Limerick, the Key?

[lynn cates]

Time is on my side, yes it is.

Hi Colin. Thanks.

"If she was in contact with family members, we can't know how often they corresponded, though, can we?"

Concedo

"If their errant sister / daughter got in touch only very occasionally, how long might it be before they made the connection (if they ever did)?"

But surely at some point . . . ?

Cheers.
LC

[Cogidubnus]

Nothing?

So right down the years not one of them said anything or made any enquiry? Dubious I'd have said, which implies to me a false identity, no familial contact, (but letters from a.n.other)...

All the best

Dave

[Bridewell]

Regularity

Hello Colin. But if she had kept contact with a few, surely they would have attended the funeral, contacted the police, etc?

Cheers.
LC

Hi Lynn,

Good point. If she was in contact with family members, we can't know how often they corresponded, though, can we? If their errant sister / daughter got in touch only very occasionally, how long might it be before they made the connection (if they ever did)?

Regards, Bridewell.

[lynn cates]

contact

Hello Colin. But if she had kept contact with a few, surely they would have attended the funeral, contacted the police, etc?

Cheers.
LC

[Bridewell]

Hello Colin. Very well. The heavy drinking I can accept.

Fear of a family member? Alright. Would that be the large Irish family described to Barnett? If so, then surely she would not hide from all of them but retain contact with some?

But perhaps the large family was a fabrication? But to what purpose a fabrication if you are fearful of a single family member?

Cheers.
LC

Hi Lynn,

I was thinking of press reports claiming that her father had been looking for her, and she had, for whatever reason, been keen not to be found.

If so, then surely she would not hide from all of them but retain contact with some?

Yes, but only with those she trusted perhaps. Just speculating, to be honest, Lynn.

Regards, Bridewell.

[lynn cates]

family

Hello Colin. Very well. The heavy drinking I can accept.

Fear of a family member? Alright. Would that be the large Irish family described to Barnett? If so, then surely she would not hide from all of them but retain contact with some?

But perhaps the large family was a fabrication? But to what purpose a fabrication if you are fearful of a single family member?

Cheers.
LC

[Bridewell]

Hello Caroline. Fair enough. You are suggesting she had absolutely no ties with any of her family and "a new identity"?

I can live with that. But tell me, what sort of situation would most likely precipitate such an extreme strategy?

Cheers.
LC

Hi Lynn,

But tell me, what sort of situation would most likely precipitate such an extreme strategy?

The extreme strategy, combined with heavy drinking? Fear, perhaps even terror. Fear of someone within her own family perhaps?

Regards, Bridewell.

[lynn cates]

down and out

Hello Caroline. Thanks.

"I know as much as you do, Lynn."

More, like as not.

I have always wondered why we know a good bit about unfortunates like Polly and Annie, but not MJK.

And I still have trouble harmonising her being "down and out" with the story about West London and France.

Cheers.
LC

[caz]

I know as much as you do, Lynn.

She may or may not have had ties with family members under her real name (MJK or otherwise), but by the time she hit rock bottom and Dorset St she may have loosened the ties herself. Alternatively, she may never have been blessed with a proper family; never have grown up with two loving parents and the usual numerous siblings. She only told Barnett the bare necessities: several brothers, one a soldier, a 'respectable' sister, and a nice respectable story to tell anyone who asked, that she had been married but widowed young due to a tragic accident. Liz Stride used a similar story.

I wouldn't go so far as to call it "a new identity" in the way you are thinking, and I see no 'extreme strategy' here either. Just another unfortunate unmarried woman reduced to dire straits by her twenties, and with no blood relations around her to mourn.

Love,

Caz
X

[lynn cates]

new identity

Hello Caroline. Fair enough. You are suggesting she had absolutely no ties with any of her family and "a new identity"?

I can live with that. But tell me, what sort of situation would most likely precipitate such an extreme strategy?

Cheers.
LC

[caz]

Hello Caroline.

"You mean it's unreasonable to suggest that Mary Kelly was an alias [?]"

Not at all.

" . . . and that consequently no relatives realised who she was?"

Did they not read the papers? Did they not correspond with her?

Cheers.
LC

Er, Lynn, if the relatives never knew her as Mary Jane Kelly (especially if she had perhaps invented a past life for herself), how would they have recognised her from what the papers said? Would the reported details (some we know to be false, such as her little boy) even have registered with them after reading her (false) name?

Who really knows who corresponded with her by that name, and what she wrote back about her situation, if anything?

Love,

Caz
X

[Cogidubnus]

Hi Colin

You may be right I guess...I'd be delighted if you were in fact! But I fear you're not...

Every good wish!

Dave

[Bridewell]

False Name

You see...this is my problem...If Mary Kelly's a false name, SOMEBODY must've known it, to be able to send her letters...so if it wasn't Ma (and research in Ireland, Wales and via "the brother in the Scots Guards" seems to suggest not) then the letters presumably don't come from family at all, and perhaps originate from a lover...

In which case, as far as MJKs identity is concerned, we are, on present evidence, right royally screwed are we not?

All the best

Dave

Hi Dave,

It is quite possible. I think, that Mary Kelly is not a false name. There has been no positively identified birth or census record, but that doesn't prove that she didn't live under that name, only that she appears not to be recorded under it. Perhaps she was part of an Irish itinerant family. That would explain the absence from official records, I think. It may be a false name, but I don't rule out the possibility that the one true thing she said about herself was her name.

Regards, Bridewell.

[Cogidubnus]

Sorry Wickers

You see...this is my problem...If Mary Kelly's a false name, SOMEBODY must've known it, to be able to send her letters...so if it wasn't Ma (and research in Ireland, Wales and via "the brother in the Scots Guards" seems to suggest not) then the letters presumably don't come from family at all, and perhaps originate from a lover...

In which case, as far as MJKs identity is concerned, we are, on present evidence, right royally screwed are we not?

All the best

Dave

[lynn cates]

late reply

Hello Caroline.

"You mean it's unreasonable to suggest that Mary Kelly was an alias [?]"

Not at all.

" . . . and that consequently no relatives realised who she was?"

Did they not read the papers? Did they not correspond with her?

Cheers.
LC