MKJ murder, NOT mjk?

[claire]

Sorry, *which* particular witness statements support the doctors? All the statements I can think of would be perfectly compatible with a later time of death...your head's been turned, Rubyretro, by your obsession with 'Hutchinson.'

[Rubyretro]

[QUOTE]

To be honest the medical opinions of that period cant be consi

dered[/QUOTE,
Of course they can be considered ! Victorian doctors may not have had the expertise that we have today -but they already had alot of anterior experience; You can't dismiss them when they don't agree with your theory !

closure of any theories that may contradict those contempary beliefs.
Lets keep an open mind on medical opinons made, and try not to cast aside serious potential witnesses that may differ.
No police doctor of that period could possibly determine when Mjk, was killed, without taking a guess , judged by local residents sightings, or hearings.

In a choice between the doctors and the witnesses -I would choose the doctors. Infact when the witness statements disagree with the doctor -at least in the case of Hanbury -the Inquest chose to believe the witnesses above the doctor : I now believe that the doctor was more likely to have been right.
Doctors have impartial professional experience -the witnesses had no reason
to remark upon things before the events..and so they are very 'muddied' in
their recollections..or just plain mistaken.

Anyway, in the case of MJK, the most belevable witness statements support the doctors..it's YOUR theories that don't !

[richardnunweek]

Hi Robert,
I remember that also, and a valid point , we must never overlook 1888, compared with the 21st century.
To be honest the medical opinions of that period cant be considered, as a solid foundation for any serious T.O.D, or closure of any theories that may contradict those contempary beliefs.
Lets keep an open mind on medical opinons made, and try not to cast aside serious potential witnesses that may differ.
No police doctor of that period , could possibly determine when Mjk, was killed, without taking a guess , judged by local residents sightings, or hearings.
Regards Richard.

[Robert]

I think Shannon Christopher used to argue that if Kelly had been murdered earlier, the blood would have completely dried by the time of the discovery.

[Fleetwood Mac]

Richardnunweek,
You can invent any theory you like, but the facts have to fit. The facts are that MK was murdered before 6AM.

Have to say MM....this is not a fact...probable yes but not a fact.

Based on what we know of rigor mortis.....and Bond's statement regarding the state of the body at 2.....then she could have been killed around 9-9.30am......stretching it certainly....but possible all the same.

No murderer would be such a fool as to take a drunk and incapable woman into her room in broad daylight, with many witnesses , people coming and going, risk visitors etc, and leaving possibly bloodstained less than two hours later, just by chance missing Bowyer coming round.

I would say it's unlikely....based on the attendant risks.

Unless of course he wasn't from the area......and believed he wouldn't be recognised even were he to be spotted leaving the room....and by the time the murder was discovered he's long gone. There are always other possibilities....however slim.

[Rubyretro]

Richard -I'm not going to reply to this again..but I did on your Maxwell thread ..which you haven't yet replied to.

[Chava]

Sorry, I thought he was asking about Maxwell.

[richardnunweek]

Hello Miss Marple.
I am not inventing a theory, I just dont have the opinion that you have.
I believe Maxwells account, I also to some degree believe Maurice Lewis.
I am not suggesting that kellys killer, took her along Dorset street, and into Millers court in Broad daylight, I believe she went ahead of her killer, to wait his arrival. hence the state of undress.
She would not have wanted being observed in daylight taking a randy client into the court, under prying eyes of many, including McCarthys shop, therefore the distance between, would have suited both parties.
The witness was not Maxwell, Chava
I will look up and see if I can find the Mitre square witness.
Regards Richard.

[miss marple]

Richardnunweek,
You can invent any theory you like, but the facts have to fit. The facts are that MK was murdered before 6AM.
Not one witness had claimed that a completely drunk and incapable Mary and a companion entered Millers Court after 9am and that her bloody companion left Millers Court before her body was discovered at 10 .45.That's complete speculation.
The fact is that Mary was dead in her room.A man was heard leaving just before 6.
No murderer would be such a fool as to take a drunk and incapable woman into her room in broad daylight, with many witnesses , people coming and going, risk visitors etc, and leaving possibly bloodstained less than two hours later, just by chance missing Bowyer coming round. She could not have been murdered after 9AM as rigor mortis had set in, but then theories are a matter of belief not science.
The fierce fire and a candle would have given enough light for jack. I have had many fires and they give off a lot of light. We cannot compere the brightness of electric light with the dim light that Eastenders were used to functioning in.
Miss Matrple

[Chava]

Hi.
I just dont buy that jack lit the fire to obtain light, the picture of jack prancing around the tiny room, sleeves rolled up lighting a fire, by the way when was this fire lit , before or after he killed Mary?
The mutilation on mjk was extensive, and I have no doubt, was carried out in daylight.. the body was discovered around 1045am, enough time for JTR to do his grizzly work.
I have always believed the man seen running through Mitre square around 1010am that morning is intresting, blood stained,respectable appearance, young, and carrying a parcel.
Especially as it was the same location as the double murder, my question is was this route passed on jacks way home after killing stride?
Remember the informant, who saw this man, mentioned seeing this man some forty minutes before kelly was discovered, and was not aware of the millers court bloodbath.
Regards Richard,

But the windows in MJK's room face north. How much light do you think he'd get at that time of day at that time of year? And do you really think the Ripper would draw back the 'curtains' in order to get that light? I don't think I'd spend time dismembering a woman with the curtains drawn back so that anyone who came down the court in the middle of the morning and looked in the window could see what was going on.

The witness you're referring to, joelhall, is Caroline Maxwell.

[joelhall]

what was the name of this witness, as I cannot find the reference to this?

Cheers,

Joel

[richardnunweek]

Hi.
I just dont buy that jack lit the fire to obtain light, the picture of jack prancing around the tiny room, sleeves rolled up lighting a fire, by the way when was this fire lit , before or after he killed Mary?
The mutilation on mjk was extensive, and I have no doubt, was carried out in daylight.. the body was discovered around 1045am, enough time for JTR to do his grizzly work.
I have always believed the man seen running through Mitre square around 1010am that morning is intresting, blood stained,respectable appearance, young, and carrying a parcel.
Especially as it was the same location as the double murder, my question is was this route passed on jacks way home after killing stride?
Remember the informant, who saw this man, mentioned seeing this man some forty minutes before kelly was discovered, and was not aware of the millers court bloodbath.
Regards Richard,

[Chava]

Good points all, Miss Marple!

And the best refutation of Maxwell, in my opinion, is the fish and chips in the victim's stomach. The chippies stayed open late, but I doubt they were frying early. It's not likely that the woman who was so sick from drink that she couldn't keep a half-pint of beer down managed to stagger around until she found an open chippy. Bought, paid for and ate a heaping helping of lovely, fishy-smelling, lard-oozing fish and chips. And then managed to keep it all down long enough to partially digest it before being murdered.

[miss marple]

N o one is doubting Mrs M's respectability, or honesty, it is just that to believe she saw mk is make every one else wrong. The facts don't fit. She was not a friend of Mary, there were many people coming and going in Millers Court, she may have confused her with Maria Harvey.
To go back to her evidence.
She spoke to a woman at 8.30 in the morning, who had been drinking for days and had thrown up. She then saw her outside Ringers Pub at 9 talking to a man.
MK was seen butchered at 10.45 am by Bowyer.
Dr Bond examined her at 2 pm. Regor Mortis was setting in, this occurs 6 to 12 hours after death.Time of death is not an exact science, the doctors were not incompetent There are variables depending on external temperature.He thought she had been died between 2 and 6 am. AS THE BODY WAS COLD he opted for the earlier time.
As the body was cut up it would lose heat quicker so she might have been killed later, by only an hour or to, say 6am LATEST.
Dr Phillips who saw her at 11. 30 thought she had been dead 5 or 6 hours, say between 5 and 6
The heat of the fire in the room, may have slowed down the coolng of the body but not to the extent that she could have been killed after 9am.Both doctors had a ballpark time Before 6am
Mary had eaten her fish and potatoes the night before, still in her stomach, so not the woman who was violently sick at 8 30
To see Mary's movements the night before, there is nothing to suggest it was not her in her room.
Mary was drinking but there is no suggestion she had been drunk for days, or could not hold down a meal.
Mary had put her friend Maris Harvey up on the nights if 5 and 6 nov and Maria was with her on the afternoon of the 8th, she left when Joe Barnett visited mk about 7 SHE WAS SOBER.
Later that evening 11. 45 Mrs Cox saw Mary in front of her drunk with Blotchy man, they went to Mary's room.
Mrs Cox heard last heard Mary singing and 1am, there was still a light in her room
Mrs Cox went out at 1 came back at 3 all was quiet in Mary's room. Mrs Cox could not sleep and heard 'several men go in and out, and heard someone go out at 5.45. This could have been Jack.
If one believes Hutchinson he saw her enter her room at 2.30 with a client, which implies she went out after 1 am and was spotted later in her room
Either way, it places Mary in her room. A fire was lit to enable Jack to see what he was about, and he slipped out before 6.
The most truthful, honest,people can make mistakes. Witness evidence is famously unreliable, people being convinced they saw someone,look at all the sightings if Madelaine McCann. I think Mrs Maxwell had set in her mind that mk was someone else.
Cheers Miss Marple

[richardnunweek]

Hello Rubyretro.
Information that I received, suggests Reg Hutchinson, proven son of Topping, knew absolutely nothing about the murders personally, infact he borrowed a book to educate himself from a younger member of the family.
I heard that broadcast in the early-mid 70s, 18 years prior to The publication The Ripper and the Royals, and it is extremely unlikely that Reg would, or could, make the whole episode up, the only way he could have given that interview for airing on radio was to have had the whole story given to him , by either his father, or a ambitious , eagle eyed radio producer.
I prefer the former.
I can see your argument, and I can not prove you are wrong.
But I do not suspect skull-dudgery present, and I still maintain that the elusive Wheeler report, was just that elusive, especially to the average east ender, and that the only person that could record the payment information, well into the 20th century was Topping.
It is known amongst the Topping family, and Regs wife, that the story was not inventory, dispite all the holes Casebook make .
Regards Richard.