Mary Jane was murdered between 09.00 and 10.30 am

[Marie Jeanette Davies]

I presume you mean, by shifting the apparent murder time?
If that be the case then perhaps the murderer suspected, or simply knew for a fact, that he'd been seen.
Whatever the case, this sequence at the inquest sounds very flaky to me...

I imagined she had been in the Britannia beer-shop at the corner of the street. I left her, saying that I could pity her feelings. I went to Bishopsgate-street to get my husband's breakfast. Returning I saw her outside the Britannia public-house, talking to a man.
[Coroner] This would be about what time ? - Between eight and nine o'clock. I was absent about half-an-hour. It was about a quarter to nine.
[Coroner] What description can you give of this man ? - I could not give you any, as they were at some distance.
Inspector Abberline: The distance is about sixteen yards.
Witness: I am sure it was the deceased. I am willing to swear it.

Under oath, I would have thought the concept of 'swearing it', to be redundant.

I also find this bit in the PMG article a bit odd ...

I didn't know then that she had separated from the man she had been living with, and I thought he had been "paying" her.

Apparently she thought Joe were a client of Mary's. So then why would he be living with her?
A live-in client who reads her the papers - perfect!

Yes, that's what I meant. Maybe Jack was someone really close to her. What do we know about Henry Maxwell, her husband? Virtually nothing, I think. I seem to recall that he passed away in 1889. She said she wouldn't be able to describe the man she saw with Mary at a distance, yet she was absolutely certain it was Mary who spoke to her. Seems strange. Plus, by not knowing Joe and Mary called it an end she admitted not to know them all that well. I don't know, I may be totally wrong, but Maxwell sounds pretty fishy to me.

[Wickerman]

Sorry, Wickerman, my mistake. However, Morris Lewis doesn't seem to be a reliable witness, even if he admitted to play pitch & toss in the Court, which was illegal. He claimed to have seen Mary carrying a bottle of milk. Perhaps it was Mrs. Maxwell he saw. Or maybe he thought that dragging himself into the inquest would have profited him in terms of publicity.

It's because Lewis described the actions of Maxwell, that I suspect this is a result of a confused reporter, or editor at the newspaper. Afterall, what would Maxwell be doing coming out of Millers Court in the morning?

As the weekend progressed, the story by Lewis seemed to suffer from editing. The woman he saw is now going for provisions, not specifically milk, but we now read that 'they' afterwards went for a drink in the Britannia and saw Kelly there drinking.
What began on Friday as a specific story by Lewis becomes merged with 'other' accounts from Kelly's associates.

[spyglass]

Cries of Murder were reported to be pretty common at the time.

But "OH Murder" ? ...swoon with hand on forehead!
straight out of the Dan Leno play book.

[Marie Jeanette Davies]

It's because Lewis described the actions of Maxwell, that I suspect this is a result of a confused reporter, or editor at the newspaper. Afterall, what would Maxwell be doing coming out of Millers Court in the morning?

As the weekend progressed, the story by Lewis seemed to suffer from editing. The woman he saw is now going for provisions, not specifically milk, but we now read that 'they' afterwards went for a drink in the Britannia and saw Kelly there drinking.
What began on Friday as a specific story by Lewis becomes merged with 'other' accounts from Kelly's associates.

So you think he was a reliable witness? The only thing that puzzles me is that he claimed to have seen Mary drinking with Dan, Joe Barnett's brother, on Thursday night, but overall I don't believe he knew her.

[Losmandris]

Hi Marie

I think your scenario is more plausible than suggesting Mary Jane Kelly screamed 'oh murder' at the time of the attack. Though who might be visiting MJK at that time of the morning and had access to the room - it narrows down who that could be. Presumably, you think they had reason not to report the murder, perhaps fear of personal safety. Of course, those who are less certain that the victim was the woman known as MJK might speculate if it was MJK herself who found a body early that morning.

I still struggle to dismiss Caroline Maxwell's statement. I think it unlikely she confused who she spoke with and highly unlikely she confused the day. Especially as Lewis and the shopkeeper corroborate the person and date/time respectively. I personally would lean to a later time of death, rather than a different victim, when I contemplate how Maxwell's statement might be accurate. I'm a little on the fence but given how inaccurate the method used for determining time of death, the significant difference in the two estimates made and the level of mutilation of the body making any estimate even less reliable, I'm inclined to think those details are more likely to be inaccurate than Caroline's statement and those who corroborate her story.

Hey Etenguy,

How does your time frame work for this scenario?

[etenguy]

Hey Etenguy,

How does your time frame work for this scenario?

Hi Los - you have asked this before - the theoretical timescale I suggested could be:

8.30 - MJK chats with Maxwell
(despite Maxwell and Lewis thinking they saw her closer to 10.00 out drinking, we know MJK said she had no intention of more drink that morning. These 'drinking' sightings are less reliable as both were at a distance and no interaction, so I don't accept those)
8.45 - at Miller's Court with the murderer (perhaps he was waiting for her while she was out - fire already lit)
by 9.00 - poor MJK has been murdered.
10.00 - murderer leaves and slips into the crowd unnoticed.

Not suggesting the above happened, but a potential timeline for a later murder.

[Abby Normal]

Hi Los - you have asked this before - the theoretical timescale I suggested could be:

8.30 - MJK chats with Maxwell
(despite Maxwell and Lewis thinking they saw her closer to 10.00 out drinking, we know MJK said she had no intention of more drink that morning. These 'drinking' sightings are less reliable as both were at a distance and no interaction, so I don't accept those)
8.45 - at Miller's Court with the murderer (perhaps he was waiting for her while she was out - fire already lit)
by 9.00 - poor MJK has been murdered.
10.00 - murderer leaves and slips into the crowd unnoticed.

Not suggesting the above happened, but a potential timeline for a later murder.

hi eten
so they both got the same wrong mary later? but maxwell got the right mary earlier? seems a little convoluted to me.

more than likely maxwell had tje wrong mary from the start and lewis is an attention seeker parrotting maxwells story.

[Wickerman]

So you think he was a reliable witness? The only thing that puzzles me is that he claimed to have seen Mary drinking with Dan, Joe Barnett's brother, on Thursday night, but overall I don't believe he knew her.

No, I'm not saying Lewis was reliable, it's just that his story appears to have preceded Maxwell's, but neither one is copying the other. Both are telling a very different story of how they thought they saw Kelly that morning, and it isn't just those two, the papers have two other unnamed witnesses who claim Kelly was in the Britannia that morning.

I wonder how many of these witnesses would have told their story if it had been known from the start that Kelly had been murdered about 3:00am?
All these stories came out while the public were under the impression Kelly had been killed after 9:00am.
I'm inclined to think these are just people who saw someone similar to the deceased, but had they known the deceased was already dead by the time they saw her, they wouldn't have even mentioned it.
People have a tendency to want to help, so even if they saw someone similar they will assume it was her, not to be controversial, but to try help solve the time of her death.

Once the papers began to print the official medical opinion (that she died about 3:00am), these stories ceased. People who may have thought they had seen Kelly late Friday morning would obviously think themselves mistaken, and brushed it off as their error, saying nothing.
But, there were at least four people who had been caught up in the confusion.

[Marie Jeanette Davies]

No, I'm not saying Lewis was reliable, it's just that his story appears to have preceded Maxwell's, but neither one is copying the other. Both are telling a very different story of how they thought they saw Kelly that morning, and it isn't just those two, the papers have two other unnamed witnesses who claim Kelly was in the Britannia that morning.

I wonder how many of these witnesses would have told their story if it had been known from the start that Kelly had been murdered about 3:00am?
All these stories came out while the public were under the impression Kelly had been killed after 9:00am.
I'm inclined to think these are just people who saw someone similar to the deceased, but had they known the deceased was already dead by the time they saw her, they wouldn't have even mentioned it.
People have a tendency to want to help, so even if they saw someone similar they will assume it was her, not to be controversial, but to try help solve the time of her death.

Once the papers began to print the official medical opinion (that she died about 3:00am), these stories ceased. People who may have thought they had seen Kelly late Friday morning would obviously think themselves mistaken, and brushed it off as their error, saying nothing.
But, there were at least four people who had been caught up in the confusion.

I find your theory very plausible. All in all, it may have been a case of mistaken identity.

[Losmandris]

Hi Los - you have asked this before - the theoretical timescale I suggested could be:

8.30 - MJK chats with Maxwell
(despite Maxwell and Lewis thinking they saw her closer to 10.00 out drinking, we know MJK said she had no intention of more drink that morning. These 'drinking' sightings are less reliable as both were at a distance and no interaction, so I don't accept those)
8.45 - at Miller's Court with the murderer (perhaps he was waiting for her while she was out - fire already lit)
by 9.00 - poor MJK has been murdered.
10.00 - murderer leaves and slips into the crowd unnoticed.

Not suggesting the above happened, but a potential timeline for a later murder.

Sorry I could well have done! I suppose it is possible, though not sure how comfortable I am with it?

[Losmandris]

No, I'm not saying Lewis was reliable, it's just that his story appears to have preceded Maxwell's, but neither one is copying the other. Both are telling a very different story of how they thought they saw Kelly that morning, and it isn't just those two, the papers have two other unnamed witnesses who claim Kelly was in the Britannia that morning.

I wonder how many of these witnesses would have told their story if it had been known from the start that Kelly had been murdered about 3:00am?
All these stories came out while the public were under the impression Kelly had been killed after 9:00am.
I'm inclined to think these are just people who saw someone similar to the deceased, but had they known the deceased was already dead by the time they saw her, they wouldn't have even mentioned it.
People have a tendency to want to help, so even if they saw someone similar they will assume it was her, not to be controversial, but to try help solve the time of her death.

Once the papers began to print the official medical opinion (that she died about 3:00am), these stories ceased. People who may have thought they had seen Kelly late Friday morning would obviously think themselves mistaken, and brushed it off as their error, saying nothing.
But, there were at least four people who had been caught up in the confusion.

All very true!

[etenguy]

Sorry I could well have done! I suppose it is possible, though not sure how comfortable I am with it?

Hi Los

I do not suggest the timeline as a probability or even likely - only that it was possible. When I mentioned this timeline earlier in the thread, the main challenge to it was that it would mean the murderer slipping out into a crowded street in broad daylight and that was considered both unlikely and too risky. It would also mean the doctors' estimates of time of death would have been considerably off the mark (not that they were particularly well aligned to begin with).

The options we are really choosing between, in my view, is which is more likely:
a) the TOD estimates were wrong (unreliable methods used, an extensively open and mutilated body and an already significant gap between estimates).
b) Mrs Maxwell was mistaken about who she spoke to or when she spoke to them (she did not know MJK well, corroborated by shop keeper and Lewis and firmly stuck to her story at the inquest despite being at odds with the medical professionals).

[Michael W Richards]

Has anyone actually pictured someone leaving that room in broad daylight...almost certainly covered in blood...and not being seen by anyone?

[Marie Jeanette Davies]

Has anyone actually pictured someone leaving that room in broad daylight...almost certainly covered in blood...and not being seen by anyone?

I haven't. I just can't picture that.

[Marie Jeanette Davies]

Hi Los

I do not suggest the timeline as a probability or even likely - only that it was possible. When I mentioned this timeline earlier in the thread, the main challenge to it was that it would mean the murderer slipping out into a crowded street in broad daylight and that was considered both unlikely and too risky. It would also mean the doctors' estimates of time of death would have been considerably off the mark (not that they were particularly well aligned to begin with).

The options we are really choosing between, in my view, is which is more likely:
a) the TOD estimates were wrong (unreliable methods used, an extensively open and mutilated body and an already significant gap between estimates).
b) Mrs Maxwell was mistaken about who she spoke to or when she spoke to them (she did not know MJK well, corroborated by shop keeper and Lewis and firmly stuck to her story at the inquest despite being at odds with the medical professionals).

I'm convinced (although you can't really be sure of anything in the Ripper case) that Maxwell was mistaken as to the identity of the murdered woman. Unless, as I've said before, she lied about the morning sighting to protect someone she suspected of being the culprit or knew without a doubt that was the killer. How do you explain that she described Mary as short and dark though? It's completely at odds with what Elizabeth Prater affirmed. She said that Mary was tall and "fair as a lily", and the corpse on the bed definitely looks like that of a tall woman.