Who left whom?

[lynn cates]

Hello All. I need help. The following snippet from "The Mercury" (Hackney, Shoreditch, Bethnal Green, Whitechapel) about Vanturney's testimony has me puzzled.

1. Is the "Joe" who was a good fellow Joe Barnett? Joe Fleming?

2. I have always understood that Joe Barnett had left MJK. This seems to indicate otherwise. Is this just a mistake?

What do you think? Is this in another paper?

Cheers.
LC

[The Grave Maurice]

Maybe "have" is a typo for "hate"? And "leave" in this context simply means "part with"? Dunno. Anyway, I never put much faith in the papers.

[curious]

Hello All. I need help. The following snippet from "The Mercury" (Hackney, Shoreditch, Bethnal Green, Whitechapel) about Vanturney's testimony has me puzzled.

1. Is the "Joe" who was a good fellow Joe Barnett? Joe Fleming?

2. I have always understood that Joe Barnett had left MJK. This seems to indicate otherwise. Is this just a mistake?

What do you think? Is this in another paper?

Cheers.
LC

Hi, Lynn,
I think Joe refers back to the man she had been living with because he is the one called "Joe" in the article, plus since he also hated her going back on the streets, I feel fairly sure the article is referring to Barnett.

[lynn cates]

sensible

Hello Ken. Thanks. That makes sense. Of course, it still sounds like that she is the one leaving.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

leaving

Hello Velma. I tend to think that too.

But I thought he left her?

Cheers.
LC

[Wickerman]

Hello Ken. Thanks. That makes sense. Of course, it still sounds like that she is the one leaving.

Cheers.
LC

Ok then, assuming the stories about Kelly being interested in the local murders (Barnett reading newspapers), and,
- assuming she is still fond of another previous "lover", (Joe), and,
- assuming one of the reasons they (Barnett, Kelly) quarrelled was she needed to leave him.

Where does this take us, in your opinion?

Regards, Jon S.

[lynn cates]

thoughts

Hello Jon. Not that far along yet. This is the first I've seen of this, and it looks like a mistake. If true, then my first question is, "Why would SHE leave him?"

Pleased to hear your thoughts.

Cheers.
LC

[Wickerman]

As if things arn't complicated enough, for all we know Morganstone's name might have been "Joe".

That aside, I don't think Kelly was targetted, but, assuming I'm wrong, thee most likely suspect would be a previous aquaintance of hers. And, topping that list would be, in my opinion, Joe Fleming.

Did Kelly have any concerns about these murders? Any more than any other East-ender?
A number of writers have looked for a connection between Kelly and Nichols, Chapman, Eddowes, etc.
What about a connection between Fleming, Nichols, Chapman, Eddowes, etc.?

I'm willing to give 'space' for the Fleming scenario to evolve, but if no connection is possible, "Fleming as Jack" is no more viable than "Barnett as Jack". But, either one of them "could" have murdered Kelly, because of the "other". On balance the chips fall towards Fleming due to his subsequent unbalanced state of mind.

That aside, even if your cutting is a misprint, "have" for "hate", the meaning remains the same, she is leaving him. Or, she initiated the split and "gentleman Joe" decided to let her keep the room. Besides, she was the one owing the 29 shillings, not Barnett, though I don't know how that came about unless the room was rented in her name, which seems a little odd.
Unless, Kelly was assumed to be the breadwinner according to some arrangement with the landlord?

Regards, Jon S.

[mariab]

The Grave Maurice's/Ken's explanation for a typo in the newspaper report makes very good sense actually. “I shall have to leave him“ is incorrect English. It could very well have been “I shall hate to leave him.“

If true, then my first question is, "Why would SHE leave him?" Pleased to hear your thoughts.

Sorry for butting in Lynn, but this is an easy one. MJK could have left Barnett for wanting to go back to Fleming, or due to the fact that Barnett couldn't put up with her drinking and going out and was getting on her nerves. Plus Barnett had lost his job.

You probably won't be interested to hear that from all victims' partners it's Barnett who sets up my alarm, not just for the murder of MJK, but even as the Ripper! Physically he totally could have done it, and his physical description fits the man seen last with Eddowes. Incidentally, Bruce Paley's the first Ripper book I've purchased (about a year ago). Unfortunately Barnett is unresearchable as a suspect.

PS.: By the by Lynn, did you get my email pertaining to the AFs?

RPS.: Sorry to be so ignorant, but who's Morganstone?

Gotta go back to Rossini now.

[lynn cates]

food for thought

Hello Jon. Thanks. Much food for thought in your post.

There was an article a while back that identified Morganstone with a Dutch chap named Morgestern. But he seemed older and with a family.

Fleming is interesting as Kelly's slayer, given--as you say--his subsequent mental condition.

MJK's housing situation is decidedly odd.

Thanks for the pronouncement. It does seem that she is leaving HIM. Of course, this depends on 1. the veracity of Vanturney and 2. the correctness of "The Mercury" piece. Not sure how highly that paper is regarded?

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

sundry

Hello Maria. Thanks.

Morganstone was another chap (besides Fleming) with whom MJK "took up."

I do like Ken's conjecture, but it still looks like SHE is leaving HIM. That seems in conflict with Barnett's testimony.

One can make a case for his being MJK's slayer--much more difficult for the other 4. Motive.

I now return you to Rossini. I can Tell you wish to make Overtures towards him. (Heh-heh)

Cheers.
LC

[DVV]

Hi Lynn

Fleming is interesting as Kelly's slayer, given--as you say--his subsequent mental condition.
LC

But given his subsequent mental condition, he can't be the ripper ?
I'm delighted.

[DVV]

MJK could have left Barnett for wanting to go back to Fleming, or due to the fact that Barnett couldn't put up with her drinking and going out and was getting on her nerves. Plus Barnett had lost his job.

Hi Maria, you're right, the "good Joe" here is Barnett. No big mystery. It's an ill-written article, and who is surprised ?
Certainly it is thought that Barnett left her. But he was still around. And Mary seemingly told Julia that although Barnett was still around, she was about to put an end to their story.
Barnett had always been good, but not very resourceful. Mary had a soft spot for the bad Joe.

"On voit des biches qui remplacent leurs beaux cerfs par des sangliers" (Victor Hugo)

[curious]

Hello Jon. Not that far along yet. This is the first I've seen of this, and it looks like a mistake. If true, then my first question is, "Why would SHE leave him?"

Pleased to hear your thoughts.

Cheers.
LC

Because he was not working and they had nothing to live on.

She could not work as effectively if Barnett continued living there with her -- not to mention the fights that brought on.

It also appears that it was her room. Remember McCarthy's testimony that he rented the room to her and the man he believed was her husband? Wasn't there evidence somewhere that McCarthy thought both their names were Kelly?

Joe was the one who physically moved, but it was probably MJK who insisted that he move out.

[DVV]

Exactly so, Curious.