"Murder...!" cry

[Abby Normal]

You're suggesting that Kelly's killer (if not Blotchy) didn't meet her on the street, but snuck into her room while she was asleep? And that's Barnett?

yup. and possibly Barnett, or hutch, or bowyer, etc. or someone else that knew her that we don't.

I think the circumstances of that night show she and killer knew each other and that she wasn't going out again after blotchy(even if he wasn't her killer).

[Sam Flynn]

Then for you Sam, the witnesses that claim they saw Mary after 11:45 pm Thursday need some consideration

Not if Blotchy was yer man, Michael, which I wouldn't rule out.

I interpret an end to song, and light in the room, as bedtime. Considering she was very inebriated, its not a long shot in my opinion, and its what the evidence suggests.

She was desperate for money, and - as a former drinker myself - it's quite easy to get a second wind and head out again after a nap. In my case, you'll be pleased to know, it wasn't prostitution, but a craving for munchies; booze doesn't half give you an appetite. Maybe it was the same for Kelly, too.

In that connection, we know from the Tabram case that there was a chandler's shop in Thrawl Street selling fish and chips until 2AM. I needn't remind folks which partially-digested food was found in Kelly's stomach.

[Observer]

Actually Patrick I was saying that its highly unlikely anyone snuck in, the windows were locked when found and we have no information to say that they weren't in that condition when she arrived home,

There were three dirty big holes in the window Michael. It didn't make a bite of difference whether they were locked or not.

and I'm saying that the cry out was in all likelihood Mary exclaiming her displeasure of having someone she knew arrive at 3:45am when she was sleeping off her bender.

You're at it again Michael. No one heard a knock on Kelly's door, and Lewis was awake at the time. Also to suggest that Kelly used the words "oh murder" to express her displeasure at a late night visitor to me is ludicrous. To use the words "in all likelihood" to make this point is plain wrong.

[Observer]

If not Blotchy, then it's more likely in my view that she went out again and picked someone else up.

I agree. It's a better option than the killer being aware of the hole in the window, and letting himself into the room. Speaking of which, a long time ago there was a heated discussion regarding whether the lock on Kelly's door incorporated a latch. If so, and Kelly had failed to drop the latch, then it was a simple matter to merely turn the knob in order to gain access to the room.

[Michael W Richards]

If not Blotchy, then it's more likely in my view that she went out again and picked someone else up.

Then for you Sam, the witnesses that claim they saw Mary after 11:45 pm Thursday need some consideration. That's not the case for me however, without her being seen leaving I will not just assume she did anyway.

I interpret an end to song, and light in the room, as bedtime. Considering she was very inebriated, its not a long shot in my opinion, and its what the evidence suggests.

Blotchy is the variable here, and Ill add this, who is to say that Wideawake wasn't actually Blotchy watching to see if she left after he did. I don't know when Blotchy leaves, but I do know he did leave at some point as an absolute fact...which makes the fact he wasn't seen doing so palatable.

[Michael W Richards]

You're suggesting that Kelly's killer (if not Blotchy) didn't meet her on the street, but snuck into her room while she was asleep? And that's Barnett?

Actually Patrick I was saying that its highly unlikely anyone snuck in, the windows were locked when found and we have no information to say that they weren't in that condition when she arrived home, and I'm saying that the cry out was in all likelihood Mary exclaiming her displeasure of having someone she knew arrive at 3:45am when she was sleeping off her bender.

Not one person said they saw Mary leave the room after 11:45, although some claimed to have seen her outside the room after that time. No-one saw Blotchy leave either, but if I'm right, and she padded to answer the door or window knock at 3:45am, then its unlikely she also still had Blotchy in the room with her. That would have caused some discussion between her and her visitor at the door, and no sounds at all were heard after "oh-murder". Which for me suggests that if she answered the door, and although ticked off, she still allowed the person access without a fuss.

We know she was involved with 2 Joes simultaneously, we don't know the second Joe, for all I know it was that 2nd Joe that showed up at 3:45.

[Sam Flynn]

if Blotchy then yes.
if not him, than more than likely the killer gained access through the window trick. mary Kelly being asleep/passed out when attacked points in this direction.

If not Blotchy, then it's more likely in my view that she went out again and picked someone else up.

[Patrick S]

if Blotchy then yes.
if not him, than more than likely the killer gained access through the window trick. mary Kelly being asleep/passed out when attacked points in this direction.

You're suggesting that Kelly's killer (if not Blotchy) didn't meet her on the street, but snuck into her room while she was asleep? And that's Barnett?

[Abby Normal]

From our witness folder here;

"Mary Kelly was apparently very drunk and could barely answer, but managed to say goodnight in return. Shortly afterwards, she was heard singing in her room. Cox went out shortly after midnight and returned about 1.00am by which time Kelly was still singing. Cox went out again just after 1.00am and returned at 3.00am and by this time all was quiet in the court and there was no light on in No.13. She stated that after that, she heard no noise for the rest of the night"


From the witness;

"Mary Ann Cox stated: I live at No. 5 Room, Miller's-court. It is the last house on the left-hand side of the court. I am a widow, and get my living on the streets. I have known the deceased for eight or nine months as the occupant of No. 13 Room. She was called Mary Jane. I last saw her alive on Thursday night, at a quarter to twelve, very much intoxicated. [Coroner] Where was this ? - In Dorset-street. She went up the court, a few steps in front of me.

[Coroner] Was anybody with her ? - A short, stout man, shabbily dressed. He had on a longish coat, very shabby, and carried a pot of ale in his hand.

[Coroner] What was the colour of the coat ? - A dark coat.

[Coroner] What hat had he ? - A round hard billycock.

[Coroner] Long or short hair ? - I did not notice. He had a blotchy face, and full carrotty moustache.

[Coroner] The chin was shaven ? - Yes. A lamp faced the door.

[Coroner] Did you see them go into her room ? - Yes; I said "Good night, Mary," and she turned round and banged the door.

[Coroner] Had he anything in his hands but the can ? - No.

[Coroner] Did she say anything ? - She said "Good night, I am going to have a song." As I went in she sang "A violet I plucked from my mother's grave when a boy." I remained a quarter of an hour in my room and went out. Deceased was still singing at one o'clock when I returned. I remained in the room for a minute to warm my hands as it was raining, and went out again. She was singing still, and I returned to my room at three o'clock. The light was then out and there was no noise."

Absolutely consistent with what I said earlier. The knock on the door, or window for that matter is deduced from the fact that the cat awoke Elizabeth just prior to the cry out, indicating some form of audible disturbance. Ive suggested many times here that the cry out and Mary Kelly being the one to have made it make perfect sense, in the context of someone being woken in the middle of the night with what is very probably a sore head.

Ill defer to Cox and her recollections rather than some other witnesses who claim to have seen Mary Kelly alive after 11:45pm Thursday evening, because of her established relationship with Kelly and the fact she passes that room several times. As for what Kelly had for making a fire, well we know there was one in that hearth at some recent point, and we know that remnants of clothing were found in it.

The issue isn't whether this makes perfect sense or not however, in this forum its whether or not people will use logical extrapolations of data to carry a storyline to its conclusion. Someone cried out at nearly 4am, only 2 witnesses can be proven to have known Mary if only for their proximity to her for some time, and the medical suggestion regarding time of death is in the middle of the night, not 10am. That plus Diddles creates a plausible scenario...including the fact that she was in a love triangle of sorts at that point in time, and she had the room to herself for only a few days. The opportunity for lover B, or anyone for that matter, to pop by to see her is clear.

Its almost certain that the killer gained access to the room by invitation, not forced entry or some catlike stealth.

if Blotchy then yes.
if not him, than more than likely the killer gained access through the window trick. mary Kelly being asleep/passed out when attacked points in this direction.

[Observer]

First of all there is no way I can multi-quote you in my post as you've buggered up the multi-quote function in your post. I'll need to quote you in the conventional manner. My original post in bold.

No it's not, you posted that Kelly was "barely able to speak". From the evidence supplied by Cox it's clear that she was able to speak coherently.

"There is at least one press acoount that claims Mary Ann characterized Mary Janes demeanor in that way"

And the official witness testimony implied otherwise. I leave other posters to draw their own conclusions.

That's just your interpretation Michael, it's not based on any evidence. There are umpteen possible reasons as to why the cat walked across Prater and awoke her. In effect it's pointless speculation.

"Correct, and since its explains the sequence that took place, by the known data, its logical speculation"

No it's not, because there is no evidence that anyone knocked on Kelly's door, thus prompting the kitten to waken Prater.

Again pure supposition, totally unqualified by the known evidence. It's unreasonable to use words like "almost certain" in this instance. It's an issue that will never be resolved.

"There is no evidence that suggests the room was entered forcibly, the windows ere found locked and so they may well have been all night long, and there is no way a killer slid under the door"

And what if Blotchy murdered Kelly? Also what if the killer knew about the broken window, and the method Kelly used to enter the room? Before you say it, I know I'm also speculating, the big difference between you and I is the fact that I am not using the words "almost certain".

Speculation using known and accepted evidence, by known and accepted friends, isn't "unqualified" in the slightest.

Yes it is in this instance. There's no way using the available evidence that you can speculate it's "almost certain" That the killer was invited into the room.

[Michael W Richards]

No it's not, you posted that Kelly was "barely able to speak". From the evidence supplied by Cox it's clear that she was able to speak coherently.

There is at least one press acoount that claims Mary Ann characterized Mary Janes demeanor in that way.

That's just your interpretation Michael, it's not based on any evidence. There are umpteen possible reasons as to why the cat walked across Prater and awoke her. In effect it's pointless speculation.

Correct, and since its explains the sequence that took place, by the known data, its logical speculation.

Again pure supposition, totally unqualified by the known evidence. It's unreasonable to use words like "almost certain" in this instance. It's an issue that will never be resolved.

There is no evidence that suggests the room was entered forcibly, the windows ere found locked and so they may well have been all night long, and there is no way a killer slid under the door.

Speculation using known and accepted evidence, by known and accepted friends, isn't "unqualified" in the slightest.

[Observer]

From our witness folder here;

"Mary Kelly was apparently very drunk and could barely answer, but managed to say goodnight in return. Shortly afterwards, she was heard singing in her room. Cox went out shortly after midnight and returned about 1.00am by which time Kelly was still singing. Cox went out again just after 1.00am and returned at 3.00am and by this time all was quiet in the court and there was no light on in No.13. She stated that after that, she heard no noise for the rest of the night"

Lets stick with the witness statement Michael.

From the witness;

[Coroner] Was anybody with her ? - A short, stout man, shabbily dressed. He had on a longish coat, very shabby, and carried a pot of ale in his hand.

[Coroner] What was the colour of the coat ? - A dark coat.

[Coroner] What hat had he ? - A round hard billycock.

[Coroner] Long or short hair ? - I did not notice. He had a blotchy face, and full carrotty moustache.

[Coroner] The chin was shaven ? - Yes. A lamp faced the door.

[Coroner] Did you see them go into her room ? - Yes; I said "Good night, Mary," and she turned round and banged the door.

[Coroner] Had he anything in his hands but the can ? - No.

[Coroner] Did she say anything ? - She said "Good night, I am going to have a song." As I went in she sang "A violet I plucked from my mother's grave when a boy."

Absolutely consistent with what I said earlier.

No it's not, you posted that Kelly was "barely able to speak". From the evidence supplied by Cox it's clear that she was able to speak coherently.

The knock on the door, or window for that matter is deduced from the fact that the cat awoke Elizabeth just prior to the cry out, indicating some form of audible disturbance. Ive suggested many times here that the cry out and Mary Kelly being the one to have made it make perfect sense, in the context of someone being woken in the middle of the night with what is very probably a sore head.

That's just your interpretation Michael, it's not based on any evidence. There are umpteen possible reasons as to why the cat walked across Prater and awoke her. In effect it's pointless speculation.

Its almost certain that the killer gained access to the room by invitation, not forced entry or some catlike stealth.

Again pure supposition, totally unqualified by the known evidence. It's unreasonable to use words like "almost certain" in this instance. It's an issue that will never be resolved.

[Michael W Richards]

The witness folder here has the evidence to support my assertions, and the logical interpretation of the known data then leads to a possible conclusion that explains all the various elements of the evidence such as it is.

My suggestion is to address 2 things: When the actual killer arrived, and the means of access to the room. Its almost certain by the evidence that the killer was allowed to enter, there was no forced entry or catlike stealth indicated. In fact Mary was facing away from the window and door when her throat is cut.

The suggestion fits, and puts the weight of belief in witnesses we can be sure actually knew Mary Kelly at all. Because those witnesses didn't see Mary alive after 11:45 Thursday evening.

NOTE: Apologies for the repetitive themes, I thought the first post was endlessly hung.

[Michael W Richards]

From our witness folder here;

"Mary Kelly was apparently very drunk and could barely answer, but managed to say goodnight in return. Shortly afterwards, she was heard singing in her room. Cox went out shortly after midnight and returned about 1.00am by which time Kelly was still singing. Cox went out again just after 1.00am and returned at 3.00am and by this time all was quiet in the court and there was no light on in No.13. She stated that after that, she heard no noise for the rest of the night"


From the witness;

"Mary Ann Cox stated: I live at No. 5 Room, Miller's-court. It is the last house on the left-hand side of the court. I am a widow, and get my living on the streets. I have known the deceased for eight or nine months as the occupant of No. 13 Room. She was called Mary Jane. I last saw her alive on Thursday night, at a quarter to twelve, very much intoxicated. [Coroner] Where was this ? - In Dorset-street. She went up the court, a few steps in front of me.

[Coroner] Was anybody with her ? - A short, stout man, shabbily dressed. He had on a longish coat, very shabby, and carried a pot of ale in his hand.

[Coroner] What was the colour of the coat ? - A dark coat.

[Coroner] What hat had he ? - A round hard billycock.

[Coroner] Long or short hair ? - I did not notice. He had a blotchy face, and full carrotty moustache.

[Coroner] The chin was shaven ? - Yes. A lamp faced the door.

[Coroner] Did you see them go into her room ? - Yes; I said "Good night, Mary," and she turned round and banged the door.

[Coroner] Had he anything in his hands but the can ? - No.

[Coroner] Did she say anything ? - She said "Good night, I am going to have a song." As I went in she sang "A violet I plucked from my mother's grave when a boy." I remained a quarter of an hour in my room and went out. Deceased was still singing at one o'clock when I returned. I remained in the room for a minute to warm my hands as it was raining, and went out again. She was singing still, and I returned to my room at three o'clock. The light was then out and there was no noise."

Absolutely consistent with what I said earlier. The knock on the door, or window for that matter is deduced from the fact that the cat awoke Elizabeth just prior to the cry out, indicating some form of audible disturbance. Ive suggested many times here that the cry out and Mary Kelly being the one to have made it make perfect sense, in the context of someone being woken in the middle of the night with what is very probably a sore head.

Ill defer to Cox and her recollections rather than some other witnesses who claim to have seen Mary Kelly alive after 11:45pm Thursday evening, because of her established relationship with Kelly and the fact she passes that room several times. As for what Kelly had for making a fire, well we know there was one in that hearth at some recent point, and we know that remnants of clothing were found in it.

The issue isn't whether this makes perfect sense or not however, in this forum its whether or not people will use logical extrapolations of data to carry a storyline to its conclusion. Someone cried out at nearly 4am, only 2 witnesses can be proven to have known Mary if only for their proximity to her for some time, and the medical suggestion regarding time of death is in the middle of the night, not 10am. That plus Diddles creates a plausible scenario...including the fact that she was in a love triangle of sorts at that point in time, and she had the room to herself for only a few days. The opportunity for lover B, or anyone for that matter, to pop by to see her is clear.

Its almost certain that the killer gained access to the room by invitation, not forced entry or some catlike stealth.

[Observer]

"Barely able to talk" is another of Michael's misleading arguments.
Cox made no such claim, what Cox did say was "I did not notice she was drunk until she said 'goodnight' ".
Considering Cox walked behind Kelly obviously she was not staggering, or bouncing off the walls as she came up the passage.

Also, I'm not sure how you can sing if you are barely able to talk.
Maybe Michael knows.

Precisely Wick.