Could MJK have survived Miller's Court

[RivkahChaya]

And, again, accepting the accuracy of the stories, her father, and brother?, came looking for her so they must have also known her as Mary Kelly in order to ask around to locate her. Likewise, if she was receiving and sending mail to her mother, the mail must have been addressed to a Mary Kelly.

On balance there seems to be precious little left to argue with that Mary Kelly was not her real name.

Except that crack researchers like Debs and Chris cannot find a trace of this person. If, however, her records are located, I would agree.

I guess we don't know what name she wrote to her parents under-- that is, whether it was something other than Kelly. Since she spoke of being married to someone named Davies, who was killed in a mining accident, I always wondered why she didn't use the name Davies. Was it normal for very young widows to resume their maiden names? Is it possible she married again, to someone named Kelly? That presents the problem of what happened to him, of course, and if she talked about one husband dying, she probably would have talked about another. Do we know for a fact she was Catholic? I assume there's the Catholic problem with divorce, although I don't really know whether the rules in the RC church vs. Anglican church today, which I am familiar with, tell me anything about the rules in 1888. Suppose she was married by an Anglican minister?

We won't ever find Mary Jane Kelly in Wales or Ireland, if that wasn't her maiden name.

I'm assuming people have looked at coal mine accidents, and deaths of miners named Davies, Davis, and the Welsh spellings thereof, although I've never seen anything on it. I'm not able to get over to Cardiff much to do my own looking-up.

Was "Kelly" ever used as a given name, the way it is now, back in the 1880s? It isn't possible her birth name was "Mary Jane Kelly Lastname," is it?

I think we may have had one clue all along that has been either ignored or misinterpreted, the "oh-murder" near 4am. 2 witnesses were awake enough at the time to notice the cry and the volume of the call seems to be directly linked to the proximity to the witness. Sarah heard it "as if at the door", and Elizabeth heard it "as if from the court". Hence, we have a courtyard warbler.

I still think "Oh, murder!" is a strange thing to say upon finding a body. I've a feeling something else was said, or shouted, that was retrospectively translated to "Oh, murder!" by the hearers once they learned what had happened.

Always people think the witnesses who saw Mary alive as late as 10:00am are argued to have mixed up their days or times. Always the time of death is questioned. Both of these are legitimate concerns. They are certainly plausible.

I have never said "mixed up the times," just that "10am" is not atomic accuracy, and it could be as much as 12 minutes earlier. Additionally, Bowyer probably did not check a watch as soon as he found the body, so rather than 45 minutes, as much as 1hr. 15 minutes could have elapsed.

I believe it equally plausible that the identification of the body could be mistaken. It has happened in more than a few cases where the body is highly decomposed or mutilated.

Do you know of a case where a body was misidentified as a still-living person, and the mistake was not discovered very quickly, when the living person turned up? and it wasn't something deliberately orchestrated, where the misidentified person either committed murder of a homeless person, or procured a body from a morgue?

I can't find one case like that. I suppose it's possible that they were so well-done, we still don't know about them, but you say "It has happened in more than a few cases." The only ones I know of are ones where the still-living misidentified person turned up soon after the misidentification, or an unknown body was identified as someone who had been missing for a long time, based simply on process of elimination, then later, a body in a better-preserved state turned up, and was identified as the same person, through dental records, so the earlier body went back to "unknown" status. Or where a body previously identified through process of elimination, or even a killer's confession, is re-evaluated through DNA testing, and found to have been misidentified.

The body in Miller's Court was very mutilated, but it was fresh, so estimates of height and weight, race, gender and hair color were very accurate, which is not the case with a highly decomposed body. It was not found in the middle of nowhere, but in someone's residence, and the resident was no where to be found. At the time the body was found, it wasn't really "unidentified," like some mysterious bodies found in the middle of the woods, without clothes, or so badly decomposed, weight and gender can't be determined outside a lab. It simply hadn't been formally identified. Any dead body that dies alone goes through a process of formal identification. I don't see any reason to question the formal identification here, other than it makes a good story.

[RavenDarkendale]

Sad story, Raven. I'm sincerely sorry for you.

Thank you, DVV

It could have been worse, they stole my son's loaded .40 caliber semiautomatic, and they could have been waiting on us when we got there! Renter's insurance should cover everything including my laptop, but my data on many things is lost until I can rebuild it. Still no one was hurt, and possessions can always be replaced.

God Bless

Raven Darkendale

[Wickerman]

Why? Bearing in mind Victorian moral values and judgements, could not a father be so deeply ashamed of what his daughter had become that he kept quiet?

This is an old sailor we're talking about here Dave, this is not Upstairs Downstairs
If Old Salty was so class conscious the press wouldn't have got hold of it, assuming there is any truth to it to begin with.

How do we know anything about this and on what evidence?

We 'know' nothing.

With respect it's all a bit speculative Jon...

Of course it is Dave, ....this is Casebook.

Regards, Jon S.

[DVV]

Sad story, Raven. I'm sincerely sorry for you.

[Cogidubnus]

I suspect we'd have heard more about this in the press. A father would not sit by and have his daughter buried as someone else without making as much noise as he could about it.
Assuming this story has any basis in fact that is.

Why? Bearing in mind Victorian moral values and judgements, could not a father be so deeply ashamed of what his daughter had become that he kept quiet?

How do we know anything about this and on what evidence? With respect it's all a bit speculative Jon...

All the best

Dave

[Michael W Richards]

Hi all,

Jon, the "shed" quote is one of many press quotes, most of which insist that Praters room was above Marys. I had a long drawn out thing here with Sam Flynn one time arguing that 8 press accounts that agree are not superseded by the one that states "shed". The 8 were written differently, but had the same data, which makes me think Central Press info. Ive seen the floorplans and the drawings, the shot of the shed door facing Dorset, but the courtyard photos that include the archway, with a window, and a window directly above one of Marys indicate to me that its probable one or both of those windows allowed courtyard noise into Elizabeths room. And Elizabeth did state that she could hear when "Mary moved about in her room".

Cheers

[RavenDarkendale]

Always people think the witnesses who saw Mary alive as late as 10:00am are argued to have mixed up their days or times. Always the time of death is questioned. Both of these are legitimate concerns. They are certainly plausible.

I believe it equally plausible that the identification of the body could be mistaken. It has happened in more than a few cases where the body is highly decomposed or mutilated. When I started this thread it was simply to suggest a possibility.

I was reading book review trying to decide which Ripper author's book I might buy next in my pursuit of why a particular suspect is even considered, when I came across one who favored no one in particular. He mentioned that he believed Mary did indeed survive, and that another woman died in her bed.

I had the author, book, and quote saved to post. Wednesday I was in Augusta GA to visit my son. We went out for lunch at around 12:00pm and got back at 3:00pm to find the house broken into and a lot stolen, including my laptop with all my data on a lot of things. Fortunately their insurance should replace my laptop soon. Either way, I'll have to find that book again.

[Debra A]

Hi Dave.
It just demonstrates that there are still leads out there, however tenuous.




I suspect we'd have heard more about this in the press. A father would not sit by and have his daughter buried as someone else without making as much noise as he could about it.
Assuming this story has any basis in fact that is.

Regards, Jon S.

You are something else Wickers!

[DVV]

Hi Dave.
It just demonstrates that there are still leads out there, however tenuous.
Regards, Jon S.

True, Jon. And well said.

[Wickerman]

We can only judge by what the witnesses said Jon, and combined they favour a time around 3:45am.

E.Prater: "A kitten disturbed me about half-past three o'clock or a quarter to four. As I was turning round I heard a suppressed cry of "Oh - murder!" in a faint voice. It seemed to proceed from the court."

Hi Michael.
I was more drawn to Prater's official testimony, MJ/SPC, NE1888, not the version given in the press.
In the GLRO file (above) we read:
"I noticed the lodging-house light was out, so it was after 4 probably.."

Prater was not actually above room 13, Prater lived above the front room (shed), another couple (unidentified) lived directly above MJK, according to the Daily Telegraph, 10 Nov.

"...and the couple in the room overhead had slept soundly without being awakened by scuffling in the room beneath them.

Elizabeth Prater, the occupant of the first floor front room,..."

So there could have been other faint noises which Prater may not have heard, maybe.

Your reasoning as to why a woman who had seen the devastation in that room might be shocked enough to scream "oh-murder" and not come forward later to give testimony in that regard is narrow...

Agreed, I could have expanded on the list.

I think the odds are Mary didnt scream it. But someone unknown did.

Cheers

I'm inclined to think along those lines, but its an argument that cannot be supported at this stage.

Regards, Jon S.

[Wickerman]

Hi Jon
I like Mary Williams (and old sailor's tales).

Hi Dave.
It just demonstrates that there are still leads out there, however tenuous.

I do too,for now.
And if MJK's family could have sneaked into the funeral unnoticed, unmolested by police or press, then why not Mary Williams' dear old salty pops? Coming in a bit too late to alter the paperwork?

I suspect we'd have heard more about this in the press. A father would not sit by and have his daughter buried as someone else without making as much noise as he could about it.
Assuming this story has any basis in fact that is.

Regards, Jon S.

[Michael W Richards]

Ahh, the Unknown Witness, which I mentioned back on post 236..

http://forum.casebook.org/showpost.php?p=239909&postcount=236

So why did she not come forward?

1) Maybe, the woman was not supposed to be there, she did not want people knowing where she was at this hour. She saw the same scene as Bowyer because the killer had already gone?

2) She saw the killer, he was caught in the act?
She did not come forward because, although she saw him, he also saw her!
As a consequence there were no more killings, both this witness and the killer went "to ground", neither surfacing for fear of the other.

Needless to say this is only conjecture.

I'm not sure if the time given by Prater is reliable, she only judged the time by the fact the lodging-house light was out. We do read that the shop closed by 3:00 am, I would assume this is when the light would also be put out.
Because the light was out (Prater), there's a chance the light was put out at 3:00 am. just after Bowyer went for that pail of water. Therefore the cry of "oh murder" was sometime after 3:00 am. Perhaps the times given by Lewis & Kennedy are to be preferred?

Regards, Jon S.

We can only judge by what the witnesses said Jon, and combined they favour a time around 3:45am.

E.Prater: "A kitten disturbed me about half-past three o'clock or a quarter to four. As I was turning round I heard a suppressed cry of "Oh - murder!" in a faint voice. It seemed to proceed from the court."

S.Lewis: " I sat awake until nearly four, when I heard a female's voice shouting "Murder" loudly. It seemed like the voice of a young woman. It sounded at our door. There was only one scream."

Your reasoning as to why a woman who had seen the devastation in that room might be shocked enough to scream "oh-murder" and not come forward later to give testimony in that regard is narrow...surely there are quite a few possible reasons why someone wouldnt come forward...including one that includes the woman screaming from within the conspirator realm.

Someone screamed it, 2 witnesses heard it around the same time, and if it was Mary Kelly, the scream did not signal the attack commencement because no noise followed it,... by Elizabeth, living a floor above Mary.

I think the odds are Mary didnt scream it. But someone unknown did.

Cheers

[Debra A]

just after Bowyer went for that pail of water. Therefore the cry of "oh murder" was sometime after 3:00 am. Perhaps the times given by Lewis & Kennedy are to be preferred?

Regards, Jon S.

Ahh. Bowyer at the water tap.

[Wickerman]

Hi all,

I think we may have had one clue all along that has been either ignored or misinterpreted, the "oh-murder" near 4am. 2 witnesses were awake enough at the time to notice the cry and the volume of the call seems to be directly linked to the proximity to the witness. Sarah heard it "as if at the door", and Elizabeth heard it "as if from the court". Hence, we have a courtyard warbler.

I have an idea. Thats our accomplice. Thats the reason the pardon was issued. Because the evidence suggests that there was no more noise after that cry out, so, no attack commencement as many have simply assumed,...and the medical opinion has Marys death at an earlier time than 4am. So, it likely wasnt Mary that cried out "oh-murder". Not if Mary Kelly was the one found dead in the bed.

Likely a woman, by both witness accounts. In the courtyard at 4am. At the very least someone may have peeked in the window and received the shock of their life and kept silent about it later on...or perhaps someone was shown the scene and reacted accordingly. And in the company of a murderer or conspirator, she had to keep quiet.

Best regards

Ahh, the Unknown Witness, which I mentioned back on post 236..

http://forum.casebook.org/showpost.php?p=239909&postcount=236

So why did she not come forward?

1) Maybe, the woman was not supposed to be there, she did not want people knowing where she was at this hour. She saw the same scene as Bowyer because the killer had already gone?

2) She saw the killer, he was caught in the act?
She did not come forward because, although she saw him, he also saw her!
As a consequence there were no more killings, both this witness and the killer went "to ground", neither surfacing for fear of the other.

Needless to say this is only conjecture.

I'm not sure if the time given by Prater is reliable, she only judged the time by the fact the lodging-house light was out. We do read that the shop closed by 3:00 am, I would assume this is when the light would also be put out.
Because the light was out (Prater), there's a chance the light was put out at 3:00 am. just after Bowyer went for that pail of water. Therefore the cry of "oh murder" was sometime after 3:00 am. Perhaps the times given by Lewis & Kennedy are to be preferred?

Regards, Jon S.

[Debra A]

Hi Jon
I like Mary Williams (and old sailor's tales).

I do too,for now.
And if MJK's family could have sneaked into the funeral unnoticed, unmolested by police or press, then why not Mary Williams' dear old salty pops? Coming in a bit too late to alter the paperwork?