Could MJK have survived Miller's Court

[Robert]

Hi Michael and Jon

Well, Bob Hinton has said that the best way to have an alias with an alias's history, is to assume the identity of a real person. Apparently they do that in the world of spying etc. But if Mary stole the name and history of an acqaintance, then we are left with the same problem : why has the said acquaintance not been found?

[Wickerman]

Hi Michael and Jon

Well, Bob Hinton has said that the best way to have an alias with an alias's history, is to assume the identity of a real person. Apparently they do that in the world of spying etc. But if Mary stole the name and history of an acqaintance, then we are left with the same problem : why has the said acquaintance not been found?

She was, there is only one woman who closely fits the bio we have been served with.
But, we don't know what happened to her cousin.

[lynn cates]

origin

Hello Jon.

"So when her father came looking for her in the East end, and she claimed to be avoiding him?"

Can you point me to the origin of this story?

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

Whom?

Hello (again) Jon.

"She was, there is only one woman who closely fits the bio we have been served with."

And she would be . . . ?

Cheers.
LC

[Supe]

In an un-documented age free of most bureacratic infringements upon life (o frabjous day, calloo callay) as in the LVP all that was really needed was a convincing story (and depending on the circles in which you moved the line need not have been overly convincing).

Andy Aliffe had a fascinating story in Ripperologist 71 (September 2006) about Sadie Orchard, a "soiled dove" from the East End and a contemporary of some of Jack's victims. She set up as a bordello proprietor in the American West and became a famed and successful madam known far and wide.

It was only years later that it was revealed she came from a proper Missouri family and had made up the Sadie Orchard persona that fooled everyone. Whatever else, she must have been one heck of an actress.

Don.

[lynn cates]

tragedy

Hello Don. Not unlike Liz Stride with her Princess Alice disaster.

Cheers.
LC

[Wickerman]

Hello Jon.

"So when her father came looking for her in the East end, and she claimed to be avoiding him?"

Can you point me to the origin of this story?

Cheers.
LC

The origin of the news story? c'mon now Lynn, your memory can't be any worse than mine

It is easy to dismiss all the second hand stories we read about her past, and some of them, like how she descended into the life she led, and the trip to France, might be in the first case, an excuse, and in the second, pure fantasy.
However, it is difficult to imagine the benefit of her inventing the story of her father coming from Wales to look for her.

Regards, Jon S.

[lynn cates]

story

Hello Jon. Thanks.

Might be quite beneficial given an older man were looking for her and she wished his real identity to remain unknown. Besides, I'd like to see something tangible in the story.

Cheers.
LC

[Wickerman]

Hello Jon. Thanks.

Might be quite beneficial given an older man were looking for her and she wished his real identity to remain unknown. Besides, I'd like to see something tangible in the story.

Cheers.
LC

Whoever this older man was she did not appear to want to stop him talking with all who knew her, and explaining who he was to all of them. If she wished to keep him incognito wouldn't it have been more beneficial for her not to avoid him but meet up with him ASAP and usher him out of sight?

Alternately, if this older man wished her harm, given Mary had created a likeable persona among her acquaintances, she would have been better asking them to hide her whereabouts and subsequently never mention his existence to anyone, especially Barnett, when she is making some effort to settle down.

Otherwise, she would become a sitting target.....


Regards, Jon S.

[lynn cates]

source

Hello Jon. Thanks.

Was Barnett the source or was it in a newspaper?

Cheers.
LC

[Wickerman]

Hello Jon. Thanks.

Was Barnett the source or was it in a newspaper?

Cheers.
LC

It was in a newspaper, the story attributed to Barnett.

"...Her father came from Wales, and tried to find her there; but, hearing from her companions that he was looking for her, Marie kept out of the way..."

http://www.casebook.org/press_reports/star/s881112.html

All the best, Jon

[lynn cates]

"The Echo"

Hello Jon. Thanks.

I would have thought as much. Early on there was a report in "The Echo" indicating that she had worked for an abortionist. It was a mistake; story retracted. Their reporter returned to London admitting he could not find a trace of "MJK" in Cardiff.

Cheers.
LC

[Tecs]

Okay, but what reason is there to believe that the woman in Mary Kelly's bed was not Mary Kelly? Which woman went missing on the night that Kelly died and never re-appeared? Are you aware of one? If not, why not accept the likelihood that the occupant of the bed was Mary Kelly?

Regards, Bridewell.

Hi bridewell,

Just to clarify, lest it be thought I advocate any conspiracy theories, I can perfectly well accept that the body was MJK no problem at all. And in all likelihood it was.

But there are those niggling issues that need to be addressed, namely the witnessess who say they saw her after the time the body was dead. I've gone through this in much more detail previously and don't want to repeat myself, but basically Maxwell under enormous pressure stuck to her story completely and I don't buy the idea that she could have got the day wrong for reasons I've listed before. If we are going to dismiss her as wrong/mistaken/lying etc just because her story doesn't fit our nice compact version of events, then we may as well dismiss every witness and abandon the whole thing. Of course, if a witness is clearly unreliable such as Packer et al, then we can have an opinion that takes that into account. But there's nothing in Maxwell's story that we can so easily dismiss, like it or not.

So, faced with this dilemma it's not unreasonable to consider an alternative version of events which satisfies everything that we know. The idea that the body was not Mary would satisfy everything that we know to be true and Maxwell's account. But it would mean that somebody else did die in her place. The fact that we know other women did share her room can surely only add to that possibility? And all the other little points fit too, such as if she did return and find the body in her place it would explain the cry of "murder" from her room and possibly the pool of vomit as she reeled from the scene. She may have had to discuss her fleeing with some close friends/associates and she was supposedly seen in the company of other people according to witnessess.

Basically, there is no smoking gun that says the alternative theory is untrue. I'm not saying I agree with it but I do object to people casually dismissing witnessess on the basis that they just must be wrong. I would be P'd off if in 120 years time somebody said that I was not doing what I said I was on the day of, for example, the school shooting in America last week. I'm not stupid, I know how a calender works and I know where I was and what I was doing when I heard the news and nobody has the right to say in years to come that I must be mistaken because it doesn't fit what they want it to.

As I've said before, Maxwell's week was boring routine, boring routine, boring routine, neighbour murdered and Lord Mayor's show, boring routine, boring routine etc etc. She did not get the day wrong and as above, if we dismiss her, then dismiss Lawende, Schwartz, Long etc.

And having said I wouldn't repeat myself, I have!

regards,

[Bridewell]

"mjk"

Hello Colin. If you'll forgive the logicese solution, there is little doubt in my mind but that the dead woman found severely mutilated in Miller's Court was "MJK." But, similarly, I have grave doubts that she was MJK.

Cheers.
LC

When you put it like that, Lynn, so do I!

Regards, Bridewell.

[Bridewell]

Coming Forward

Caroline Maxwell and Maurice Lewis describe the same woman, a description that is at odds with the description of Mary by her friends.

But both describe said woman as being known to them as Mary Kelly. If you're going to argue:

None is this is confirmed by the landlord of the Brittannia, and no one came forward to say they had been with her in the pub. Had she been drinking so late in the morning many more people would have seen her, and if she had not been murdered would have cleared up the mistake.

then surely you have to wonder why the woman mis-identified as Kelly didn't come forward to clear up that mistake. Some people weren't interested in coming forward. Perhaps that's true of the woman claimed by Maxwell & Lewis to have been Kelly but, on the same basis, perhaps it's also true of whoever was in the Britannia?

Regards, Bridewell.