Jack had to slip up

[Sam Flynn]

Hi Paul,

I had said that if a key had been used, Abberline must have known that Barnett's story about the window could not have explained away the key.

That argument's bordering on the circular, and since it appears that a key was not used, the argument is purely academic.

And I too think that unless the Cops were Keystone, they had to have tried the window trick.

Not if they assumed it was locked, which to all intents and purposes it would have appeared to be. The fact that McCarthy had to resort to forcing the door open indicates very strongly that he (a) couldn't find or didn't have a spare key, and (b) that he didn't know that the original key was missing. This, in turn, tallies perfectly with Barnett's testimony that the key had gone missing only a short time previously.

It all sounds pretty coherent to me.

I then, in turn, struggle to see why you struggle for mystery.

Perhaps it's because I'm not reaching for one.

[paul emmett]

Hi, Michael.

Barnett couldn't have done much reaching in here at all. He was no longer living with Kelly. And to send Bowyer with a spare key would have been most aggressive. But the crux here is, suppose the window trick story is legit and suppose the door wasn't locked with a key, then why couldn't all those police have figured the window trick out?

I am sorry. After telling you yesterday that I was looking forward to a chat, I have to go out for dinner. I will be back to discuss if you care to in a couple of hours.

Paul


OOPS. Sam too. I just got your last note.

[richardnunweek]

Hello Paul,
I agree if the police were worried that the killer was now able to obtain keys to properties and it was now not just prostitutes on the streets that were at risk, they would play down any evidence, and concentrate on the 'Spring lock' routine with the window.
I would suspect however that Abberline and senior detectives would have suspected that the key was used ,and proberly that was the main reason Barnett was interviewed at such length, but regardless of this, key or no key ,the killer remained undetected.
Richard.

[anna]

Hi all, maybe the police DID figure out the window trick . We thought on a previous thread, that they had gone into the room earlier than was reported.There is a strange point to note,and that is that Kelly was supposed to have had her face covered by a sheet.Now if this is correct, and the first picture in the set was taken from outside the window, it sould have been this one,with the sheet over her face,where is it?The first picture,whenever they are shown, is one of the ones we are all familiar with. So I think the police went into the room using the window trick,while they were supposed to be outside. The sheet was taken off of Kelly's face,because if you were a photographer that would be a natural action if you think about it,because he was supposed to be recording the details of the body so in his eyes a picture with the sheet over the top would be blocking out part of the evidence he had to record. Then they left the room so that they could make the grand entrance when they were supposed to.When they shut the door the spring lock goes down and locks it. They could hardly own up to why it happened,even if they realised it.Would also mean Bowyer and McCarthy identified the fact that it was Kelly from any hair they could see.Just a thought I had.

[Chava]

Sam, we simply see the situation from different points of view. I'm not looking for a mystery or claiming that I know who the Ripper was. I'm simply looking at anomalies, any and all. And most of those anomalies will have nothing to do with the case, and some of them might. McCarthy's lack of a key is an anomaly in the world of landlords. You may wish to come up with an explanation for this. However your explanation was not gained by having a chat with Mr McCarthy, so it is as much supposition as my supposition that he would have had a key. We are at point non plus. I'm not saying that McCarthy's apparent lack of a key proves that he is the Ripper. I'm just saying that it's unusual so it bears looking at. And since Mr McCarthy was shown at the inquest to be still onsite at 1.30 am on the fatal morning, I think he is a possible candidate for Kelly. I've thought so for more than 20 years. I'm impressed that you've found out so much about him. When we started looking at him in the mid '80s, there was very little material available to us and Google certainly wasn't around. But we did know that another prostitute was murdered in this same Millers Court around 20 years later. And McCarthy was still the landlord then I believe.

I guess what I am saying is this: None of us know who the Ripper was. Given that, he could as easily be John McCarthy, George Richardson, even (takes deep breath) George Hutchinson. And those are just the names of men we know to have been near to the murders at roughly the time they were carried out. We could add israel Schwartz, Mr Lawende etc etc. I don't see the point of ramming my own favourite--although 'favourite' is too strong a word, rather he's someone I'd like to have a chat with--down your throat. But equally I don't see the point of trying to explain what I believe to be a valid point about a landlord's possession of a key by telling me I'm looking at the case from a relaxed and cosy 21st Century perspective. I would never tell you that your theories are wrong because I don't know whether they are wrong or right. Please don't tell me that my theories are wrong unless you can prove to me that they are wrong. And global comments about life in the 19th Century slums don't prove that. Show me where McCarthy says 'I didn't have a key' and I'll believe you! If you can't, then maybe we can agree to disagree about the key and move on to something else.

[Sam Flynn]

Show me where McCarthy says 'I didn't have a key' and I'll believe you!

He damaged his own property with an axe, Chava. I think there's a bit of a clue there

As to the "cosy 21st Century" perspective - it's worth pausing to consider that even landlords in the 21st Century might lose or mislay one of their tenants' keys, or loan them the spare and forget to replace it. Such could have happened many times over between 1851 and 1888, as "Miller's Rents" morphed into "Miller's Court". It must have seen many hundreds of residents, not to mention several landlords and misplaced keys, in all those years.

It's not beyond the bounds of possibility that McCarthy, having taken over the property, never bothered to check whether he had inherited any spare keys at all. He had his shop, after all, and the slum rooms in the back alley might have been little more than a squalid bonus from his perspective. From the state of the furniture (and the fact that Prater, as well as Kelly, seems to have had no functioning lock on her door either), it doesn't appear that that the landlord was lavishing much care and attention on his rooms.

[Chava]

He damaged his own property with an axe, Chava. I think there's a bit of a clue there

Ah well you see, Sam, I think he damaged his own property with an axe because he didn't want to highlight te fact that he had a key. So I think there's a bit of a clue there After all, there were 'missing key' issues and Kelly 'makes it look like her door is locked' issues all over the place.

So like I said, we're looking at the same facts differently. I think he had a key and didn't want to admit it. You think he didn't have a key. Neither of us can prove the other wrong or ourselves right unless we find documentary evidence to prove that one way or another. And sadly the inhabitants of Millers Court during McCarthy's tenure are long gone and unlikely to have left us anything of that nature.

[Sam Flynn]

Ah well you see, Sam, I think he damaged his own property with an axe because he didn't want to highlight te fact that he had a key. So I think there's a bit of a clue there

It's only a clue if you believe that McCarthy had something to hide, Chava.

Even if McCarthy had had something to hide, why would he have felt the need to "pretend" that he didn't have a key - he was the landlord, after all, so what would have been so suspicious about his having a spare? It just doesn't add up, I'm afraid.

The simplest explanation, and one which fits perfectly well with the testimony of long-dead Miller's Court residents (the best we can do), is that Kelly and Barnett had lost their keys and that McCarthy did not have, or could not find, a spare key - which is why he was compelled to force the door.

[Chava]

It's only a clue if you believe that McCarthy had something to hide, Chava.

Well of course I do! I think he's a candidate for Mary Jane Kelly's killer! I'm not going to ram that idea down everyone else's throat. But I'm not going to back down on the key issue because we just don't know. I read these boards a lot. And so many people have 'simple' or 'reasonable' explanations why everyone else is full of it. I'll agree with you, McCarthy may not have had a key. But I'll also say that he may and I believe that he did. If I make a factual mistake, I rely on the board to tell me so. But there are no facts at all around this issue, just a whole bunch of suppositions on your part and on mine. For heaven's sake, Sam, let's move on from this circle and talk about other stuff. I heard a good one about George Hutchinson recently...

[paul emmett]

Hello Paul,
I agree if the police were worried that the killer was now able to obtain keys to properties and it was now not just prostitutes on the streets that were at risk, they would play down any evidence, and concentrate on the 'Spring lock' routine with the window.
I would suspect however that Abberline and senior detectives would have suspected that the key was used ,and proberly that was the main reason Barnett was interviewed at such length, but regardless of this, key or no key ,the killer remained undetected.
Richard.

Richard, I feel even more strongly, that the senior detectives would have KNOWN a key was used, and, of course, this could lead to Barnett. On the other hand, I have heard people argue here that Barnett was not interviewed so long. Was it four hours? It seems to me there would be a lot of questions.

Anna, you are right. The photograhers are an issue too. Don't some say they came inside to take pics before the police entered?

[paul emmett]

The simplest explanation, and one which fits perfectly well with the testimony of long-dead Miller's Court residents (the best we can do), is that Kelly and Barnett had lost their keys and that McCarthy did not have, or could not find, a spare key - which is why he was compelled to force the door.

Honest, Sam, I never imagined BOTH Kelly and Barnett losing their keys--and McCarthy? I know you won't agree, but I'd call that an anomaly.

Chava, How many Hutchinsons does it take to . . .??

[paul emmett]

He[McCarthy] was aware of how they entered when he is interviewed Nov 9th by the police though, ....(Sam, your birthday was Nov 9th for real?...odd coincidence... ...so my thinking is he had spoken to Mary or Barnett about how they were doing without a key after their initial request for a replacement.

Michael, this would certianly be relevant to our earlier discussions here about whether or not McCarthy knew of the lost key(s).

[CitizenX]

I think it's interesting to note here that when Cox gave her statement to the police and the inquest she never mentioned seeing MJK do "the window trick" even though she claims to be very close to Mary and her customer at the time.

She did say something like "Mary turned round and banged the door", which seems to me more like a door which has been left off the latch, temporaily.

Im sure if Cox had seen Mary lean thru the window to open the door she would have mentioned this to the police in the yard before they broke open the door at 1.30pm

kevin

[Blackkat]

ANNA

Hi all, maybe the police DID figure out the window trick . We thought on a previous thread, that they had gone into the room earlier than was reported.There is a strange point to note,and that is that Kelly was supposed to have had her face covered by a sheet.Now if this is correct, and the first picture in the set was taken from outside the window, it sould have been this one,with the sheet over her face,where is it?The first picture,whenever they are shown, is one of the ones we are all familiar with. So I think the police went into the room using the window trick,while they were supposed to be outside. The sheet was taken off of Kelly's face,because if you were a photographer that would be a natural action if you think about it,because he was supposed to be recording the details of the body so in his eyes a picture with the sheet over the top would be blocking out part of the evidence he had to record. Then they left the room so that they could make the grand entrance when they were supposed to.When they shut the door the spring lock goes down and locks it. They could hardly own up to why it happened,even if they realised it.Would also mean Bowyer and McCarthy identified the fact that it was Kelly from any hair they could see.Just a thought I had.

Very good point, to me that is very possible.

However, I do NOT buy the fact that of three people, they didn't have one key. I do think that even if the police found the door locked they would have tried to open it from the window. Doesn't take a scientist there.

That missing key to me, is a vital part of who killed MJK - or another woman or whatever you wish to believe. I'm going to go with MJK. I too am disappointed they weren't more detailed with the ashes. I think the clothes were burnt on purpose and as stated earlier by another poster, I think there may have been a link to her killer. (something vital anyway) I think the key was stolen, not misplaced or lost. Was it a total stranger or someone she knew? Looking at the stories is enough for some people to draw a conclusion. My god, how could so many people be that dumb? LOL - It must have been in the water.

[perrymason]

Hello all,

To refresh, Barnett and Mary had used the window access together, while Barnett lived there, so we are talking about at least two weeks likely. Had McCarthy a key, as Sam points out, he would not have himself forced the door open at 1:30. But McCarthy did know of the window access that the couple used, he said so, so you make make your own conclusions.

Personally I believe the room was breached before 1:30, and I dont think the lingering Constables and Detectives in the court from around 11:30ish until 1:30 could resist looking through the window, and noticing the pane and the proximity to the door latch,.... and McCarthy had likely informed the police of his knowledge of the window access method prior to 1:30 anyway, since he fetched the police in the first place.

I do know one thing though...there is no way in hell to prove they entered early using only the existing evidence.

So its also clear, McCarthy was quite clearly very shaken by this discovery...so if you like him as the killer, you must also conclude his acting skills were a match for Mansfields at the Lyceum.

My best regards all.