I just had a message from Jenni Shelden.
Research into this family formed part of her talk at Cardiff on the"Uncle Jack" book. This is the relevant part from Jenni's presentation:
"David Knott suggested that the Mary Kelly whom Williams and Price state was the same one as the final Ripper victim, was alive and well at the time of the 1891 census. He found a Mary Kelly marrying a Griffin Jones in 1886 and that there was a Mary Jones on the 1891 census with details that fit with those of the Kelly found on the 1881 census and identified as the same person as the Ripper victim by Williams and Price. Therefore the Mary Kelly identified by Williams and Price could not have been the Mary Kelly killed by Jack the Ripper in 1888. On Casebook David subsequently said on 2nd Feb 2006 “this is correct. The Mary Kelly identified in Uncle Jack from the 1881 census was actually a Mary Ann Kelly, not a Mary Jane Kelly, and she was married to Griffith Jones at St Marys Catholic Church on February 27th 1886. They were still together at the time of the 1901 census.”
Research into this family formed part of her talk at Cardiff on the"Uncle Jack" book. This is the relevant part from Jenni's presentation:
"David Knott suggested that the Mary Kelly whom Williams and Price state was the same one as the final Ripper victim, was alive and well at the time of the 1891 census. He found a Mary Kelly marrying a Griffin Jones in 1886 and that there was a Mary Jones on the 1891 census with details that fit with those of the Kelly found on the 1881 census and identified as the same person as the Ripper victim by Williams and Price. Therefore the Mary Kelly identified by Williams and Price could not have been the Mary Kelly killed by Jack the Ripper in 1888. On Casebook David subsequently said on 2nd Feb 2006 “this is correct. The Mary Kelly identified in Uncle Jack from the 1881 census was actually a Mary Ann Kelly, not a Mary Jane Kelly, and she was married to Griffith Jones at St Marys Catholic Church on February 27th 1886. They were still together at the time of the 1901 census.”
Comment