Was Mary Kelly killed in daylight hours.?

[David Orsam]

Ok, so why don't you provide a press quote where activities which took place in the room are described, because to be honest, none come to mind.

If I provided a press quote about the activities in the room I would be hypocritical. My point is that the press didn't know for sure what happened in the room.

That is why some newspapers say there were two examinations while others only refer to a single examination, or post-mortem.

What I rely on is: firstly the evidence of Dr Phillips who referred to entering the room at 1.30pm and who then referred to his 'subsequent examination' suggesting, to me at least, that the examination occurred later in time.

Then I rely on the fact that a photographer certainly attended that afternoon and I would have thought that all photographs would have been taken before anything in the room was touched.

Then I rely on the fact that Dr Bond referred to "the examination" which commenced at 2pm. I strongly suspect that all the doctors commenced a single examination (or post-mortem) at that time.

What I can't say, however, is that I know what happened in that room for a fact but that is what you have now stated twice in this thread, despite your only source being a single unsourced newspaper report.

[Wickerman]

After several days,at least up to the inquest, the police were still undecided as to the time of murder although they were leaning towards around 4:00 am..

Although it is a laborious task, I went through every principal London newspaper from Friday evening to Monday morning.
Yes, there were some opinions which admitted to the authorities being unsure about a time of death.
But, by far the most popular story was Maxwell's, and the most likely time of death published over that weekend was after 9:00 am in the morning.
I'm not saying this was the view of the police, that is not specifically stated, it was just what the press were saying.
So, the reading public were more likely to have accepted the murder of Kelly as a late morning murder, in daylight.

[Joshua Rogan]

Hi All,

Compile a list of those people who claimed to have some knowledge of Mary Jane Kelly.

I think you will find that these people were the nine witnesses called to give evidence at her inquest.

Plenty of other locals claimed that Mary Jane Kelly was unknown to them.

Regards,

Simon

I made a list once, and it was more than nine....in fact, I might still have it somewhere...result!

Joe Barnett
John McCarthy
Thomas Bowyer
Lizzie Albrook
Mary Ann Cox
Elizabeth Prater
Caroline Maxwell
George Hutchinson
Maria Harvey
Sarah Rooney
Julia Vanturney
Annie Govan
Elizabeth Smith
Liz Foster
Maurice Lewis
Catherine Pickett
Another unnamed woman
And a fellow in the doss house who said everyone knew Mary Jane

[David Orsam]

Yes, but keep in mind this is reported in the Irish Times, not, so far as I can see in the local London papers. The American press also got a number of detail wrong, so I mostly give preference to the London papers first.

In fact, the Daily Chronicle (a London newspaper) of 10 November 1888 claimed that Dr Duke, who it described as 'the police surgeon of the H Division' was 'the first medical man to arrive on the spot'.

Just shows how inaccurate information can spread quickly in the press.

[Wickerman]

But we come back to the simple question: how did the press know what happened in the room?

Ok, so why don't you provide a press quote where activities which took place in the room are described, because to be honest, none come to mind.

Do not forget, the photographer is very likely to have been approached by a journalist to describe the look of the room. I'm not so sure he would have been sworn to secrecy.
Police officials in attendance that morning are not a likely source, but I think some questions about Dr. Percy Clerk's conduct with the press were posed.

[Joshua Rogan]

Was just going to say the same thing, Simon.

http://forum.casebook.org/showthread...ver#post406066 (Post #37)

Thanks Jerry and Simon!

[Wickerman]

Hi Wickerman,

what I want to point out are just the simple and well historically established facts that:

1. There are newspapers from 10th November reporting that Dukes was the first medical man at Miller´s Court.

So accordring to these sources, Phillips was not first. Or Bond.

Yes, but keep in mind this is reported in the Irish Times, not, so far as I can see in the local London papers. The American press also got a number of detail wrong, so I mostly give preference to the London papers first. The only time I look further afield, but still in English press, is when articles are published that do not appear in the London press.

3. Dukes and Bond did not testify at the inquest.

This means that we have no inquest testimony from them as to what they saw or when they entered the murder site.

Agreed, but it is not normally required to have more than one professional opinion attended at the inquest. This was Dr. Phillips's case so only he is required.

So we can not draw any conclusions about the time they entered from that specific testimony.

No we can't, with the exception of Dr. Phillips who stated when he arrived at Millers Court, being 11:15 am.
The photographer arrived at 1:30, roughly when the door was broken open.
Phillips entered and made a preliminary examination, then allowed the photographer to enter and take some pictures. Dukes, Bond, Gabe, and the rest all arrived between 1:30 - 2:00, actual times not being available.

[Simon Wood]

Hi All,

Compile a list of those people who claimed to have some knowledge of Mary Jane Kelly.

I think you will find that these people were the nine witnesses called to give evidence at her inquest.

Plenty of other locals claimed that Mary Jane Kelly was unknown to them.

Regards,

Simon

[David Orsam]

I didn't suggest Mary would be well known at all, just that none of the other people who were out on the street at the time of the alleged sighting saw anything of this alleged exchange, nor did they come forward to substantiate the description of Mary. People did not have to know Mary to be able to corroberate what Carrie says Mary was looking like that morning. A simple "I saw someone who looked like that also" is conspicuously absent.

Why would you expect anyone to see anything of this exchange if it occurred? People speak in the street all the time but I don't see everyone else keeping records of those conversations, mental or otherwise. And why would anyone think they needed to come forward to substantiate "the description" of Mary?

I love the way you have simply ignored the fact that I said we don't know if anyone did come forward to corroborate Maxwell's story and ploughed on regardless.

But for me the key fact is that we are talking about an area of London where members of the public simply did not approach the police or tell them anything. Most people in the streets were probably petty criminals. People in that area didn't come forward at the best of times, and certainly not to confirm something that the police already knew from another witness.

[David Orsam]

No sir, just makes them unsubstantiated claims until otherwise proven. Hardly something to formulate a particular position with.

Well I'm not formulating any position. I simply pointed out to you that there was no evidence to contradict Maxwell's evidence. There wasn't any need for any further discussion in my opinion.

[Michael W Richards]

Actually we don't know if anyone came forward and corroborated her story. Police reports after the inquest are missing. We just can't say.

But the point you make is built on what I regard as a fallacy, namely that Kelly was almost a minor celebrity in the area so that just about everyone walking down Dorset Street would have known who she was and remembered her. It's just not realistic. Like you say, it was a highly populated area with people coming and going over short spaces of time. I just don't think everyone knew everyone else or anything like it.

I didn't suggest Mary would be well known at all, just that none of the other people who were out on the street at the time of the alleged sighting saw anything of this alleged exchange, nor did they come forward to substantiate the description of Mary. People did not have to know Mary to be able to corroberate what Carrie says Mary was looking like that morning. A simple "I saw someone who looked like that also" is conspicuously absent.

[Michael W Richards]

There's no evidence to corroborate a lot of things regarding the murders but that doesn't necessarily make them untrue does it?

No sir, just makes them unsubstantiated claims until otherwise proven. Hardly something to formulate a particular position with.

[David Orsam]

So obviously, the press can determine who enters the room & when, without actually interviewing anyone.

But we're not concerned with who entered the room and when are we Jon?

We are concerned with what happened once they were inside.

[David Orsam]

As for Dorset Street, Mayors Day would have nothing to do with how many people would have been out and about on any given morning on Dorset...this was one of the most populated streets due to the number of lodging houses, and there would have been many people on the street by the time "Corrie" says she saw Mary. Yet not one of these people came forward and corroborated her story.

Actually we don't know if anyone came forward and corroborated her story. Police reports after the inquest are missing. We just can't say.

But the point you make is built on what I regard as a fallacy, namely that Kelly was almost a minor celebrity in the area so that just about everyone walking down Dorset Street would have known who she was and remembered her. It's just not realistic. Like you say, it was a highly populated area with people coming and going over short spaces of time. I just don't think everyone knew everyone else or anything like it.

[Wickerman]

David:

What are you saying? A reporter on the roof observed the 'preliminary examination' of Dr Phillips and was reporting what he saw? Seriously?

As everyone else can see, except from you David, Wickerman did not say that. I do think you should apologize to Wickerman for putting words into his mouth.

The question marks are irrelevant. Especially since you finish off with "Seriously?", a confirming word, when there is NOTHING TO CONFIRM.

Hi Pierre.
The article concerning pressmen on the rooftops came from the Star:

"The police, however, refuse to supply information of any kind to certain of the reporters, and guard the entrance to the court where the crime was committed as carefully as if the murderer were still confined within its precincts.
The court itself, which our reporter and artist got an opportunity of viewing from the roof, is one of those miserable little alleys where none but those compelled to live in its stifling atmosphere ever enter."
Star, 9 Nov. 1888.

So obviously, the press can determine who enters the room & when, without actually interviewing anyone.