Mary Jane was murdered between 09.00 and 10.30 am

[Ms Diddles]

Sorry Wick,

I just re-read your post and realised that you had clearly stated that you don't know if the woman who Maxwell spoke with was the woman we know as MJK.

I should have read it more carefully....

Re the notion that Maxwell was over-playing her familiarity with MJK; It's a possibility, but again it feels like a bit of a stretch to me.

I somehow read Maxwell as being quite no-nonsense and straight forward.

I don't see her as an attention seeker or someone trying to make a drama out of a crisis.

Still, that's really just me speculating based on a very limited amount of information.

[Wickerman]

....
The few facts that have turned up do seem to point in a particular direction, but I can't say I'm comfortable with the implication.
All I feel comfortable in stating is that the name of the victim was not Mary Jane Kelly, and the real MJK was alive and well somewhere else.

My apologies, that last line came across as too clandestine.
What I meant is, regardless of the false name the victim chose to use, it could have been simply 'Susan Smith', what the records will show is that the real Susan Smith turned up alive and well at the end of 1888.
Researchers will continue to look for the elusive Susan Smith that died in Nov. 1888, and there will not be one.
This is the situation we have with Mary Kelly.

[Ms Diddles]

You are correct Ms Diddles, the shopkeeper remembered Maxwell coming in for milk that morning. So, we can take it as verified she had the right day.
The most likely alternative I resign myself to is, she just got the wrong woman.
I know she claimed to know MJK, but it is a fact that when reporters are looking for stories after an event like this, there'll be a never-ending line-up of people who claim to have known the victim.
Perhaps Maxwell was just overplaying her familiarity with MJK?

I don't know if the woman Maxwell saw really was the true MJK, but I am and have been convinced for years now that the victim certainly was not called MJK. It was not her real name.
Look at all the brilliant researchers over the decades that have searched for her ruthlessly but turned up nothing.
In fact, back on the very first day of the murder, 9th Nov., one local woman told us that very fact. "Mary Jane" was not her real name.



The few facts that have turned up do seem to point in a particular direction, but I can't say I'm comfortable with the implication.
All I feel comfortable in stating is that the name of the victim was not Mary Jane Kelly, and the real MJK was alive and well somewhere else.

That's exactly it, Wick!

The evidence points in a certain direction, but I too am uncomfortable with the consequent implications, and stop short of constructing any far-fetched theories to account for it.

I agree that the woman who resided in 13 Millers Court was likely not born Mary Jane Kelly.

Are you postulating that the MJK known to Caroline Maxwell (and who she conversed with that morning) was not the woman residing in 13 Millers Court who we know as MJK (although this may not have been her real name)?

Am just trying to get things clear in my mind here.....!

[Ms Diddles]

Hi Ms Diddles

Good post. Regarding the above point, I wondered about this myself. Going against this is:
a) Maxwell had known this woman for some four months. There was no-one staying with MJK for that length of time.
b) Maxwell was on speaking terms with MJK and did not just see her, but spoke with her.
c) If it was mistaken identity - where did the other woman disappear to?
d) If it was MJK and someone else was killed, what happened to MJK?

Like you, I think it is a stretch. This is a real conundrum and for some reason the police just ignored it, despite Abberline stating that Maxwell was a solid and honest witness. Like you, I agree that the police simply dismissing this encounter as the previous morning and ignoring Lewis completely seems hard to reconcile.

Hi Eten,

I wonder if the police had other reasons for dismissing Maxwell's testimony that we today are unaware of?

I completely accept that her statement doesn't fit into the accepted narrative of events, (in fact it sticks out like a sore thumb!), but for the police to simply disregard it (and it's implications) seems somewhat remiss, if this was indeed their response.

Personally, I consider Maxwell to be credible and all of the arguments used to refute her statement (wrong day, mistaken identity etc) appear weak, for all of the reasons mentioned in your post above.

I'm sure there is a probably a mundane explanation for it, but I can't for the life of me think what it could be!

I'm pretty vanilla in my approach to all things Ripper.

I kind of trundle along reading the literature (and theories on here), mull it over a bit, and usually my opinions will align with the simplest, least dramatic theories.

I'll stick my neck out on this one though, whichever way I look at this, based on the available information, I believe Maxwell.

[Wickerman]

You are correct Ms Diddles, the shopkeeper remembered Maxwell coming in for milk that morning. So, we can take it as verified she had the right day.
The most likely alternative I resign myself to is, she just got the wrong woman.
I know she claimed to know MJK, but it is a fact that when reporters are looking for stories after an event like this, there'll be a never-ending line-up of people who claim to have known the victim.
Perhaps Maxwell was just overplaying her familiarity with MJK?

I don't know if the woman Maxwell saw really was the true MJK, but I am and have been convinced for years now that the victim certainly was not called MJK. It was not her real name.
Look at all the brilliant researchers over the decades that have searched for her ruthlessly but turned up nothing.
In fact, back on the very first day of the murder, 9th Nov., one local woman told us that very fact. "Mary Jane" was not her real name.



The few facts that have turned up do seem to point in a particular direction, but I can't say I'm comfortable with the implication.
All I feel comfortable in stating is that the name of the victim was not Mary Jane Kelly, and the real MJK was alive and well somewhere else.

[etenguy]

Is it feasible that the woman who Maxwell thought was MJK was actually (and had all along been) another woman who was bstaying in number 13?

I guess that's not impossible, but it feels like a stretch.

Hi Ms Diddles

Good post. Regarding the above point, I wondered about this myself. Going against this is:
a) Maxwell had known this woman for some four months. There was no-one staying with MJK for that length of time.
b) Maxwell was on speaking terms with MJK and did not just see her, but spoke with her.
c) If it was mistaken identity - where did the other woman disappear to?
d) If it was MJK and someone else was killed, what happened to MJK?

Like you, I think it is a stretch. This is a real conundrum and for some reason the police just ignored it, despite Abberline stating that Maxwell was a solid and honest witness. Like you, I agree that the police simply dismissing this encounter as the previous morning and ignoring Lewis completely seems hard to reconcile.

[Ms Diddles]

The reports from Lewis & Maxwell were pretty much the same in all newspapers, likely they were interviewed by an agency reporter. In all cases it was nothing more than a brief sentence.



It was the same day though, Kelly was killed in the morning, Maxwell was interviewed in the afternoon.
How can anyone figure she get the day wrong? I know they did, but obviously they didn't put much thought into it.

Agreed, Wick!

I have never bought into the notion that Maxwell got the wrong day.

It makes no sense.

If your neighbourhood had just been thrown into uproar, and someone you knew had been so brutally murdered, the events of that day would be crystal clear in your mind, particularly if you had actually conversed with the victim.

I'm working from memory here, but I'm sure I read somewhere that the shopkeeper had confirmed Maxwell's statement too (in addition to Lewis)??

As stated in a different thread, I actually feel that Caroline Maxwell comes across as one of the most credible witnesses in the whole saga, based on the information we have.

She's corroborated by Lewis (and the shop keeper?), and stands firm despite being challenged at the inquest.

IIRC she is described as an honest and upstanding citizen (or words to that effect).

Against that, I find it hard to picture JTR emerging into a bustling Millers Court in broad daylight following the murder.

Is it feasible that the woman who Maxwell thought was MJK was actually (and had all along been) another woman who was bstaying in number 13?

I guess that's not impossible, but it feels like a stretch.

I'd do a poll with options to choose from:

Maxwell was lying
Maxwell got the wrong day
Maxwell got the wrong person
Medical evidence is out and MJK was murdered much later than previously thought
The body isn't MJK

but I have an inkling that this will have been done on MANY previous occasions already!

It's another of those fascinating conundrums which are pivotal in this case.

[Wickerman]

Hi Wickerman

It is certainly possible the Echo report was confused - they also reported that Mary Jane Kelly had sent her son out for sweets. Other papers also reported Lewis's story though. It doesn't seem likely to me that Maurice was confusing Mary Jane Kelly with Caroline Maxwell, who as you say had gone out for provisions for her husband's breakfast. Based on the full story, he would also then be placing Caroline Maxwell at the Britannia an hour or so later.

The reports from Lewis & Maxwell were pretty much the same in all newspapers, likely they were interviewed by an agency reporter. In all cases it was nothing more than a brief sentence.

Well the police thought she got the day wrong and had met her on Thursday morning, not Friday morning.

It was the same day though, Kelly was killed in the morning, Maxwell was interviewed in the afternoon.
How can anyone figure she get the day wrong? I know they did, but obviously they didn't put much thought into it.

[etenguy]

The odd thing about Lewis's statement for me was, at least as given by the Echo, that Kelly returned with some milk.

The thought crossed my mind that it was the reporter who may have been confused, Lewis told the reporter what Maxwell did. Maxwell was the one who left between 8:00-8:30am, and returned with milk, not Kelly

Hi Wickerman

It is certainly possible the Echo report was confused - they also reported that Mary Jane Kelly had sent her son out for sweets. Other papers also reported Lewis's story though. It doesn't seem likely to me that Maurice was confusing Mary Jane Kelly with Caroline Maxwell, who as you say had gone out for provisions for her husband's breakfast. Based on the full story, he would also then be placing Caroline Maxwell at the Britannia an hour or so later.

Regarding Maxwell's statement, other than a case of mistaken identity, I can't imagine anything else.

Well the police thought she got the day wrong and had met her on Thursday morning, not Friday morning. Highly unlikely in the event of a most gruesome murder I think. Also, Maxwell had been on speaking terms with Mary Jane for some months - not likely to be mistaken identity I think.

Another option is that Mary Jane was alive until later in the morning than the doctors' time of death would indicate - especially since two independent witnesses corroborate each other in this - at the same locations no less.

[Wickerman]

The odd thing about Lewis's statement for me was, at least as given by the Echo, that Kelly returned with some milk.
The thought crossed my mind that it was the reporter who may have been confused, Lewis told the reporter what Maxwell did. Maxwell was the one who left between 8:00-8:30am, and returned with milk, not Kelly

Regarding Maxwell's statement, other than a case of mistaken identity, I can't imagine anything else.

[etenguy]

Mary JK. Found 10.40 in warmed room. Most organs gone lots of flesh removed. According to the dissertation (Estimation of Mary Kelly T.O.D.) Dr Bond reported in an autopsy annex that Rigour mortis was starting at 14.00. If she was killed at 05.00 this is 9 hours later. Just starting?? As stated above, the cold Chapman was starting to stiffen within 50 minutes and was well stiff within 8.5 hours. Kelly was in a warm room and "starting" to stiffen after 9 hours? If she was killed between 09.00 after being seen and speaking to Caroline Maxwell, that would be 5 hours before Bond's autopsy and would fit in with the previous victims onset of R.M. If she were killed much earlier, as is widely believed, when Bond started she would have been "well marked". No wonder Bond demurred regarding T.O.D. because it was weird.

Hi Miakaal4

I can't help but think there is good reason to review the estimate of Mary Jane Kelly's time of death. Not only did Caroline Maxwell state she had a conversation with Mary Jane Kelly between 8.00am and 8.30am, someone with whom she was on speaking terms and whom she had known for months - Maurice Lewis also said he saw Mary Jane kelly leave her room at 8.00am and return soon after. He had known her for five years. These are two independent witnesses both seeing Mary Jane Kelly between 8.00am and 8.30am in the same area. They are either both lying or are both mistaken. I think either scenario highly unlikely.

They both also put Mary Jane Kelly in the area of the Britannia pub at 9.00am (Maxwell) and 10.00am (Lewis). Again they are either both lying or both mistaken if the doctor's times of death are accurate. Given that two independent witnesses see Mary Jane Kelly twice in the same areas on both occasions, after the time she was meant to have been murdered, suggests to me Mary Jane was killed after the sightings and the doctors' estimates (which varied by about three hours anyway) were inaccurate. Two corroborating witness sightings, both independent of each other, placing Mary Jane Kelly in two locations during the morning seems more reliable to me than a time of death estimate based on rigor mortis.

[The Rookie Detective]

Let’s take a beat and strip everything back.

If we put aside all of the witness statements for a moment and imagine there were no witnesses.

what is the most likely time for MJK to have been killed?

In my opinion we are looking at this from the wrong angle.

due to the sheer ferocity of the wounds inflicted, the murder is most likely so have occurred when Millers Court has the least activity.

what time was Millers Court the least active in terms of comings and going’s of residents?

what if Hutchinson was a complete fantasist and Kelly was already dead BEFORE he says he saw her?

her neighbour mentions going in and out of Millers Court several times.


I would suggest that the murder either happened between Kelly’s light being on and off OR at the point when witnesses heard “oh Murder” which was of course much later.

Imagine there’s no Hutchinson and then the real time of death is more likely to be found.


TRD

[DJA]

i dont think she was lying, just mistaken. I think who she thought was mary, was not. she didnt even know tje woman who she thought was mary very well.

Hmm ...... Hutchinson purportedly watching from outside the Commercial Street Chambers,15 to 20 Dorset Street, owned by William Crossingham of Romford tends to fix Mary Kelly out and about between 2am and 3am.
He purported to reside at the corner of Commercial and Wentworth Streets.

Caroline Maxewell (sic) the wife of Wiliam Crossingham's deputy,lives next door at 14 Dorset Street, has Mary out and about from 8.30am.
She has known Mary a month before the double event.

Somehow reminds me about the twins at the crossroad.
One always tells the truth,one always tells a lie.
What question can a traveler ask either/both in order to discern the road he needs to take?

[etenguy]

hi eten
i dont think she was lying, just mistaken. I think who she thought was mary, was not. she didnt even know tje woman who she thought was mary very well.

Hi Abby

My memory is that she had 'known' Mary Jane for about four months and had chatted with her a couple of times, and she also knew her domestic set up with Joe Barnet and the fact that he had left 13 Millers Court. I think it unlikely she has confused her with someone else (who presumably she didn't see again to realise her mistake if she had). Also, she spoke to the woman by name, so if she was confused with someone else, she would have to be called the same name. I think it more likely that Mary Jane was killed a little later than the doctors estimated or that Maxwell lied. There is no reason to think Maxwell lied.

[etenguy]

I took it that the reporter misheard 'ears' for 'hair', and I suspect many others believe that too.
Her hair was her most defining feature, yet Kelly is supposed to have had something like a false tooth?, I can't remember the quote exactly but it reads like another defining feature, whether false teeth or an overbite, something of that nature.
I'm surprised Barnet didn't mention it, whatever it was. The whole face was normally exposed for viewing in a mortuary, the body being completely wrapped.

I think the problem with identifying the body with a known Mary Kelly is, the name she used was not her true name. Whatever Barnet's girlfriend's name was, it wasn't Mary Kelly, at least not on her birth certificate.

Hi Wickerman

Hair makes more sense to me than ears, especially in this case. Even so, not the most reliable identification, but given the circumstances.

I think that leaves me on balance thinking the TOD was later than the doctors estimated. I am inclined to believe Caroline Maxwell and I can see no reason to think she was mistaken.