Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Mary Jane was murdered between 09.00 and 10.30 am

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Michael W Richards
    replied
    Originally posted by etenguy View Post

    Hi Michael

    I would think he was seen, possibly with some blood on him but he may have protected himself from being drenched in blood. I would guess people simply ignored him as one in a crowd of people - he would have left before anyone knew a murder had taken place.
    If the previous murders were potentially blood soaked then this one surely was. I cant see any way he wouldnt have been virtually covered in it, unless he brought a cloth and cleaned himself before leaving then took the cloth with him. He didnt take any laundry apparently, nor Marys clothing.

    Leave a comment:


  • Curious Cat
    replied
    Something that goes against Caroline Maxwell being mistaken on Mary Kelly's identity is that she also knew Joe Barnett. Mary and Joe had been together since the previous Easter and were apparently known as a pair by others. Maxwell mentions that she thought Mary received monies from her companion. I don't believe she interpreted the relationship as one of prostitute and client but rather that Joe paid Mary as an act of helping her out as a partner would. She seems surprised to learn that Mary might have been a prostitute to earn money given she was aware of Joe's payments to Mary which would have been intended to go towards food and rent.

    My feeling is, going by how long they were together and how familiar people were of either of them, that knowing Joe wouldn't necessarily mean knowing Mary too but if someone knew or was aware of Mary they would automatically know who Joe is. As Maxwell says she knew both Mary and Joe, and Joe could easily dispute this if it wasn't possible, then it makes her mistaking someone else for Mary Kelly on that morning harder to account for. Mistaking an individual on their own is obviously quite possible. But to mistake an individual you are able to attach to another individual you're familiar with? That's much more difficult to reconcile. Just because Maxwell didn't speak with Mary much before that morning she would have known her enough by sight to be aware of who she was. As Mary also appears to have known Maxwell for each to refer to one another by name - at least according to Maxwell's account.

    Which leads us to a secondary reason for Maxwell not to have been mistaken. For Maxwell it was unusual to see Mary at that time of the day. She must've been used to seeing Mary at a much later time during the course of the day or just simply not at all when she was about at that time in the morning. It would've been a fairly routine occurrence for Maxwell to be up and about in Dorset Street at that time in the morning and going to sort out some breakfast to bring back for her and her husband. Seeing Mary in the street at that time would have been an unusual event for Maxwell if it wasn't part of her typical morning routine. It's what draws Maxwell to approach Mary and express her surprise at seeing her. Maxwell then goes to west to get the breakfast and returns to Dorset Street from the Crispin Street end. She sees Mary talking to a man further along outside The Britannia pub from about the same spot she left Mary 20-30 minutes earlier. Maxwell doesn't mention the street being busy at that time so perhaps it was easy to pick out someone she had only spoken to barely 30 minutes before now being further up the street. Again, it being unusual to see Mary at that time of day in that location would stick out to Maxwell.

    The woman seen by Caroline Maxwell is who she knew to be with Joe Barnett. To say at the inquest that she also knew Joe Barnett means knowing both him and the woman she saw together. If the woman wasn't Mary Kelly then Caroline Maxwell would've mistaken her twice over, once as an individual and again as the partner of Joe Barnett. How does that happen when the initial interaction between them is prompted by the unusual circumstances of them meeting? The woman must be distinct to Maxwell in one way or another. By the time Maxwell gives her story to the press it's well known that Joe Barnett was the dead woman's most recent long time partner. This would surely solidify the identity of the woman she spoke to that morning in her mind.

    There's no wonder why Caroline Maxwell defiantly sticks to her version of events and insists she saw Mary Kelly. Maybe she really did see Mary Kelly.

    Leave a comment:


  • Marie Jeanette Davies
    replied
    Originally posted by Wickerman View Post

    It maybe for some - it was Morris Lewis who described Kelly as "short". This was captured in the Lloyds Weekly News of 11th Nov.
    "She was short, stout & dark, and stood about 5ft 3in"
    Is it possible Morris Lewis was describing Maxwell?

    Leave a comment:


  • etenguy
    replied
    Originally posted by Michael W Richards View Post
    Has anyone actually pictured someone leaving that room in broad daylight...almost certainly covered in blood...and not being seen by anyone?
    Hi Michael

    Came across this and according to the Evening News, as reported on 12 November, it is possible somebody did see him -

    A POSSIBLE CLUE
    On Saturday afternoon a gentleman engaged in business in the vicinity of the murder gave what is the only approach to a possible clue that has yet been brought to light. He states that he was walking through Mitre square at about ten minutes past ten on Friday morning, when a tall, well dressed man, carrying a parcel under his arm, and rushing along in a very excited manner, ran plump into him. The man's face was covered with blood splashes, and his collar and shirt were also bloodstained. The gentleman did not at the time know anything of the murder.
    Of course, this could be unconnected - but well dressed man carrying a parcel under his arm also appears in the description given by George Hutchinson as the man he saw with MJK the morning of the murder.




    Leave a comment:


  • mpriestnall
    replied
    Originally posted by Wickerman View Post

    It maybe for some - it was Morris Lewis who described Kelly as "short". This was captured in the Lloyds Weekly News of 11th Nov.
    "She was short, stout & dark, and stood about 5ft 3in"
    Kelly looks short (maybe), sturdy, and dark haired as depicted on the front cover of The Illustrated Police News, Saturday November17, 1888.
    Last edited by mpriestnall; 05-23-2021, 08:19 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Wickerman
    replied
    Originally posted by rjpalmer View Post

    Not explicitly, but Maxwell is quoted as saying that Mary Jane was a 'pleasant little woman,' which is somewhat odd, since she also called her 'rather stout.' Taken together, some have argued that this shows Maxwell had described Mary as short and sturdy.

    Click image for larger version Name:	maxwell.JPG Views:	0 Size:	19.5 KB ID:	758911


    Still, it's a figure of speech, so that may be reading too much into it. Is it a deal breaker?
    It maybe for some - it was Morris Lewis who described Kelly as "short". This was captured in the Lloyds Weekly News of 11th Nov.
    "She was short, stout & dark, and stood about 5ft 3in"

    Leave a comment:


  • rjpalmer
    replied
    Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post

    hey rj
    i was wrong. heard from lord orsam and it was a post. but started by his lordship and not pierre, titled Morris Lewis Revisited.

    https://forum.casebook.org/forum/rip...ewis-revisited
    Ah, there it is. Merci beaucoup.

    Leave a comment:


  • rjpalmer
    replied
    Originally posted by Joshua Rogan View Post

    Did Maxwell actually describe Mary as short? Or dark?
    Not explicitly, but Maxwell is quoted as saying that Mary Jane was a 'pleasant little woman,' which is somewhat odd, since she also called her 'rather stout.' Taken together, some have argued that this shows Maxwell had described Mary as short and sturdy.

    Click image for larger version  Name:	maxwell.JPG Views:	0 Size:	19.5 KB ID:	758911


    Still, it's a figure of speech, so that may be reading too much into it. Is it a deal breaker?

    Leave a comment:


  • Abby Normal
    replied
    Originally posted by etenguy View Post

    Thanks Abby - an amazingly comprehensive and interesting account of how the story took shape and how that helps our understanding of what information was provided, by whom and when.
    thanks eten but its all lord Orsam . tis a fascinating thread though

    Leave a comment:


  • etenguy
    replied
    Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post
    another tour de force post by Lord Orsam, this one focusing on Morris Lewis

    Morris Lewis and the reporting of his story - Casebook: Jack the Ripper Forums
    Thanks Abby - an amazingly comprehensive and interesting account of how the story took shape and how that helps our understanding of what information was provided, by whom and when.

    Leave a comment:


  • Abby Normal
    replied
    another tour de force post by Lord Orsam, this one focusing on Morris Lewis

    Morris Lewis and the reporting of his story - Casebook: Jack the Ripper Forums

    Leave a comment:


  • Wickerman
    replied
    Originally posted by Joshua Rogan View Post

    Did Maxwell actually describe Mary as short? Or dark?
    Not at the inquest she didn't, if she did it must have been in a press interview.

    Not in a press interview either.
    Maxwell described the man Kelly was with, outside the Britannia that morning as short.
    Last edited by Wickerman; 05-20-2021, 08:03 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Joshua Rogan
    replied
    Originally posted by Marie Jeanette Davies View Post

    So, being shorter than Mary, she couldn't have described her as short.
    Did Maxwell actually describe Mary as short? Or dark?

    Leave a comment:


  • Marie Jeanette Davies
    replied
    Originally posted by Wickerman View Post

    Maxwell was said to be about 5ft 5in tall, as reported in the Morning Advertiser, Standard & Scotsman.
    So, being shorter than Mary, she couldn't have described her as short.

    Leave a comment:


  • Abby Normal
    replied
    Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post

    hey rj
    no i remember reading it on his website, but i cant find it now. or maybe its an article he did for the mag, but he dosnt put those on his website. ill shoot him a note and see if he will send.
    hey rj
    i was wrong. heard from lord orsam and it was a post. but started by his lordship and not pierre, titled Morris Lewis Revisited.

    https://forum.casebook.org/forum/rip...ewis-revisited

    fascinating thread and quite the page turner!!!
    Last edited by Abby Normal; 05-19-2021, 11:22 PM.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X