The Night She Died

Hi folks,

I believe that Sam correctly used the alias and address that Kate used with Hutt, and Chava is correct when he talks of the boots alias. Something that to me was always curious too Chava....not once with Jane Kelly and Dorset St, but within what was likely 24 hours, she uses Mary Kelly.

Now, Kelly wasnt a rare surname as we all know from these cases, and she was the "partner" of a man who had that surname, which would perhaps be used by Kate in other situations as Mrs Kelly maybe....while hopping for example, but the fact she uses both of Marys alleged given names, Mary and Jane, a number 6 and Dorset Street, and that she does this just prior to being murdered and the victim that is believed killed next by the same killer, and the last, is Mary Jane Kelly of 26 Dorset Street.....more accurately of course Millers Court, is to me one of the "co-incidences" that are abundant within these cases... a few being, Brown and Schwartz's same time-different stories, Watkins and Harvey not seeing or hearing each other or Harvey the killer, Mary Ann being discovered dead twice, scads of the most relevant and controversial records just lost, stolen or destroyed, ..Johns claim the boots were pawned Saturday morning...the pawn ticket saying differently, finding the only known piece of a crime scene transported by the killer then left somewhere, on the night two murders are killed with almost all Jewish witnesses and one on Jewish property... to be found almost right next to some chalk writing about blame and Jews, right at the entrance of a housing complex of perhaps 90-95% Jewish tenants.....

Theres lots of them, but this little factoid that suggests the last two women died calling themselves Mary Kelly is quite odd I think.

Best regards all.

[Chava]

... Fashion Street, actually, Chava. She gave a false name, "Mary Ann Kelly".

Wait a minute, according to this board and other research I've done, she was found with a pawn ticket in her possession when she died and it said:

Jane Kelly of 6 Dorset Street and dated September 28, 2S for a pair of men's boots.

[Sam Flynn]

Gareth, I know this has been mentioned before, but Eddowes gave a false address on Dorset St

... Fashion Street, actually, Chava. She gave a false name, "Mary Ann Kelly".

[Chava]

Gareth, I know this has been mentioned before, but Eddowes gave a false address on Dorset St when she pawned some stuff--shoes, I believe. She also gave a false name--Kelly. No, I'm not suggesting that she was a close confidante of Mary Jane. Kelly was a common name. But the fact that she chose Dorset St for her fake address suggests to me that she may have had some ties to the street. Flowery Dean was just around the corner. She probably had pals who did doss on Dorset St.

[Ben]

Ah, what a genius you are. Here you just got through arguing that Lewis and Kennedy might be the same person, remember?

That's a possibility.

I don't believe it to be the correct explanation.

I believe the correct explanation is that Kennedy was copying Lewis' account.

Now Kennedy is not at the inquest because, according to you, she didn't mention Kelly (although she actually did, indirectly) on the 12th

No, Kennedy was not at the inquest because she was more than likely exposed as a liar for reason I explained above. The fact that she gave conflicting accounts can't have helped either, but that is also something that you should reasonably expect from someone passing off an account that they didn't experience themselves.

Kennedy was a liar, or Kennedy and Lewis were one and the same? Can't remember your latest BS, it seems.

Kennedy was a liar, and if you can't keep up with the thread and just want to hurl insults around, don't waste everyone's time (including your own) contributing to it. The fact that you've chosen to entrench yourself in this particular facet of the case and apparently no other is annoying in itself, but doubly so when it was only recently that the latest "Mrs. Kennedy" discussion was in session.

[Marlowe]

Ben,

You "giggling"? Never. Why, you're the epitome of masculinity.

Anyway, you do make this real easy for me. Let's see...you wrote, "hence the fact that she didn't appear at the inquest." Ah, what a genius you are. Here you just got through arguing that Lewis and Kennedy might be the same person, remember? Now Kennedy is not at the inquest because, according to you, she didn't mention Kelly (although she actually did, indirectly) on the 12th. So, what is it now? Kennedy was a liar, or Kennedy and Lewis were one and the same? Can't remember your latest BS, it seems. That's common with delusions, I think. Which reminds me: I posted to Chava, not to you. If there was any stalking, it was you doing it. Careful, little man.

[Sam Flynn]

Gareth, I don't mean they had close ties to Millers Court. But that they had spent time in Dorset St.

In actual fact, Chava, apart from Chapman (as you've already correctly noted), the other victims' connections with Dorset Street were practically non-existent. With the exception of Mary Kelly, the other C5 victims are known to have lodged in Flower & Dean Street, albeit in different lodging houses and at different times.

[Ben]

And you think one of these tiny "few details" involves saying that she knew Mary Kelly and saw Mary Kelly

Easily.

In fact, that's precisely the sort of embellished nonsense that a person parrotting another person's account is likely to include. It's a perfectly basic premise to all but the most moronic. Women #1 provides account. Woman #2 hears of that account. Woman #2 then tries to pass it off as her own account, but because she doesn't have a superhuman memory, she doesn't get it precisely right. She embellishes, hence the fact that she mentions seeing Kelly on 10the, but says nothing of Kelly on 12th, hence the fact that she didn't appear at the inquest.

I'm stifling some serious giggles at the hilarious thought of "Marlowe" destroying my argument. Stalking me on a message board with the same obsessive detail that made you look stupid before was one thing, but to delude yourself to that extent is just embarrassing.

[Marlowe]

Ben,

"getting a few details wrong in the process"....huh? And you think one of these tiny "few details" involves saying that she knew Mary Kelly and saw Mary Kelly with the well-dressed man AND another woman who was attempting to go in the opposite direction from this guy. You seriously think that she was "parroting" Sarah Lewis when she gave that account? WOW. I don't know if you're totally BSing or you're just completely clueless. Either way, your argument is totally destroyed and you know it.

[Chava]

Gareth, I don't mean they had close ties to Millers Court. But that they had spent time in Dorset St. I know Chapman did. Eddowes did as well. But you're right, it was a generalization and I shouldn't have said it without checking, which I usually do!

[Sam Flynn]

All the victims, I believe, had close ties to the area around Millers Court.

That is certainly not the case, Chava - however, I won't distort the thread you started by discussing it here.

[Ben]

What does the word "parroting" mean? I suggest you look it up. Kennedy said something that Sarah Lewis NEVER SAID!!!! That's NOT PARROTING.

Oops, that's a copy and paste, I'm afraid:

The details of the account are far too implausibly similar to apply to two individuals, suggesting very strongly that someone had learned of Sarah Lewis' evidence and attempted to pass it off as her own experience, getting a few details wrong in the process.

THAT IS PARROTTING!!!

AND WE HAVE EVIDENCE THAT PEOPLE WERE PAROTTING ACCOUNTS!!!

See, I can do silly unnecessary capitals and exclamation marks too.

Sarah who? What relatives? Kennedy had relatives...Sarah had friends.

So that would total four people in a room the size of Kelly's?

[Chava]

Chava,

No, I'm not aware of any collection of sightings. I thought one your posts on the "Rent Arrears" thread was interesting; the one where you mention a possibly complicit, Mary Jane Kelly. Isn't it possible that Kelly was friends with any number of these suspects -- either Sun Burn man, or Astrakhan, or Hutchinson? If so, then what? "Sara", on a different thread, made some interesting observations about this possibility, too, re: friends and drinking.

All's cool, perrymason.

Yes, I think it's entirely possible she was involved. We've had two murderous male/female partnerships in the past 50 years--Hindley/Brady and Homolka/Bernardo. I doubt the Hindley/Brady duo were the first. they were just the first we'd heard of. And both Myra Hindley and Karla Homolka claimed they had been abused by their homicidal lovers.

All the victims, I believe, had close ties to the area around Millers Court. I don't think they were lured to their deaths--the evidence really doesn't suggest this. But I do think it's possible that more than one person was involved in catching them and setting them up. Especially given the fact that they were killed in the open air with people all around who could walk in on a murder at any moment. Having an accomplice to keep watch could be invaluable. And a man walking late at night with a woman wouldn't be nearly as suspicious as a man walking alone. Also a woman could carry the all-important knife concealed more easily than a man. She could just hold it in her shawl or her skirts.

If, however, these two fall out in a bad way, I think it's highly likely that the man would turn on the woman. And after she has died find himself unable to go on killing alone. I've always thought there was something different and personal about the Kelly killing.

[Marlowe]

Chava,

No, I'm not aware of any collection of sightings. I thought one your posts on the "Rent Arrears" thread was interesting; the one where you mention a possibly complicit, Mary Jane Kelly. Isn't it possible that Kelly was friends with any number of these suspects -- either Sun Burn man, or Astrakhan, or Hutchinson? If so, then what? "Sara", on a different thread, made some interesting observations about this possibility, too, re: friends and drinking.

All's cool, perrymason.

Hi again,

Just a quick address of the last post addressed at me Chava, honest....

Marlowe, I cant remember what I wrote on Dec 4th or why I phrased it as I did, but if as you said I wrote what you quoted then its because Im not 100 % convinced that The Keylers were not related to Sarah Lewis in some form...sounds something like a favourite niece seeking shelter to me, and it leaked out in my post.

She says only that she "knew" Mrs Keyler...not how, or to what extent. She could be an aunt, as represented by the fact she doesnt use Mrs Keylers first name. She'd be "auntie" whatever to Sarah in conversation, but Mrs Keyler if Sarah was telling someone about her who didnt know Keyler herself...."auntie" such and such would mean nothing to someone like that.

Anyway, weve skirted being adversarial here, and although I dont agree with your "believeable witness" choices in this case, Ive no issue with you....so were clear.

Best regards.