The ALLEGED photograph of the Kelly family

[Ben]

how about yours truly is developing a smirk on his face

...and possibly for no good reason, Richard.

If a witness was paid for his "time", it was obviously "time" that would otherwise have been spent either working or in pursuit of work. Unless the witnesses in question were ladies and gentleman of leisure, I think you'll find that payment for "time" was, and is, inextricably linked to the issue of the witness' work patterns. If not, the police really were incompetent, and I can't accept that. A distinction should also be paid between "generous" payments, and absurdly over-the-top, Faircloughian payments.

But as you note, we're on the "wrong thread" for that particular discussion, and it would be a terrible shame to derail such an interesting exchange on the photograph.

Regards,
Ben

[richardnunweek]

Hi,
What surely not offensive, how about yours truly is developing a smirk on his face.
Richard.

[richardnunweek]

Hi Debra,
Witness's paid generously for their time, rather then related to earnings, or loss of earnings... well I declare.
Wrong thread, but yours truly is having a s******..
Regards Richard.

[curious4]

Hi Livia

As I posted over at JtR Forums in reply to Deb Arif, I agree that the Springfield, Illinois, Kelly family who arrived in the United States in 1849 doesn't seem to be the same Kelly family since it doesn't agree with the information Chris Scott received that the Kelly family in the photograph arrived in this country after MJK's murder.

As I mentioned to her, this is further proof that the names Bridget and Mary, let alone Kelly, repeat and repeat in Irish families. Although it seems unlikely at this point, there's a vague possibility that the Mary of Miller's Court was a cousin of these people or somehow linked to them, and that the information got mangled through the years, as Jenni Shelden wrote at JtR Forums. Just a thought.

Best regards

Chris

Actually I said that, or words to that effect a few pages back (facts being twisted down the generations) .

C4

[KatBradshaw]

Ok, so if the Kelly's in the picture are not the Kelly's who moved to America in 1849, how do people feel about them being a possibility for our Kelly's?

I have to say that the likelyhood for me is that they are not our Kelly's. I only have my gut on this. I think their picture looks pre-1890s to me and so given Mary's age and the scant details we have of our Mary's brother I don't think he is in this picture.

[curious]

Definitely, Robert! And perhaps others who claimed to know MJK too?
There are also some other interesting things in the files too,one of which might please Richard: Receipts for witness expenses paid that show a witness was generously paid for his 'time' rather than loss of earnings or related to his earnings.

Jason, I totally agree!

This is wonderful information to have when considering possible JtR suspects.

Thanks so much.

[Debra A]

It kind of puts into perspective the theories about the cursory investigation of Mr B, doesn't it. All done and dusted in just one day!

Definitely, Robert! And perhaps others who claimed to know MJK too?
There are also some other interesting things in the files too,one of which might please Richard: Receipts for witness expenses paid that show a witness was generously paid for his 'time' rather than loss of earnings or related to his earnings.

Jason, I totally agree!

[ChrisGeorge]

Hi Jason,

It means that the Kellys listed on the 1891-92 page
of the Springfield IL City Directory that I posted can't
be the Kelly family that Chris' contact said emigrated
to the US shortly after her murder.

According to the bio Debs found, the Springfield Kellys
arrived in the US in the late 1840s and had no
children that lived so that discounts them too.

Hi Livia

As I posted over at JtR Forums in reply to Deb Arif, I agree that the Springfield, Illinois, Kelly family who arrived in the United States in 1849 doesn't seem to be the same Kelly family since it doesn't agree with the information Chris Scott received that the Kelly family in the photograph arrived in this country after MJK's murder.

As I mentioned to her, this is further proof that the names Bridget and Mary, let alone Kelly, repeat and repeat in Irish families. Although it seems unlikely at this point, there's a vague possibility that the Mary of Miller's Court was a cousin of these people or somehow linked to them, and that the information got mangled through the years, as Jenni Shelden wrote at JtR Forums. Just a thought.

Best regards

Chris

[The Good Michael]

I don't think there'd be any mystery about Johnto not sticking to enlistment obligations. If he moved to America, his enlistment would be effectively over. Easy enough to throw the military yoke from one's shoulders.

Mike

[jason_c]

Hi Robert, you're right. The press had no family traced, then the family were traced and the funeral postponed until they arrived (didn't say from where). Then there's the reports that say inquiries with Limerick Police had been fruitless and the Limerick police denying that Scotland yard had even been in touch!

A while back, Rob Clack made me copies of the huge police files on the unsolved murder of Harriett Buswell (as well as Emma Jackson's which was a similar type of murder). Reading through the Buswell investigation makes me wonder how much really is missing from the Whitechapel murder files.

The Met. police in the Buswell case covered every single angle of investigation and noted every bit of it. All previous lovers/acquaintances/friends were interviewed and detailed statements taken. All Harriett's personal letters and photographs were kept in the police file and thoroughly investigated, police went through her personal photo album and traced everyone who's picture appeared in it through the photographic details on the back and going to that photographer for a name.

They went to the town Harriet was born and brought up in and traced all family members (however distantly related) and old childhood friends. Even though she had siblings who were known to police, the photographs and letters remain in the police file, the siblings were allowed to claim her clothing and jewelry and this had to be done formally and the request is also in the file.

I can't begin to describe the scale and thoroughness of the investigation conducted to catch Harriett's killer, which they never did, even armed with all this information.
What I'm waffling on about I suppose, is that I can't imagine the Met's procedures would have changed all that much in 15 years,certainly I can't imagine they became less thorough in their investigative techniques. I think that if there were letters from Mary's family, a photograph of Mary taken in , 85, a passport or anything personal to her then there would be something in the police file. Maybe it's all just missing but most likely the family was never traced?

Thanks for this excellent post. Whilst its possible the police had some blind spots in the Ripper investigation and perhaps a lack of manpower, I dont believe they were incompetent or lacklustre.

[lynn cates]

investigation

Hello Debs.

"Reading through the Buswell investigation makes me wonder how much really is missing from the Whitechapel murder files.

The Met. police in the Buswell case covered every single angle of investigation and noted every bit of it. All previous lovers/acquaintances/friends were interviewed and detailed statements taken. All Harriett's personal letters and photographs were kept in the police file and thoroughly investigated, police went through her personal photo album and traced everyone who's picture appeared in it through the photographic details on the back and going to that photographer for a name.

They went to the town Harriet was born and brought up in and traced all family members (however distantly related) and old childhood friends. Even though she had siblings who were known to police, the photographs and letters remain in the police file, the siblings were allowed to claim her clothing and jewelry and this had to be done formally and the request is also in the file.

I can't begin to describe the scale and thoroughness of the investigation conducted to catch Harriett's killer . . ."

Precisely!

Cheers.
LC

[Cogidubnus]

Checking those parcel rates, the prevalent rate in 1888 (set in 1886) for internal parcels indicate that a parcel of 5lb weight, for example, would cost 9d to post, a 7lb packet 1/-...add the cost of packaging, and it's costing you!

Dave

[Robert]

Thanks Debs. Yes a tragedy how much seems to have disappeared, but also a slight ray of hope : if only a fraction of the files were to turn up somewhere....

It kind of puts into perspective the theories about the cursory investigation of Mr B, doesn't it. All done and dusted in just one day!

[Cogidubnus]

Binned

I confess to being bothered about the story of the McCarthy family tracing the brother and posting her belongings off to him. Although MJK mayn't have owned much, I just can't see them taking the trouble...actually, the less she owned, possibly the less they'd be inclined to go to the expense.

After all inland Letter post/newspaper post were (deliberately) kept cheap (penny and ha'penny respectively). I seem to recall Parcel post wasn't though (I'd need to check)...

I suspect they simply ditched whatever there was and told a cosy tale years after...no evidence of course...just a gut feeling...after all if the McCarthy's traced the brother so easily, so would the Met...they weren't that daft...

Dave

[Debra A]

I can't say for sure, Phil. I think the police said they hadn't found anyone. I think there was a Press report that the family were coming, and then another report that they weren't! Debs would know.

Hi Robert, you're right. The press had no family traced, then the family were traced and the funeral postponed until they arrived (didn't say from where). Then there's the reports that say inquiries with Limerick Police had been fruitless and the Limerick police denying that Scotland yard had even been in touch!

A while back, Rob Clack made me copies of the huge police files on the unsolved murder of Harriett Buswell (as well as Emma Jackson's which was a similar type of murder). Reading through the Buswell investigation makes me wonder how much really is missing from the Whitechapel murder files.

The Met. police in the Buswell case covered every single angle of investigation and noted every bit of it. All previous lovers/acquaintances/friends were interviewed and detailed statements taken. All Harriett's personal letters and photographs were kept in the police file and thoroughly investigated, police went through her personal photo album and traced everyone who's picture appeared in it through the photographic details on the back and going to that photographer for a name.

They went to the town Harriet was born and brought up in and traced all family members (however distantly related) and old childhood friends. Even though she had siblings who were known to police, the photographs and letters remain in the police file, the siblings were allowed to claim her clothing and jewelry and this had to be done formally and the request is also in the file.

I can't begin to describe the scale and thoroughness of the investigation conducted to catch Harriett's killer, which they never did, even armed with all this information.
What I'm waffling on about I suppose, is that I can't imagine the Met's procedures would have changed all that much in 15 years,certainly I can't imagine they became less thorough in their investigative techniques. I think that if there were letters from Mary's family, a photograph of Mary taken in , 85, a passport or anything personal to her then there would be something in the police file. Maybe it's all just missing but most likely the family was never traced?