I know her

[Michael W Richards]

I suppose an element of doubt is introduced by the fact that the police wanted Hutchinson to ID Mary after the inquest - can't quite see the point of that.

It would seem Robert that they hoped to get some tangible evidence that Hutch at least could recognize the face. They had confidence that it was Mary from earlier ID's, so it certainly wasn't for confirmation of that fact.

There are 2 witnesses in this case that muddle up the truth, Hutch and Maxwell, and to my knowledge we have no supporting evidence for their knowing Mary at all.

[Wickerman]

I suspect that has more to do with the police wanting Hutch to positively identify the woman he supposedly saw with Astrakhan man as a match with the dead woman (Kelly), rather than it being about any doubt over Kelly's identity.

Exactly, more to do with confirming Hutchinson's story than identifying Mary Kelly.
The police had already been advised that Mary could have died between 1:00-2:00 am by Dr. Bond, so naturally they need to be sure Hutchinson was not mistaken in who he saw.

[Robert]

Hi Qlder

Yes, but let's face it, there wasn't much to identify.

[Pcdunn]

True identification?

Joe Barnett also lived there, knew Kelly intimately, and made a positive identification.

Yes, but could he have lied about the identification?

[Qlder]

I suspect that has more to do with the police wanting Hutch to positively identify the woman he supposedly saw with Astrakhan man as a match with the dead woman (Kelly), rather than it being about any doubt over Kelly's identity.

[Robert]

I suppose an element of doubt is introduced by the fact that the police wanted Hutchinson to ID Mary after the inquest - can't quite see the point of that.

[Sam Flynn]

The onus of identification would be biased towards it being Mary Kelly...because Mary Kelly lived there.

Joe Barnett also lived there, knew Kelly intimately, and made a positive identification.

[Wickerman]

I doubt the identification was such a clinical procedure as some modern theorists would have us believe.
When the live-in lover tells them it is Mary, the clothes are Marys, the hair is the same as Marys. The police are not likely to question whether he could be mistaken, nor should we.

It's a desperate theory to suggest otherwise.
My only query is that Mary Kelly was perhaps not her real name, not that the body was not that of Barnett's lover, whoever she was.

[Robert]

I think we have to factor in the possibility that Joe may have recognized her from indications which he would have been reluctant to mention, for reasons of taste. After all, her breasts were still in the room.

But going back to the clothes, the only way I can see Mary disappearing and leaving her clothes behind would be if she heard that a murder had been committed in the room and decided not to go back there. But that would raise the question, what became of the clothes belonging to the non-Mary woman?

[miss marple]

Apart from her hair the most distinctive feature of Mary according to her friends was her height. She was supposedly taller than the average woman, about 5ft .7 /8. The length of a mattress is 6ft, the body on the bed ,looks like a taller woman the slightly bent leg ending just a couple of inches from the end,
Apart from that, the whole Maxwell thing is so dubious, According to her Mary was short dark and stout, lived quietly ' kept herself to herself.' If she had known her, she would have known that Joe was living with up until a few days before her death and they had drunken rows and she had friends staying with her. She said she had only spoken to her a couple times before her death yet according to her the drunk woman she encountered called her 'Carrie' as if she were an intimate friend.
The woman she met seems to have been the same woman seen by Maurice Lewis going into the Britannia, but no one in The Britannia saw Mary Kelly at nine in the morning in the pub.

Miss Marple

[Phil Carter]

Hello Michael,

A thought occured to me while ago. Any local asked to look inside 13 Millers Court would..because they knew "MJK" lived there, presume the female body to be hers anyway.
Nobody in thst situation would have a clear mind to believe another female was the victim. It is a natural thought.
The onus of identification would be biased towards it being Mary Kelly...because Mary Kelly lived there.



Phil

[Michael W Richards]

We all know Joe identified Mary, by hair, ears, eyes, whatever.

I have never had an issue with him identifying her by her ears, eyes or hair, in fact if they had been in an intimate relationship for a year I would find it strange if he couldn't, I know I could identify Mrs Gut by her little toe, if that was all they had.

But I had a thought last night.

Thinking of the horrific sight that must have been before him, is it possible that (if he believed it was Mary) Joe would have said anything to avoid being asked to take a second look.

So in his own mind he is convinced it's Mary, barely looks, says "Yep it's her"

"How do you recognise her" police ask.

first thing he thinks of "Her hair (or ear) and eyes.

There is uncertainty as to exactly when, and where, Joe did identify the body GUT. If he was led to the window and looked from there, as at least one press report suggests, then you have to explain why he could even see her eyes, since the flap of skin from her forehead fell over and covered her eyes while she lay in bed. If he identified her at the mortuary her entire body was covered leaving only her face visible. That seems like it might explain the limited amount of his Mary that he could identify.

[Joshua Rogan]

She was positively identified by her boyfriend which, speculation and conspiracy theories aside, is usually sufficient proof. If that weren't enough, she was also positively seen - and heard - by her neighbours in the hours leading up to her death; on which basis, the idea of mistaken identity and/or "switcheroo" seems even less likely.

McCarthy also positively identified her;

"I knew deceased as Mary Jane Kelly. I have seen both alive and dead, and have no doubt about her identity."

[Robert]

McCarthy also identified her body.

[Sam Flynn]

I don't get why everyone's sticking to the theory of her being the one they found at Millers Court. Just because it's logical. That doesn't mean it's true.

She was positively identified by her boyfriend which, speculation and conspiracy theories aside, is usually sufficient proof. If that weren't enough, she was also positively seen - and heard - by her neighbours in the hours leading up to her death; on which basis, the idea of mistaken identity and/or "switcheroo" seems even less likely.