Mary Jane was murdered between 09.00 and 10.30 am

[The Rookie Detective]

Quite true.
It's just that when we read books like Mayhew's, London Labour and the London Poor, you soon get the impression that when the poor managed to get their hands on morsals of food, they ate it. None of this keeping something for a rainy day. Kelly would have no leftovers from a previous meal, when they got money - they spend it. When they got food they ate it.
So I see it reasonable for the police to assume if Kelly had taken a meal, it must have been bought very soon before consumption.
Of course it isn't a fact, it's a reasonable working hypothesis bearing in mind they have little else to go on.

I completely agree.

I think there's a very high probability that MJK got the food very soon before she ate it.

The question isn't whether she got the food shortly before she died, but WHERE she got that food from and whether that is significant with regards to witnesses/T.O.D and events leading up to her death.

I also take your point regarding it being unlikely that MJK purchased the food from McCarthy's because she owed him rent money.

However, even though she is unlikely to have purchased the food from McCarthy herself, someone else may have purchased it for her.

Could the killer have got the food as a ruse to return to her room rather than going to a dark alleyway?

Do we have a timeframe of how long the partially digested food found in her stomach would have entered her system?

Could the fire have been lit to warm the food?

We know that the food MUST have come from somewhere and it's extremely likely that she OBTAINED the food AND CONSUMED the food shortly before she was murdered.

And so could she have consumed the food in her room after the killer had bought it for her? All washed down with Ginger Beer?

The fact that she ate relatively shortly before she died is perhaps more significant than we realize because IF the killer was present in her room then it wouldn't fit with the client angle and would perhaps go closer to implicating someone close to her. In other words, I can't see how she would have shared or ate food with a client in her room and so WHEN and WHERE did she consume the food?
There's NO witnesses that state seeing her outside eating or going to a place that sold food.

Did Barnett bring her the food?

Lots to decipher.



RD

[Fleetwood Mac]

What was in the tankard that Blotchy had? Its entirely feasible that she and Blotchy had a bit of food and drink when she was singing in her room. If she is murdered around 4, after the "oh murder" was heard, would that allow for the food to have been partially digested before she expires? She gets home at 11:45pm Thursday night, surely lots of vendors were open at that time.

We know vendors, chandlers and the like were open at 11.45pm, we hear that from witness statements relating to all of the murders.

Taking Mary's case as an example, McCarthy's usual closing time was 1.30am.

That should tell us that more often than not, McCarthy didn't have sufficient custom after that time to make it worth his while.

We know from witness statements also, that around that time most people were in off the streets, except the desperate with nowhere to stay or looking for a client to earn the money for a bed for the night or pay the rent.

Realistically, there will have been nobody selling fish on the streets after say 2.30 in the morning, and quite probably earlier than that. McCarthy's closing time, as well as other witnesses in the series who were traders who also tell us they'd closed up by 1.30am, suggests that's probably when you're getting to around the time when sourcing fish is going to be a problem.

Supporting that, we don't hear any statements from vendors being open or people sourcing food after that time period. In fact, the witness statements we hear suggest the streets were pretty empty after say 1.30am.

[Lewis C]

Maybe someone has already addressed this and I i missed it, but if we're going to be talking about when places that served food closed, then there's also the question of when they re-opened, given the premise of the thread and the time they re-opened was probably before 9:00.

[Simon Wood]

Mary Jane Kelly was not murdered in Room 13, Millers Court. All the witness statements, medical opinions and time of death estimates are balderdash.

https://www.amazon.com/Secret-History-Simon-Daryl-Wood/dp/B0C9SLCVNT/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=secret+history+simon+daryl+wood&qid=1689706161&s=books&sr=1-1

[etenguy]

Maybe someone has already addressed this and I i missed it, but if we're going to be talking about when places that served food closed, then there's also the question of when they re-opened, given the premise of the thread and the time they re-opened was probably before 9:00.

Hi Lewis

You make a good point. Though would MJK have eaten fish and potatoes for breakfast?

[Fleetwood Mac]

Maybe someone has already addressed this and I i missed it, but if we're going to be talking about when places that served food closed, then there's also the question of when they re-opened, given the premise of the thread and the time they re-opened was probably before 9:00.

You can be absolutely certain that where there is custom there is a business.

We know that people were back on the streets again after say 5.30am in good numbers. We know that Elizabeth Prater was looking for booze and men were harnessing horses outside. We know that the pubs opened again around that time.

We know that Victorian era sleeping patterns were different to ours. Our sleeping pattern of say 8 hours continuous sleep is a modern invention. In Victorian times, the optimum sleeping pattern was considered to be a few hours in the early morning, get up at say 4am, do a few chores, or in these women's habits go to the pub; and go back to bed for a few hours. It follows that lots of people on the streets after say 5.30am, is to be expected in that period.

But, you have to show that fish and chips or fish and potatoes were part of the breakfast of the Victorian poor, i.e. there was a market for it at that time of the morning. I doubt it very much.

I've lived in England all of my life, and believe me when I say that fried fish is not something that people eat for their breakfast. Add in Mary's financial position, and then add the choice of many of those people: booze or fried fish in the morning.

The likelihood is that Mary, or more to the point the person who bought fish and chips/potatoes for her, did not source that food after 1.30am. Add in that Mary was in her room for a while singing, and in my mind it is highly likely that Mary ate that food prior to Mary Cox seeing her.

But, why don't you have a look 'round the internet, do some research on the breakfast habits of the Victorian poor. In the event you find something interesting, people will appreciate it.

[Aethelwulf]

Mary Jane Kelly was not murdered in Room 13, Millers Court. All the witness statements, medical opinions and time of death estimates are balderdash.

https://www.amazon.com/Secret-Histor...&sr=1-1

out with it then - what's your theory? If you say 'read the book', I've read the blurb and it sounds like conspiracy nonsense, so I ain't reading the book.

[Simon Wood]

As you wish. Stay in your comfort zone.

[Aethelwulf]

As you wish. Stay in your comfort zone.

I'll take that as confirmation that it is indeed a load on conspiracy nonsense. People these days seem to like that sort of thing. You only need to look at Trump's followers and that buffoon Johnson. Sure it'll do really well!

[Aethelwulf]

As you wish. Stay in your comfort zone.

This smells decidely like the BS zone:

The Amazon description outlines official lies, invention, disinformation, and opportunism

What is your rationale for posting? You keep putting up clearly provocative messages like 'Mary Jane Kelly was not murdered in Room 13, Millers Court. All the witness statements, medical opinions and time of death estimates are balderdash'. When asked for further explanation, you don't. So what is your point?

[Elamarna]

Simon, I suggest believes he knows information most are not aware of.
Of course those who do not accept his hints are viewed as having closed minds and of accepting the official spin, as he sees it

A few of us are aware of what he believes occurred in 1888.
One day, perhaps he will actually say exactly what that is, in detail.


Steve

[Simon Wood]

Hi Steve,

Exactly what I mean is laid out in granular detail in Secret History, together with the photographic evidence.

As one of the few who are already aware of what I believe happened in 1888, perhaps you would be good enough to let me in on it.

Regards,

Simon

[Aethelwulf]

Simon, I suggest believes he knows information most are not aware of.
Of course those who do not accept his hints are viewed as having closed minds and of accepting the official spin, as he sees it

A few of us are aware of what he believes occurred in 1888.
One day, perhaps he will actually say exactly what that is, in detail.


Steve

Call me cynical Steve but I suspect he knows that if he outlines his theory it will be seen as nonsense and then no one will buy his book.

[Elamarna]

Hi Steve,

Exactly what I mean is laid out in granular detail in Secret History, together with the photographic evidence.

As one of the few who are already aware of what I believe happened in 1888, perhaps you would be good enough to let me in on it.

Regards,

Simon

Hi Simon,

I note, you say what you mean, rather than a fully explanation and theory.

It's an open secret that you believe no murder occurred in Miller's Court, and that there was not one individual who carried out all the murders in Whitechapel.

What you actually believe occurred in Whitechapel in 1888 is not so clear.

Why was it claimed there was a murder in Millers court?
Why the murders were tied together by the police.

These are issues that you have not really explained in the past, simply hinted at.

Some of us are indeed aware , but it's not our place to discuss a theory that you have not as yet made public.

If of course you do actually give the answer to those questions in your latest book, then Bravo, at last!
Maybe we can examine the evidence openly.

However, given that such a disclosure as not, as yet, been reported on any forum, I wonder if you have done .

All the best.

Steve

[Simon Wood]

Hi Steve,

My "theory" as you term it couldn't be more public.

It's openly available at Amazon.

https://www.amazon.com/Secret-History-Simon-Daryl-Wood/dp/B0C9SLCVNT/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=secret+history+simon+daryl+wood&qid=1689706161&s=books&sr=1-1

You seem to be attempting to be spared from the bother of buying it.

Regards,

Simon