Was it mary kelly?

[Debra A]

Thats the first time I ve heard about 'peculiar shape of the ears' which makes me wonder if she had attached lobes. The top of her ears were cut, but attached lobes are distinctive and less common than loose lobes. Attached lobes are hereditary which could be a clue to her family. Miss Marple

He he, this made me laugh MM! I have attached lobes and never even realised until I went to check in the mirror just now! I've never looked at the rest of my family's either...must do that! I've never considered my ears peculiar shaped or more distinctive and neither has anyone else....not to my face anyway
It's just the result of inheriting two recessive genes, one from each parent I presume if it's less common than loose lobes?

[j.r-ahde]

Hello Claire!

Heheh, in potentially solving that, Jukka, you make it sound even more mysterious and conspiratorial!

Oh-oh, you are too clever for my brain-cells!

What I meant, was: the letter could have been from any relative of hers, not necessarily from her mother.

Maybe from some relative, who happened to see her in London. This relative X could have kept this piece of information within oneself, while returning to Ireland. Thus; no parents or siblings aware of MJK's whereabouts...

Does this make more sense?!

All the best
Jukka

[claire]

I just enjoyed your mysterious turn of phrase...must be a Finnish thing! But I knew what you meant!

[j.r-ahde]

Hello Claire!

It's just the thing, that English is not my mother-tongue!

Thanks anyway!

All the best
Jukka

[Suzi]

Hi all- The deeper and darker we get into MJK the murkier it gets! I'm convinced that Kelly ( a common name in the LVP and especially in that area) would have been a nice little way of 'blending in' and that it wasn't Mary's surname at all
Suz x

[Moriarty]

The people writing his testimony down would have been more familiar with Cockney as spoken in that period than we are now, and they said it was "ear" not "hair." And what makes you think that her hair was the most recognizable feature? Frankly I'd think hair would be one of the least distinctive parts. It's just color and length, and there wouldn't be a lot of variation in those during the Victorian era. It's not like she had a purple mohawk cut or anything.

We don't all sound like Dick Van Dyke you know.

[Sam Flynn]

We don't all sound like Dick Van Dyke you know.

...neither did he

[Moriarty]

...neither did he

JtR would not have lasted 5 mins had the intrepid Dr Mark Sloan been on his case.

[CitizenX]

With all due respect to Stuart how can the report of Tom Robinson be accepted at anything more than face value, when the phrase “by the peculiar shape of the ears” was not recorded by the inquest clerk or any of the many attending reporters. Robinson can’t even be accurate with Barnett’s name, instead calling him Bennett.

We have to be careful not to select unsubstantiated statements when reading into non official reports.

Also many regional papers would not have had reporters at the inquest, instead printing copy from agencies or another paper they may have had an agreement with. Counting how many time “ears” or “hair” was reported would be pretty inccurate in that case. If an agency reporter wrote “hair” by mistake, it could have ended up being printed in 20 papers.

Kevin

[Debra A]

Also many regional papers would not have had reporters at the inquest, instead printing copy from agencies or another paper they may have had an agreement with. Counting how many time “ears” or “hair” was reported would be pretty inccurate in that case. If an agency reporter wrote “hair” by mistake, it could have ended up being printed in 20 papers.

Kevin

What I was trying to illustrate Citizen was that 'ear' could be, and was (in at least one case for it to be reported in the papers) misheard or misreported as 'hair.' I wasn't putting any stock in the amount of times the mistake was repeated in the papers, although I did notice there were at least two completely different versions (that is not word for word copies) amongst those that reported hair.

[Robert]

Just shifting to Mary's clothes for a moment : Joe may well not have been able to say with certainty whether the dress found was Mary's, but I reckon the other women in the court would have. Surely if the victim had been someone else, they'd have said "I've never seen her wearing that dress before."

[j.r-ahde]

Hello Robert!

One can always speculate with the following possibility; since according to Joe, MJK helped the even worse-to-do, she might have lent her dress to someone else.

Yes, on the other hand, she's being 5'7" made it pretty difficult...

All the best
Jukka

[Robert]

Hi Jukka

If she had two dresses, and lent one, then we would have to try and decide (given the theory that she came in upon a murdered woman and then fled Whitechapel) would she have gone off and left her dress? I think that after crying "murder" in surprise, she would have taken her dress before leaving the area.

Personally I think it's Kelly murdered on that bed, and the evidence of the clothes is extra evidence to think that it is.

[Suzi]

Hi Mr Q

Well the idea that Mary only had one 'frock' is unlikely- perhaps one posh 'FROCK' but a fair few skirts and top layers I reckon...maroon crossovers notwithstanding!!........
. ......Now if we we're to go down the Jill (which I'm not) road that would make a lot of sense re Mrs M etc etc -easy to chage clothes etc etc etc

Somehow I can't get the 'Men Harnessing Horses' image out of my mind though Just me I suppose.....call me suspicious..........at your peril!!!!

Suz xxx

[Robert]

Oh, the mad midwife. That's another one - you mean the midwife put on Mary's clothes and walked out? I agree Suzi, I can't see that happening. Might explain the kettle, I suppose. They always seem to want hot water in those situations. Never ever found out why.