MKJ murder, NOT mjk?

[c.d.]

Hi Richard,

In light of Maxwell's testimony, do you think it likely that the police asked Bond to reaffirm his findings? Wouldn't they have also spoken to Phillips as well?

I can't believe that the police were simply willing to accept two contradictory times for her death.

c.d.

[Supe]

Fleetwood,

What would you need a quick....hot fire for......cooking something.....I'd go for the fire being used to fry the fish in Kelly's stomach.....

Once again, for those who don't grill, you don't cook with a flaming fire, you cook over hot coals. And she surely didn't fry fish in the fireplace--or otherwise prepare it there. Most in Kelly's situation bought prepared meals, either from street vendors, in pubs or at chandler's shops (see Mrs. Mahoney in George Yard buildings).

Don.

[Fleetwood Mac]

Victorian Christmas dinner

Many of our favourite Christmas foods are inherited from the Victorians.

Turkey, although boiled with onions and other veg rather than roasted, was the centre of the working class Christmas meal in towns and cities, although some families had boiled beef and country-dwellers usually had goose.
Accompaniments included forcemeat balls, bread, celery or oyster sauce, plenty of carrots, cabbage, and 'stoved' potatoes, cooked slowly by the fire in dripping or lard and water, a method still used, albeit with olive oil rather than dripping, in parts of the Med today.

http://www.saga.co.uk/health/healthyliving/healthyeating/healthy-eating-victorian-style.asp

Fair enough.....try again.....the potatoes were cooked using the fire......

I remember my Grandma frying chips on a coal fire in the early 1980s.

[Supe]

Fleetwood,

Not suggesting you can't cook many things (including "stovies" as my Scots grandmothers called them) on a coal fire or in a fireplace grate. I'm just arguing against the notion that the fire must have been ablaze to have done something like melt the solder connecting spout to kettle. A blazing fire would provide a fair amount of light, but hot coals boiling away water in a kettle would eventually melt any soldered joints.

Don.

[richardnunweek]

Hi,
When investigating any case of murder, you interview the last person who claims to have seen the victim.
In the case of Mary Kelly, that is Mrs Maxwell.
Unless you can eliminate them from the inquiry, you have a starting point to the case.
In Maxwells case, she could not be ruled out , that is why she was summoned to the inquest as a witness.
Her movements between 8am-9am of the morning of the 9th were checked and verified by the police, her comments on the clothing seen worn by the deseased were taken, and accepted by them, her statement to Abberline was accepted by him.
She had the weekend to realise any mistake, but there was none, she knew Mjks ex [Barnett], and saw him at the inquest, she would have had no doubt that the woman she saw on the morning of the 9th, was that of the resident of room 13.
Yet we still allow this vital sighting to be overlooked.
Fact.
If Mary was seen by Maxwell, then it is obvious that she lit the fire, as the killer would have had no need for light.
Fact.
If Mary lit the fire she would not have burned valuable assets ie, the shirts, bonnet that were in her room overnight.
Therefore if Kelly was alive at 845am, the only reason the killer would throw items on the fire, would be to confuse the T.O.D, which he managed to achieve.
We all know that T.O.D is not a science, and in 1888, was in most cases educated guesswork, witnesses hearing a scream, and clothes being burnt, would have indicated an earlier murder.
But the cry of 'Oh murder' was explained by Prater at the inquest, and described, and definitely makes sense, and I have also explained the burning of the clothes, as possibly occuring later.
Remains of fish and potatoes,... could have been eaten any time upon wakening by Kelly, we dont know either, the amount of vomit in the road, and we dont know the quantity of the remains found in Marys insides.
A lot can be explained if we accept the possibility of a murder in daylight.
Regards Richard.

[Rubyretro]

Richard -I went back and read the story of Mrs Maxwell's sighting:

She admitted to hardly knowing Mary Kelly, and the woman she described was very different to descriptions of MJK. As a lot of women were tiny, and Mary was tall, she would have stood out by her height -yet Mrs Maxwell
described the woman she sighted as being short.

It is very true that I here cries of 'Murder !' sometimes and people shouting -and no one has yet been murdered in my area. But a cry of 'Murder !' by a woman in Millers Court at the right time, on the right night, would surely be too massive a coincidence to dismiss -surely the Police would try and identify who DID shout 'murder !'.
.
It's true that Doctor's could make a mistake when dealing with 'T.O.D.' -but
not that many hours.

Surely someone 'ill from drink' wouldn't light a fire, wait for it to become embers, cook and tuck into fish and potatos first thing in the morning ? (I think that they'd rather want to drink plenty of water) -and when they started vomiting, they wouldn't stop until they'd vomited it all, by reflex.

I think that anybody used to fires, could tell how long it had been burning, by the ashes at the bottom.

Lots of women are called Mary...maybe Mrs Maxwell was convinced that the woman that she spoke to was called Mary Kelly -but she wasn't at all., or she was but it wasn't the right one.

I don't think that the Police accepted her story -or else they would surely have taken her description of the Market Porter, as a very good witness view of Jack.

[c.d.]

Hi Rubyretro,

All excellent points. I would expect that the police would have examined the ashes from the fire as you stated.

I still think that they would have gone back to the doctors to confirm their estimates of time of death.

c.d.

[c.d.]

You would think that the police would have made some effort to find the woman that Maxwell spoke to assuming that it was not Mary. That doesn't seem to be that hard a task.

c.d.

[Rubyretro]

You would think that the police would have made some effort to find the woman that Maxwell spoke to assuming that it was not Mary. That doesn't seem to be that hard a task.

c.d.

People have different personalities -some like to have the lime light and would
love to 'star'at an inquest...but others would want to keep well away from it all (espcially if they didn't understand the importance their testimony), and wouldn't come forward.

If this Mary was a relative stranger to Mrs Maxwell, she might not know that
she was called 'Mrs Maxwell' -she might not have been able to read the papers.

If she DID know that Mrs Maxwell claimed to have seen a murdered woman that morning -she might not associate it with herself..especially if she wasn't called Mary 'Kelly'.

If she was used having 'the horrors of drink' -it might not have been anything
special to remember... or she might have been ashamed.

If Mrs Maxwell said that she barely knew 'Mary' -it can't have been someone she passed often.

[Chava]

i doubt MJK did ane cooking on her fire. For a start I don't think any cooking utensils were listed in her belongings! She'd have bought her food ready-cooked at a chippie or some such.

[Robert]

Hi Chava

Some time ago Jane Coram (and I hope I'm remembering this right) suggested the stale bread in Mary's cupboard could have been for bread and butter pudding.

[Fleetwood Mac]

i doubt MJK did ane cooking on her fire. For a start I don't think any cooking utensils were listed in her belongings! She'd have bought her food ready-cooked at a chippie or some such.

I take Supe's point about the fire....bit of a long shot on my part....

But....the Victorian poor certainly did cook on the fire...whether Mary did is open to debate.

[Jane Coram]

Hi,

There were a few things they could use stale bread for, but only one that I think Mary might have considered. I honestly don't think she could do more than toast a bit of bread or possibly hot up a pie or maybe fry and egg on that fire if she was very ambitious.

I suspect that if Mary was going to do anything with that bread it would have been to soak it in milk, (ideally warm milk which she could have heated on the fire) and eat it as a breakfast cereal. Lots of people had bread and milk as a morning meal, sometimes sprinkled with a bit of sugar to give it some taste. It was an excellent way to use up stale bread.

Those who think that Mrs Maxwell did see Mary that morning going to buy some milk could certainly put the bread and milk together to make an interesting recipe.

I seriously doubt she would have ever considered making a bread pudding as it required cooking, and some fairly expensive ingredients, but a lot of working class women that had cooking facilities would save their stale bread and use it for that. I have a feeling that our Mary wouldn't have been fond of cooking even if she did have a stove!

An strangely enough, I have just this second finishing eating a lump of my bread pudding. I feel fatter already. Lol

Hugs

Jane

xxxx

[Fleetwood Mac]

Well......there's a fair chance Mary would have had experience of cooking......as late as the late 1920s young girls (10 and above) were expected to help their mothers with cooking...cleaning...and washing....and many in the poorer areas (such as my Grandma) went into service at stately homes at the age of 14. So there's a decent chance Mary would have had experience of cooking.

In terms of whether ale overrided all else......it would have depended upon the economics......could she afford to buy from stalls all of the time....or would it have been more economical to buy a few things and cook them herself......I suppose when needs must....

[joelhall]

Do not forget that the stale loaves left over at the close of business were sometimes all the very poor could afford to have about the house, so it's perfectly possible she ate it as bread or toast. This bread would be sold off at a knock down price before it went moudly to cut down on the bakers or shops losses, and if you have no choice in the matter it's better than nothing, when needs must, etc.

As for ale over-riding all else - this could of course be for the same reason in the centuries before kids at school drank ale - the water they had eccess to was filthy, and brewing help to semi-sterilise it.

That said I remember an interview with an old warehouse worker when some old video footage of normal life dating from I think the 1920s or before was found in the last few years. I forget the exact details of it but remember the old boy talking. He said after their shift they'd often go to the pub and sink about 20 pints! It wasn't uncommon then, as the alcohol content was much lower and drinking ale was practically a way of life. People often forget that what we now class as 'normal' strength beer is in fact strong beer (check the side of the can or bottle). Normal strength beer is around 2-3% alcohol, and has quite a watery taste.

If you lived in Dorset street or elsewhere with a mangy old water pump outside you'd probably think twice about drinking the water too.

The other way was of course boiling the water and making tea to disguise the taste for those who didn't fancy boozing.