 1887, as the after banns certificate says, I'm sure she knew Mary Kelly or knew of her. The fact that Margaret didn't come forward with information could be deemed as suspicious, not the other way around.

Maybea I don't follow you. If she knew the murder victim, why is her not coming forward suspicious. In what way.

And before going on to your other questions please, while we're on Margaret, you shared this info -

Margaret and Daniel Reardon were living at 93 Cleveland Street in 1891

Was this Cleveland Street, Fitzroy Square W or Cleveland Street, Mile End Road E? There were two, one each in West London and East London.

Roy