Could MJK have survived Miller's Court

[richardnunweek]

Hi Andy,
Oh how we love to play the conspiracy angle, the gruesome murder, that has a ''Hitchcock'' twist.
We all know that it was extremely unlikely, but it is fun in placing all the known parts into a scenario.
Common sense would suggest, that all Mary Kelly had to do was ride off into the sunset and vanish, if she wished to ''Make away with herself'', or easier still use her youth and buxom appearance, to find another Barnett, who would be able to pay off McCarthy, and provide for her.
But to be an accessory to murder?
All of this reminds me of a time way back in 1965, when I fell foul of the law[ naughty boy] and was given the ''short sharp shock' sentence in a detention centre.
It was a ritual that on the eve of release , the other inmates would raid the cell of the lad that was to be discharged , and inflict damage on his clothes, and items that would have to be accountable for on release.
I had the bright idea to do my own damage , disguising the amount, and minimising it.
It worked a treat, nobody came near my cell[ which was unlocked on that wing] believing it to have been done.
They believed Richard had the ritual already., and the victim had been sorted.
Rather like Mary Kelly, no need to go after her she's been done already..
Regards Richard.

[andy1867]

I don't think there need be a plot or conspiracy if Kelly was not the woman killed in her room.

If she had been absent during the night - for whatever reason, and discovered the mutilated corpse in her room on return then Caroline Maxwell and Morris Lewis could have seen her.

If that were so, why not just scream 'Murder'? Why not alert somebody, call the police?

Well, perhaps she didn't trust the police, perhaps she feared that the killer had meant to kill her (whether or not she was truly a Fenian spy...) - after all, the murder had taken place in her room. Perhaps she wanted to get as far away from Millers Court as she could and simply did a runner?

It was a lot easier then to disappear.

I'm not convinced that this is what happened, just speculating.

I'm all for speculation Sally...it makes it all so much more interesting in the absence of a killer..in the absence of records and facts..or some records and facts.....some folk on here have done superb work in bringing as much factual evidence to the fore as humanely possible...but...if it was not MJK...who was it...someone must have gone missing that day..
Regards
Andy

[andy1867]

Hi Andy,
Oh how we love to play the conspiracy angle, the gruesome murder, that has a ''Hitchcock'' twist.
We all know that it was extremely unlikely, but it is fun in placing all the known parts into a scenario.
Common sense would suggest, that all Mary Kelly had to do was ride off into the sunset and vanish, if she wished to ''Make away with herself'', or easier still use her youth and buxom appearance, to find another Barnett, who would be able to pay off McCarthy, and provide for her.
But to be an accessory to murder?
All of this reminds me of a time way back in 1965, when I fell foul of the law[ naughty boy] and was given the ''short sharp shock' sentence in a detention centre.
It was a ritual that on the eve of release , the other inmates would raid the cell of the lad that was to be discharged , and inflict damage on his clothes, and items that would have to be accountable for on release.
I had the bright idea to do my own damage , disguising the amount, and minimising it.
It worked a treat, nobody came near my cell[ which was unlocked on that wing] believing it to have been done.
They believed Richard had the ritual already., and the victim had been sorted.
Rather like Mary Kelly, no need to go after her she's been done already..
Regards Richard.

And...Who went missing on that night Richard???

[richardnunweek]

Hi Andy,
It certainly was not me , but I was seen in the morning, by about 12 other lads, and quite a few warders
Oh happy days...
Regards Richard.

[RivkahChaya]

A pound consisted 240 pennies...a shilling was twelve pennies, and therefore a twentieth of a pound...

Two shillings (a florin or two bob) was a tenth of a pound.

Two shillings and sixpence (a half crown, two and a kick or half a dollar) was an eighth of a pound

And I knew that. It was just late at night.

So, 5(1/20x4.5)=$[1888]x.xx, or $1.13. That's $22.60, more or less, today. Back to modern pounds, it's about 13.30. If I were paying someone for a partitioned-off room with a separate entrance, communal bathroom, and no kitchen, but a hot plate & microwave I had to provide myself, and a mini-fridge, ditto that I provided myself, I could probably find that, even in a city, but it would be in someone's already low-level slum, in a bad part of town.

But just for comparison, a studio (one room) apartment in New York, in a bad part of town, with its own bathroom and kitchen area, would still be about $700-800, and in Indianapolis, about $300, and this is unfurnished, and doesn't include utilities.

Which is another thing; we don't know who the bed and table belonged to. If they came with the apartment, then it was a "furnished" apartment, however bleakly, so MJK was paying for the bed as well as the space.

Also, the room was originally for two people, so technically, you have to think that when she took it, her share was 2 shillings, 6p. We don't know what was going on in her mind-- she may have been thinking of the whole thing as Barnett's responsibility.

At any rate, I don't think the rent was unreasonable. Rent in a city is always high, even in the slums.

Hi,
The impression that Kelly was anxious that she owed her landlord such a lot , suggests a young woman desperate for money, that would work the streets for a few coppers.

I suppose it's also a mundane reason for her choosing to bolt, as well. No theories about Fenians or Masons, just dodging back rent. We don't even have to think she tried to go all the way to Ireland, or something, just another poor section of town, with a fake name. No one is going to be looking for her, after all.

Should wouldn't be desperate for money, per se, just desperate for a solution.

I'm not personally in the "It wasn't Mary Kelly camp"; however, if there's going to be a scenario that convinces me otherwise, it's going to involve a mundane reason for her leaving, and skipping out on the rent fits. That's something people actually do, all the time.

My grandmother used to say that women of forty were considered elderly when she was young.

I wouldn't say "elderly," but I'd say "matronly." I remember watching an episode of a TV show from the early 70s (All in the Family, for you Americans), and being momentarily stunned when I did the math-- the main characters were going to their 20th high school reunion. That made them 48. Edith Bunker was 48 years old. And it wasn't even the first season. I can't think of a British show for comparison, but this character, while she wasn't really elderly, she was so matronly, so well into middle age. She had the sprayed down hair that women got done at a salon every week back then, and the house dresses-- there was a whole episode built around Edith wearing pants (trousers, or a woman's tailored polyester suit) instead of a dress once. It had nothing to do with her life expectancy, just with different ideas about how people acted at certain ages.

I don't know about the UK, but in the US, it was the baby boom (people born from 1946-1964) who changed things. They are the people who are in their 60s now, and want children to call them by their first names, because anything that makes them feel mature makes them feel old, and that's bad.

I'll admit that I'm 45, and I'm sitting cross-legged on a futon, with my keyboard on my lap, instead of at a proper, grown-up desk, and I call people "Dude," and sometimes order pizza for dinner because of poor planning, which would never, ever have happened to my mother (who was born in 1940, and not a boomer).

However, in 1888, lifespan was not that much shorter than it is now, once you correct for nutrition and disease exposure. That is, people who lived in the East End didn't often live much beyond 50, but rich people often lived past 70. Other than MJK, the C-victims probably didn't lose many years (Annie Chapman in particular), but if they had lived in a different neighborhood, it would have been a different story.

I do think that the two possibilities:-1. It was Mary. 2. It was someone else both have positive and negative points to consider. To just say that number 2 is impossible because it just is, isn't good enough.

There is no fact that rules it out.

It's not really a question of ruling it out. The idea isn't to come up with every single possible theory, o matter how implausible, then look for obscure bits of evidence to rule out each one. It's to look for the most plausible scenario that explains all the facts, then double-check it, to make sure there isn't a fact we missed, a new fact that has come to light, or that there isn't something even more plausible.

Almost always, the simplest, most plausible explanation is the right one. There are cases where it isn't, but as Carl Sagan said, extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. If the in fact, Mary was running from the Fenians, or the Masons, that needs more than speculation, or process of elimination; it needs a smoking gun.

Also, riddle me this: if Mary did want to run, why do it in winter? why wait so long? She couldn't have known she was going to have the sudden opportunity of being mistaken for dead.

[andy1867]

It all brings me back to the point though....there was a body...who's if not Mary Jane Kellys' was it?.....

[RivkahChaya]

Well, perhaps she didn't trust the police, perhaps she feared that the killer had meant to kill her (whether or not she was truly a Fenian spy...)

Cripes, you'd think the Fenians would have at least paid her rent.

"Nope, sorry Mary. We know you're taking a big risk, and all, but we wouldn't want someone to trace the money back to us. That wouldn't be good for us, or for you."

"Fergus, I thought you said it was because we spent it on beer?"

"Shhh!"

[andy1867]

Cripes, you'd think the Fenians would have at least paid her rent.

"Nope, sorry Mary. We know you're taking a big risk, and all, but we wouldn't want someone to trace the money back to us. That wouldn't be good for us, or for you."

"Fergus, I thought you said it was because we spent it on beer?"

"Shhh!"

Unless McCarthy was a fenian...then the rent thingy would be moot...apart from the show of "trying to collect it"


P.S I have no evidence whatsoever to back up my latest ridiculous supposition
Regards
andy

[Cogidubnus]

If she had been absent during the night - for whatever reason, and discovered the mutilated corpse in her room on return then Caroline Maxwell and Morris Lewis could have seen her. As for Hutchinson - well, there are lots of issues surrounding his alleged sighting - we could reasonably entertain the idea that he was wrong, whatever the cause.

So, if Kelly discovered a body in her room, why not just scream 'Murder'? Why not alert somebody, call the police?

Well, perhaps she didn't trust the police, perhaps she feared that the killer had meant to kill her (whether or not she was truly a Fenian spy...) - after all, the murder had taken place in her room. Perhaps she wanted to get as far away from Millers Court as she could and simply did a runner?

It was a lot easier then to disappear.

In which case, having shrieked "Murder" she took a hell of a long time, hours in fact, to do a runner, stopping off en route to pop out for a drink, then a nice chat with Ma Maxwell on the way...sorry, it doesn't stack up!

All the best

Dave

[Tecs]

If it wasn't Mary Jane Kelly...any ideas of who it might have been...

Hi Andy,

I don't know, but we know that Mary had other people staying in the room so it could have been any unknown and/or unnamed woman.

regards,

tecs

[Michael W Richards]

About the arrears.....I am suprised so many seem to make a big deal out of her rent non-payment in Millers Court and use that as an excuse to suggest that she must have tried earning some cash the night she is murdered because of her rent dilemma.

It bears repeating that Mary had been evicted for non-payment before and what was happening in Millers Court represented a pattern of disregard for her responsibilities in this area.

She was seen coming home drunk, we later discover that she had been fed, and she was singing to some company from 11:45ish until sometime after 1am.

Hardly the behavior of someone who was so desperate to deal with her finances and arrears that she decides to work out in the rain after that time.

Cheers

[andy1867]

About the arrears.....I am suprised so many seem to make a big deal out of her rent non-payment in Millers Court and use that as an excuse to suggest that she must have tried earning some cash the night she is murdered because of her rent dilemma.

It bears repeating that Mary had been evicted for non-payment before and what was happening in Millers Court represented a pattern of disregard for her responsibilities in this area.

She was seen coming home drunk, we later discover that she had been fed, and she was singing to some company from 11:45ish until sometime after 1am.

Hardly the behavior of someone who was so desperate to deal with her finances and arrears that she decides to work out in the rain after that time.

Cheers

Its not so much Kellys disregard for the rent arrears , as much as McCarthy's that bothers me somewhat...
He seems to have allowed her to rack it up.....and then you read other landlords... or proprietors of lodging houses who...if you don't pay on the day...no bed sort of thing.....it just doesn't seem the norm to me..
Regards
Andy

[richardnunweek]

Hi Michael,
Must agree with you, on the mental state of Kelly that night, hardly the actions of a young lady with a lot on her mind, as you point out, to venture out again at 2am, on the dangerous streets, when it was unlikely she would meet any desirable suitor, and even possibly the killer, would be so out of character, for someone so paranoid.
And yet according to Hutchinson she did precisely that , and what's more invited someone who was to anyone , of suspicious nature, back to her room..
No way unless it was premeditated.
Regards Richard.

[Tecs]

It's not really a question of ruling it out. The idea isn't to come up with every single possible theory, o matter how implausible, then look for obscure bits of evidence to rule out each one. It's to look for the most plausible scenario that explains all the facts, then double-check it, to make sure there isn't a fact we missed, a new fact that has come to light, or that there isn't something even more plausible.

Hi,

Sherlock Holmes would of course disagree and say that everything must be considered and then as we all know, "when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truth."

I think that police today also adopt a similar approach, ie look at everything then one by one whittle out the rubbish until we are left with the truth. Certainly they often crack murders by eliminating every possible person until the only one left is the killer. When they stray from this approach and stick with their first thoughts regardless of what evidence comes forwards they often go wrong eg Stefan Kischko (apologies if spelt incorrectly), Colin Stagg, Barry George maybe?

"He's the local oddball, it must be him."

"But Sir two witnessess say he was the other side of town when the murder happened."

"Don't care. they must have been mistaken. Got the identity wrong, or the day maybe." Sound familiar....

What would Sherlock say?

"One witness I'd agree with you Lestrade, but two independant people don't get the same thing wrong. No, Mary was alive after the doctors say the body was dead, ergo the body was not Mary. Or She was murdered much later than we think."

Impossible = Maxwell and Lewis correct and Mary dead.

So it all hinges on Maxwell and Lewis's evidence and I would argue that we would need a very good reason to just ignore them because it isn't comfortable.

My ill fitting shoes are still a pair of shoes!

regards

[Michael W Richards]

Its not so much Kellys disregard for the rent arrears , as much as McCarthy's that bothers me somewhat...
He seems to have allowed her to rack it up.....and then you read other landlords... or proprietors of lodging houses who...if you don't pay on the day...no bed sort of thing.....it just doesn't seem the norm to me..
Regards
Andy

Hi Andy,

Mary rented that room, not Barnett, so when she rented it from McCarthy she must have told him how she made her living and intended to pay the rent due. We know that another Unfortunate in the same small courtyard did "street work", and I believe its possible that Elizabeth Prater resorted to some after her man left.

Since the murders many women would have been reluctant to work the streets even if they had to...perhaps the circumstances that Fall warranted some lenience on their situation. How would it look if McCarthy had kicked out the next victim because of money owed?

He was a bit of a slum landlord and amassed a fair bit of wealth, owning a few lodging houses around the East End eventually, and his reputation for being a fair and considerate landlord may have had a play in this situation as well.

We see some Canonicals having to pay in advance each night....Mary wasnt a transient lodger, she rented by the week. Thats why Bowyer was sent "to see" if he could collect "some" rent Friday morning...not because she was in arrears, because thats the day her rent for the next week would be due. Had he found her alive and still broke he would be sent back again next Friday morning to try again.

So she was being given weeks...not just days...to catch up.

Cheers