The Night She Died

[Sam Flynn]

Would it be safe to say that Joe was full of Sh*t?

Hardly, Wiz. His testimony seemed sincere enough, as far as one can tell.

Sam, Richard told me that he saw a sketch of Joe B.and McCarthy at the Cemetery... could you help me in finding it?

It's pretty much a "thumbnail sketch" - nicely composed, but not particularly detailed:

[BLUE WIZZARD]

So SAM,

Would it be safe to say that Joe was full of Sh*t?

His statement about helping Mary, when she would much rather sleep with a prostitute instead of him?

She would not budge from her made up mind, and told him to take a hike.
Aah love like that is what poems are made of.

So poor unemployed Joe, no control of Mary, broke and living with his sister.

His heart is so big that he says's he will take care of Mary as best he can.(B.S.)
No mater what she does to him.

My heart goes out to poor old stammering Joe.

Wow what a catch for any 23-year-old woman with looks and fine figure.

BW

PS.

Sam, Richard told me that he saw a sketch of Joe B.and McCarthy at the Cemetery; he said it was on the boards somewhere.

I ask him if he knew where I could find it, he has yet to answer me, so could you help me in finding it?


BW

[Sam Flynn]

How would anyone know for sure that Mary was servicing clients that night?

How would we not know, Wiz? It's like asking whether a particular bear took a dump in a particular forest on a given night. Chances are we'll never know, but - being a bear - there's a fair chance that it did

[BLUE WIZZARD]

Has Harvey said anything about Joe and Mary arguing about wither or not she could sleep over or not?

Where did the kind hearted Joe get the money he said that he was giving to Mary?

Joe was not working, maybe he was winning it all from the card games.

Or he was borrowing the money from his sister.

What a burden Joe must have been.

So why did he not just give it to McCarthy for the rent money? Knowing that Mary might have used it for booze.

Joe was all upset about Mary sleeping with the prostitute, and Mary was learning the ropes from Harvey.

What does Harvey say about all that?

Sounds like poor suffering Joe was the victim, and not Mary.

How would anyone know for sure that Mary was servicing clients that night?

BW

[Sam Flynn]

Other than Joe's word that he was giving money to Mary, can anyone else verify Joe's kindness of giving Mary money?

No more corroboration than just about any other witness testimony one might like to mention, Wiz... but it's all we have to go on. Personally, I don't find it at all strange that Barnett might have tried to help her out, so it's hardly the most outlandish claim on his part.

[BLUE WIZZARD]

Sam,

Other than Joe's word that he was giving money to Mary, can anyone else verify Joe's kindness of giving Mary money?

BW

[richardnunweek]

Hi,
We cannot be certain that Mjk was a practising prostitute, however she apparently associated with women of that class, and we know of at least one instance [ apparently whilst Barnett was still on the scene] that she turned up at her old landladys place with a 'strange man' [ her terms] and wanted to stay the night.
One could hazard a guess unless this was another lover, he was proberly a client.
Other observations made in the middle of the 20th century, have Mjk as a real rough diamond, and a gin swelling, loud mouth, who couldnt resist the sailors especially when they were carrying a wad.
Others have seen her as a quiet woman , and a real friend to people in need.
A real dual personality.
Apparently it was not her policy to bring back men to room 13, however since Barnetts departure, who was to stop her.?
She was also apparently paranoid about spending nights in that room alone, speculating that, either Barnett spent nights away from millers court via work, or simply she was scared to be alone with him, or frightened of someone else.
Proberly it was just a case of Prostitute meets a porter , moves in with him, all the time money was coming in life was ok, but since Barnetts income became irregular, she had to resort to soliciting on the streets, and servicing where ever she could.Barnett understandably objected to her morals, and forbid her to continue, so she mayby brought home Mrs Harvey not only for company, but the opportunetly to earn a shilling or two doing washing.
Since Barnett left she spirelled downhill rapidly, and took more chances with her safety, why else would she take back to her room a man dressed like Astracan. if Gh was thinking it was unusual, so would Mary .
Early morning sightings may suggest that she survived the night, but possibly made one fateful judgement of error, ie allowing a market porter to visit her room, after all it was now daylight, and her defences were down.
Simple is it not?
Regards Richard.

[celee]

Hi Brad,

Ok.....now without using any evidence that was introduced as being incompatible with all the others, or evidence that was given by someone who's story is discreditted that same week.....what evidence is there that suggests Mary Jane went back out to seek clients after 11:45pm?

Or....what have we learned of Mary Jane by her friends statements that would support a simple suggestion that she had ever brought clients to her room before, had any specific concerns about rent arrears at this or any other time in her past, or that on that night it was probable, based on the observances of Mary Ann Cox and Eliabeth Prater, that any activity took place in or around Mary Kellys room from 1:30am until Ms Cox comes in near three. After 3, no courtyard witnesses are outside.

I can assure you, ... you will be needing either Hutchinson, Maxwell or both to make any kind of case.....and again, they are on record as dismissed...in this rebuttal, there are no such statements even on record.

I look forward to your answer Brad.

Cheers.

Hi Perry,

Was Mary Kelly a prostitute? I feel she was. I think it was the popular believe at the time. Kelly lived in her home with Barnett. That may have made bringing clients back to her place a little difficult. However after Barnett's departure, it was not a problem. I am sure that she saw having a "safe" place to bring her clients as a good selling point. Kelly may have got her groove on that night before returning home with blotchy face but I am sure she was working and blotchy face was indeed a customer, who she brought back to her place.

Barnett had just run off leaving Kelly behind to deal with the landlord. I am sure she was concerned about the rent. Kelly may not have been the most responsible person with her money. I would be willing to bet that her drinks were being bought for her that night, maybe for her favors.

I agree Cox is the solid witness of the bunch, simply because of her familiarity with Kelly. We see events differently, you see Kelly entertaining a friend back in her room. I see kelly entertaining a client who she ahad taken to her room. I still think that Hutchinson saw Kelly later that night on the streets. Parts of His story may have been discredited later or not papers were not always the most reliable source and the Star does not go in to detail Just how his story was discredited.

Your friend, Brad

[richardnunweek]

What I have always thought strange is Barnetts apparent lack of funds at 8pm when he visited Mary, and by his own admission is playing cards at his lodgings four hours later.
The obvious answer some may say is , he was playing for matchsticks, or like most men kept hold of a couple of shillings , after all he still had to pay for his lodgings.
That may well be the case, then again why call on her to explain his empty pockets, was he that much under her thumb?, or was it for other sinister reasons , for eg..to determine
a] she was not comtemplating any sleepovers that night.
b] knowing that if he said he had no funds to give her , she would have no choice, but to venture out on the streets to obtain some, [ which surely according to him he was dead against] and that would allow the possibility to fall into the killers hands.
Was he a man or a mouse?
According to him, his occassional disputes with Mary were soon over, and they apparently lived happily together, in that case if he had any strength of character he would have insisted that the other women that she brought home left , but he appears to have put himself back in common lodgings, he was paying the rent after all[ or should have been] so why not just kick her out?.
Mayby he was a mouse, and was used, like proberly all the men in her life were. I cant get to the bottom of MJK, she informs a friend that she could not 'stand the man' apparently refering to Barnett, then states that she would miss her man, [ Barnett] if she were to leave the area, as he had been'Good to her'.
Talk about a Love/hate relationship.
Just a few observations.
Regards Richard.

[Chava]

Given Barnett's account of Kelly accepting money from other old boyfriends, it's certainly possible that he gave her money. However all we have is his account, and he could be lying or fudging the truth. What we do know is that Kelly was drinking in a pub during the evening before she was murdered. And we know from Cox's account that she was drunk and was heard singing in her room. She may not have sung for the entire hour and 20 minutes that Cox testifies to. I doubt she did. But she sang enough to get noticed by other people at a time when Cox wasn't around.

If she was really concerned about eviction, she would, in my opinion, have gone to work. She would not have gone out on the piss. And, after taking care of Blotchy Face, she would not have wasted golden triple whore time singing in her room.

And on this topic, an hour and twenty minutes is a long time to sit in a miserable dump of a room doing not much but singing. I would love to know what else she was doing then. In my opinion, this only makes sense if she sang for a while, got ready for bed, sang some more, went to bed. I can't think what keeps her home and singing during peak hours for her trade, but sends her out into the far reaches of the night looking for business at 1.30 or so just as the punters are beginning to go home. If she's not worried about going out earlier, why does she go out then?

[Sam Flynn]

No 'in fact' here, Sam

What we have is a statement to that effect - which is as far as "facts" go in this case, I suppose.

More likely Mary had no money for him.

Not sure how that's "more" likely, Stephen - the fact of the matter is that Barnett said the opposite. That's all we have to go on, and, although anyone is welcome to speculate to the contrary, I personally see no reason to do so. It was, after all, usually the estranged male partner who subsidised the female - as witness the "subs" paid out by various men to other victims - rather than vice versa.

[Stephen Thomas]

In fact, we know that Barnett had told Kelly earlier that evening that he had no money for her - so I'd have thought that what little evidence we have points in the opposite direction, if anything.

No 'in fact' here, Sam

More likely Mary had no money for him.

[Sam Flynn]

Hi Chava,

I agree with Michael here. There's nothing to suggest that she was particularly worried about the rent.

Not being particularly worried about the rent does not equate to "wasn't interested in making some extra money", though. Besides - what is there that tells us she wasn't particularly worried about the rent anyway? We don't have enough evidence either way - and the "witness timeline" has great big gaps in it.

In fact, we know that Barnett had told Kelly earlier that evening that he had no money for her - so I'd have thought that what little evidence we have points in the opposite direction, if anything.

[Chava]

I agree with Michael here. There's nothing to suggest that she was particularly worried about the rent. She's not seen street-walking on the evening before the murder, she's in the pub getting very drunk. It's possible that Blotchy-Face paid her for her services, but if he did, I get the feeling he was short-changed. As she clearly started to sing as she went into her room, and she kept on singing. Also, even if Blotchy was a punter, that would only be one. Cox trails in and out of her room all night. I suspect she had gotten a fair amount of work out of it. Nichols said, on the night she died, "I've had my doss-money 3 times and drunk it...' So she was dealing with multiple tricks. Kelly simply doesn't go to work that evening. I respectfully suggest that, if she was really worried about the rent, she'd be down the 10 Bells or the Leman St Stroll or wherever else she frequented trying to drum up some cash. Now one could argue that's exactly what she is doing when she's seen by Hutchinson. But not all of us believe Hutchinson's account of this encounter.

Hi Jon,

Regarding Kelly`s concerns over her rent arrears I believe a number of factors should be considered:

Barnett visits Kelly on Thursday evening to say sorry I cannot give you any money.

Its conceivable that what he is apologizing for is not bringing money on that day, as he seems to have brought her money almost every other day since leaving. Do we have any evidence that of the money Barnett gives her she then gives any of it to McCarthy against her arrears?

It is approaching the end of the first full week that Kelly has spent as sole occupier of Millers Court. The room was initially rented as a couple with a working partner.

Not according to the tenants agreement, the room was let to Ms Mary Jane Kelly, who had a man believed to be her spouse living with her...he was initially thought to be Mr Kelly. In other coarser words, the street whore is the person on the lease and therefore the hook, not the working man.

McCarthy will be aware that Barnett has left the premises.

And so will he then know that the room that had 2 potential sources of income now just had one.

Bowyer is asked to visit No.13 to collect some rent Friday morning.

Bowyer is sent to "see" if he can collect some rent from number 13. As McCarthy himself says, "arrears were got as best one could", and there is no indication that he sent Bowyer on anything but a "pick up anything you can" mission.

Joe Barnett, Mr McCarthy, Bowyer, Julia, Maria, Mary Ann, and Elizabeth Prater were interviewed regarding Mary Kelly....and not one of them mentions any concerns or thoughts Mary has about her arrears. And this is not the first time she had run arrears that led to eviction...this is just pre-eviction Mary doing the same things.

Cheers Jon