Mary Kelly's clothing and possessions

[Mary_Jane_Kelly]

This is one of the stranger things I find about Mary Kelly and 13 millers court thats never thought or talked about.

There seem to be conflicting ideas on what she was wearing on the night of her death... Some say she was wearing a linsey dress with a red shawl pulled around her shoulders... One account has her wearing a white apron... Others say she was wearing a black jacket and bonnet... And then theres the version with a dark dress, velvet body and a maroon shawl. Did these people just mistake another girl for her or could she have changed clothing throughout the night? Even what shes wearing in the crime scene photograph is up for debate, some reports said naked, others said she was wearing a chemise or some sort of linen undergarment but it doesn't look like a chemise as it seems to have short puff sleeves. If it is a chemise its a very fancy one and would be expensive, not exactly common wear.

All the other ripper victims had most of their personal items and clothing with them when they were killed on the streets. Mary had her own lodgings, so there would be at least a few personal items scattered about inside, is there any items that could tell us more about who she was?

She was said to be a clean and had some sort of wash tub in her room indicating she took care of her clothing and appearance. She had worked in high class brothels and even visited Paris so while its true she was a common prostitute by the time she was in millers court it doesn't mean she was (or looked) destitute. So as an attractive prostitute she would have done her hair and makeup, this means a mirror, comb, hair pins, pots of powder and rouge but theres no mention of any of these items. She was said to be clean but theres not a bar of soap or any grooming items of any sort in her room.

The only items found were a few pieces of clothes neatly folded on a chair, a pair of boots and the remains of burned clothing were found in the fireplace. There isn't a description on what the clothes on the chair were, what kind of boots they are (mens?) or what the burned remains were.What happened to the clothing she was seen wearing? The red shawl, the white apron? What about her undergarments? A corset and stockings were staples to a woman's outfit back then but there doesn't seem to be any sign she had any?

It was known she had some fashionable dresses around the time she moved into millers court, possibly acquired from her time in the high class brothels or maybe her trip to Paris, but theres no mention of these being found either?

Could someone have taken them? It was well known she had lots of friends who visited and she let other prostitutes live with her, could one of them have robbed her? Or maybe the ripper took them?

Please share your thoughts and help clear some of the mystery up!

[richardnunweek]

Hi Mjk,
You raise some interesting points,
I have brought up the clothing many times over the years, especially Mrs Praters account , and Mrs Cox's.
At 9.pm Mrs Prater states she saw/spoke to Mary Kelly at the bottom of the passage , she was wearing a jacket , and Bonnet
At 11.45 pm, Cox states completely different clothing.
I find it hard to reject Praters account , as she clearly remembers the Jacket and Bonnet, and remarked that she herself never owned such garments,
Mrs Cox was not[ in my opinion] a reliable witness, she reports she followed the Kelly woman , and drunken blotchy into the court, and another report has her standing at her door , waiting for her drunken husband to come home,albeit that statement came years later from her niece.[ in this Blotchy had turned into a ''fine looking gentleman''.
The jacket, and bonnet, are fascinating, as the police formed opinions that they were burnt by the killer because they were bloodstained, and the murder was carried out in daylight.
This would suggest, that either the victim was wearing them when attacked, or were in close proximity to her and became blood splattered.
But why would the killer be concerned about these being soiled ?
The question must be asked. Was Mary Kelly wearing the Jacket and bonnet when George Hutchinson 'allegedly'' saw her , and if so, was she attacked as soon as she entered Room 13, or shortly after those items were removed, and placed on the bed by Mary,?
We know that she owned a velvet jacket, and we know that Mrs Harvey left her bonnet Thursday as she said''I have left my bonnet for you'' [ Which gives more power to Praters account, as Kelly never had a bonnet previous to that evening]
Parts of velvet, and a bonnets rim, were in the fire grate.
I pose the question ..did the killer burn those items, because he knew that Hutchinson had seen him , and Kelly , when she was wearing them, and leaving them bloodstained would suggest that she was killed by him, but destroy, and she could have died any time ?
Food for discussion..
Regards Richard.

[richardnunweek]

Hi,
Following on..
If we take all reports, we could easily look on this crime in a new prospective.
Report..Seeing a couple entering the court laughing at the reward poster close by.
Report..Seeing two women, and a man outside Ringers, the man trying to entice one of the women to go with him/them.
Report..That Mary Kelly had rented out her room that night,
Report..Mary Kelly seen by Hutchinson being solicited by a man, they then both laughed,and even kissed.and then go into Millers court.
Report.Kelly allegedly saying to a friend Lottie.''I will do away with myself''
Report..Kelly being seen , and spoke to by witnesses , after she was medically reported dead.
Report..Police believing the deed was done in daylight.
Conclusion,
A possibility,that when Kelly left her room and encountered Hutchinson, she was out to meet a man on a prearranged time. then be seen by as many people that appeared interested[ Which Hutch was] to solicit, and go back to Millers court,
This would then give the impression that she had taken her killer back, when the truth being the victim was already there., during the attack on the victim her jacket and bonnet were splattered , and she burnt them in the fire.
Massive Hitchcock speculation, but not impossible if one places the above reports together,
Regards Richard.

[Mary_Jane_Kelly]

Yes Richard, it just doesn't add up...

I doubt she had so many wardrobe changes on the evening of her death to warrant all these conflicting clothing statements. The most reliable witness would have been the constable who saw her that night wearing a white apron but no one else mentioned this. It is possible she was wearing a jacket and a bonnet at some point and just changed them for a shawl later in her lodgings, she was working that night so she would have been coming and going from her room all night. Whats weirder is how have all her clothes and possessions had vanished when her body was discovered...

Maybe her landlord Mcarthy had something to do with it. He said she was behind with her rent and had only discovered she had been murdered because he went to collect her rent. Maybe he thought it was an opportunity to recuperate some losses so had her clothes and possessions removed before the police came and pawned them off later?

[spyglass]

Hi all,
This is in important part of the case of late for me, because the more you look at it, the more it suggests the murder of Kelly isn't all it seems.
I've gone over certain aspects of this on a number of different threads on here, but my conclusion is that Kelly wasn't murdered.....the clues are all there, here is just three.
Clue 1. The dark velvet / purple bodice noted by Maxwell and mystery appears in a newspaper report held in the files.

Clue 2. Phillips and Bond contradiction on her being naked.

Clue 3. What was removed from the room in a bucket.

Regards

[Harry D]

Poor Mary Kelly. Her shadowy past and barbaric death lends itself to all kinds of crackpots and fantasists.

[spyglass]

Poor Mary Kelly. Her shadowy past and barbaric death lends itself to all kinds of crackpots and fantasists.

I prefer an alternative idea.
Maxwell and one other (name escapes me ) saw her on the morning of November 9th, she was adamant and didn't budge an inch even when practically told she was a liar at the inquest.
Her statement was made to police that very day.
I tend to believe her.

Regards.

[Michael W Richards]

I prefer an alternative idea.
Maxwell and one other (name escapes me ) saw her on the morning of November 9th, she was adamant and didn't budge an inch even when practically told she was a liar at the inquest.
Her statement was made to police that very day.
I tend to believe her.

Regards.

Although the above statement is in conflict with Bonds rough estimate of death, that isn't in and of itself conclusive. But what can be considered conclusive is that he murder most probably did not commence in daylight hours. The risk of being caught in the room was already there, to add to that the fact that anyone in the courtyard could have done what Bowyer did, it almost eliminates any real possibility her murder began in the mid morning. When adding the fact that rigor mortis is present at 1:30, the cumulative circumstantial evidence suggests, as does all the evidence that wasn't prefaced with à warning, that Mary wasn't out of her room alive on Friday morning.

[Harry D]

I prefer an alternative idea.
Maxwell and one other (name escapes me ) saw her on the morning of November 9th, she was adamant and didn't budge an inch even when practically told she was a liar at the inquest.
Her statement was made to police that very day.
I tend to believe her.

Regards.

Which obviously means HOAX!

It couldn't mean that a) she was mistaken or b) Mary Kelly died later than presumed.

I dread to ask, but I assume you think that the police used a medical cadaver and pretended it was MJK? Why? And if MJK was in on it, why did they allow her to be seen in broad daylight and converse with a witness that same morning? Back to the drawing board for you, me thinks.

[Abby Normal]

This is one of the stranger things I find about Mary Kelly and 13 millers court thats never thought or talked about.

There seem to be conflicting ideas on what she was wearing on the night of her death... Some say she was wearing a linsey dress with a red shawl pulled around her shoulders... One account has her wearing a white apron... Others say she was wearing a black jacket and bonnet... And then theres the version with a dark dress, velvet body and a maroon shawl. Did these people just mistake another girl for her or could she have changed clothing throughout the night? Even what shes wearing in the crime scene photograph is up for debate, some reports said naked, others said she was wearing a chemise or some sort of linen undergarment but it doesn't look like a chemise as it seems to have short puff sleeves. If it is a chemise its a very fancy one and would be expensive, not exactly common wear.

All the other ripper victims had most of their personal items and clothing with them when they were killed on the streets. Mary had her own lodgings, so there would be at least a few personal items scattered about inside, is there any items that could tell us more about who she was?

She was said to be a clean and had some sort of wash tub in her room indicating she took care of her clothing and appearance. She had worked in high class brothels and even visited Paris so while its true she was a common prostitute by the time she was in millers court it doesn't mean she was (or looked) destitute. So as an attractive prostitute she would have done her hair and makeup, this means a mirror, comb, hair pins, pots of powder and rouge but theres no mention of any of these items. She was said to be clean but theres not a bar of soap or any grooming items of any sort in her room.

The only items found were a few pieces of clothes neatly folded on a chair, a pair of boots and the remains of burned clothing were found in the fireplace. There isn't a description on what the clothes on the chair were, what kind of boots they are (mens?) or what the burned remains were.What happened to the clothing she was seen wearing? The red shawl, the white apron? What about her undergarments? A corset and stockings were staples to a woman's outfit back then but there doesn't seem to be any sign she had any?

It was known she had some fashionable dresses around the time she moved into millers court, possibly acquired from her time in the high class brothels or maybe her trip to Paris, but theres no mention of these being found either?

Could someone have taken them? It was well known she had lots of friends who visited and she let other prostitutes live with her, could one of them have robbed her? Or maybe the ripper took them?

Please share your thoughts and help clear some of the mystery up!

I would tend think that witness descriptions, clothing included, is notoriously unreliable.

Plus some clothing was burned, some was found in the room, maybe the killer stole some who knows?

just more fodder for peoples over active imaginations, methinks.

[John Wheat]

Which obviously means HOAX!

It couldn't mean that a) she was mistaken or b) Mary Kelly died later than presumed.

I dread to ask, but I assume you think that the police used a medical cadaver and pretended it was MJK? Why? And if MJK was in on it, why did they allow her to be seen in broad daylight and converse with a witness that same morning? Back to the drawing board for you, me thinks.

Hi Harry

I suggest Mary was killed much later than some believe. Probably around 10am. There are other witnesses besides Maxwell who saw Mary Kelly after many would have you believe she was dead if people only bothered to look into it properly.

Cheers John

[Mary_Jane_Kelly]

Does anyone have any infomation regarding what was found in her room?

[John Wheat]

Does anyone have any infomation regarding what was found in her room?

I'd be as interested to know what the killer took away with him as regards possessions. I think it highly likely Jack took away what he would have thought of as mementos so he could relive the murder and mutilations.

[spyglass]

Which obviously means HOAX!

It couldn't mean that a) she was mistaken or b) Mary Kelly died later than presumed.

I dread to ask, but I assume you think that the police used a medical cadaver and pretended it was MJK? Why? And if MJK was in on it, why did they allow her to be seen in broad daylight and converse with a witness that same morning? Back to the drawing board for you, me thinks.

I prefer "staged"

A body from the morgue. ...I like our thinking ,maybe this was the reason Dr Bond became involved
It seems likely to me that JTR was all done and dusted after the double event, ie the identification and certain witnesses written about further in time.
So why keep it quite at the time? Was it because someone wanted / needed it to be kept going for a little longer.
We know nothing about Kelly, she could have been anything and anyone, her past completly hidden from view.,
The cry of "Oh Murder" just doesn't ring true in a about to be murdered situation, but more likely it is how someone would react to opening a door and finding a cut up body laying on your bed.
If Kelly was in on it, then I suggest she came back at the wrong time before disappearing for good, more proberbly getting drunk didn't help....it's enough to make one vomit right up to 8.00 in the morning .
Now she's been seen, this causes all kinds of problems, and so Hutchinson is introduced with he's tailored made statement just to muddy the waters.
And then there is that newspaper report on the crime scene, the one the police kept in the file on MJK, the inaccurate one that mentions for some reason that dark / purple bodice.

Regards

[Joshua Rogan]

Does anyone have any infomation regarding what was found in her room?

Inspector Abberline stated at the inquest that he had compiled a list of the room's contents, but sadly for us didn't read it out. He did mention some things which would presumably have been on the list, but only if they were thought to have a bearing on the case, i.e. The burnt clothes in the fireplace, kettle with melted spout, candle in broken wineglass, pipe left behind by Barnett.