Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Legend Of Mary Jane Kelly

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

  • #76
    Originally posted by seanr View Post

    Astrakhan man may very well have been Joseph Isaacs and a red herring inserted into the case by Hutchinson. If there was a fake backstory to protect a suspect, could it not just have easily have been to protect Blotchy?
    Seanr,

    Could you explain a little more about this. Why would Hutchinson insert Joseph Isaacs a as red herring?

    I'm interested to know your take with Astrakhan, Hutchinson, Blotchy, Kelly etc

    Martyn

    Comment


    • #77
      Originally posted by seanr View Post

      Astrakhan man may very well have been Joseph Isaacs and a red herring inserted into the case by Hutchinson....
      Sean, Joseph Isaacs stayed at the Green Dragon in Barnet on Wednesday night. On Thursday he was arrested for theft and put in jail at Barnet, where he was held until he appeared in court, in Barnet, on Monday.

      There just is not any way Isaacs could have been involved.

      Alternately, I suppose it could be argued that Hutchinson described Isaacs as Astrachan in order to incriminate him, that's about the only way we can associate Isaacs with Kelly's murder.
      That hypothesis would require that Hutchinson knew Isaacs, which we cannot demonstrate at the moment.

      Regards, Jon S.

      Comment


      • #78
        Originally posted by mpriestnall View Post

        Seanr,

        Could you explain a little more about this. Why would Hutchinson insert Joseph Isaacs a as red herring?

        I'm interested to know your take with Astrakhan, Hutchinson, Blotchy, Kelly etc

        Martyn
        Well, I note that Astrachan Man is very definitely associated with Joseph Isaacs who was said to have answered the description given by George Hutchinson but turned out to have a cast iron alibi (was at her majesty's pleasure) on November the 8th, but had also stayed at a local lodging house so his description might be known to local people. His description may have been singularly distinctive... what are the chances of two Astrachan Men in the East End at the time?

        You may also note that in the case of the Kitty Ronan murder at Miller's Court in 1909, there was coincidentally again a man stood in Dorset Street opposite Miller's Court; we have Alfred Wilkins as a witness apparently seeing the victim with a man before entering the court and waiting until he sees the man leave.

        Almost every picture we have, whether illustration or photograph, appears to have a chair or a group of women sat outside Miller's Court. In George Duckworth's walk through Dorset Street the PC guiding him notes a woman who has always sat staring out of the window (of what maybe Crossingham's lodging house) for years. The street seems like it is under constant watch.

        Then add a dose of the claims the lodging house keepers, specifically John McCarthy were 'gang' leaders. McCarthy was certainly involved in illegal boxing... which may also suggest illegal sports betting and so maybe the more organised crime such as the illegal casinos, protection rackets and the tobacco smuggling in the East End at the time. More directly related though is the suspicions of the Dorset Street lodging houses operating as brothels, and more specifically Miller's Court being such. This would provide a reason for the street to be watched. George Hutchinson may have been working on behalf of John McCarthy, either on the 8th of November or afterwards when he came forward and fingered a locally recognisable eccentric.

        John McCarthy may have been operating as police informant against the Fenian's who were operating in London at the time and with whom, as an alleged Irish gang leader, he may have had associations with. You may have illicit money, useful police information (about affairs of state no less, which might be judged as 'more important' than the lives of East End unfortunates) and perhaps organised crime. All the kinds of associations which tend to be found in situations where police corruption is present. I believe John McCarthy attended Abberline's retirement party, by the way.

        Then there's Blotchy... possibly identified (by a modern source and not necessarily reliable) as Henry Buckley, a man employed by John McCarthy as a shopman but some seem to be of the opinion he was McCarthy's hired muscle.
        Some wonder if Blotchy so exactly matched the description of a man who lived in Dorset Street, how he wasn't ever brought into the investigation. He was in police custody for a stabbing in Dorset Street in December 1888. I wonder why the police wouldn't be interested in him, too, but don't necessarily conclude it was because he might not reasonably be considered a suspect.

        A lot of crazy speculation, but if only a little more of it could more definitely proved...

        Comment


        • #79
          Originally posted by Wickerman View Post

          Sean, Joseph Isaacs stayed at the Green Dragon in Barnet on Wednesday night. On Thursday he was arrested for theft and put in jail at Barnet, where he was held until he appeared in court, in Barnet, on Monday.

          There just is not any way Isaacs could have been involved.

          Alternately, I suppose it could be argued that Hutchinson described Isaacs as Astrachan in order to incriminate him, that's about the only way we can associate Isaacs with Kelly's murder.
          That hypothesis would require that Hutchinson knew Isaacs, which we cannot demonstrate at the moment.
          Isaacs definitely is not a credible suspect. As you say, he was not at his freedom on November the 8th.

          Hutchinson may have known Isaacs, at least to have seen him in the street to be able to give a recognisable description (he would have been distinctive in his appearance, no?) but it just as possible Hutchinson knew Mary Cusins the lodging house deputy in Paternoster Row who had this suspicious lodger and / or Cornelius Oakes her lodger who backed up her claim Isaacs was suspicious and threatened violence against women, and that's where he picked up the description to provide to the police.

          Hutchinson came forward after the inquest. So, if the Mary Kelly backstory given at the inquest was intended to protect anyone it might more likely be thought to be Blotchy. Which raises the possibility that the Astrachan Man story may also have been to divert suspicion away from Blotchy.
          Last edited by seanr; 06-21-2021, 01:06 PM.

          Comment


          • #80
            I'd bet good money Mary Cusins knew John McCarthy.

            Comment


            • #81
              Perhaps at risk at derailing the thread, but I do consider the point as to whether Astrakhan Man was correctly identified with Joseph Isaacs to be relevant. Here's a report from Lloyd's Weekly Newspaper on 16th of December, 1888. The article points out that Isaacs' 'appearance certainly answered to the published description of a man with an astrachan trimming to his coat'.

              Mary Cusins remembered on the night of the murder, she heard Joseph Isaacs walking about his room. We now know she was at best mistaken, as Joseph Isaacs was not in his room on the night of the murder. He was in police custody on the charge of stealing a coat. Cornelius Oakes supports her claims and a resident named Catherine made serious accusations against him.

              So, did some of the lodging house residents try to implicate a local eccentric? And was George Hutchinson part of that effort? - it might be impossible to prove, of course. But I can't easily dismiss the possibility, either.





              Comment


              • #82
                As an aside, what was it with the kitchens at lodging houses? - that's where Isaacs made his strange remarks, Annie Chapman had a fight and Alexander Munroe was fatally wounded when he fell on a knife.

                I guess kitchen's were where all the action was.
                Last edited by seanr; 06-21-2021, 03:41 PM.

                Comment


                • #83
                  Originally posted by seanr View Post

                  Isaacs definitely is not a credible suspect.
                  As a suspect no, pretty poor in fact.


                  Hutchinson may have known Isaacs, at least to have seen him in the street to be able to give a recognisable description (he would have been distinctive in his appearance, no?)..
                  Hutch did say he recognised the man, which makes you wonder just how many Astrachan-looking men lived in the neighborhood, besides Isaacs?


                  Hutchinson came forward after the inquest. So, if the Mary Kelly backstory given at the inquest was intended to protect anyone it might more likely be thought to be Blotchy. Which raises the possibility that the Astrachan Man story may also have been to divert suspicion away from Blotchy.
                  I think that is less likely, Sarah Lewis saw Kelly with a man as Hutchinson looked on, so we know Astrachan was not an invention - he existed.
                  We could query whether the actual suspect was dressed so ostentatiously as Hutchinson described.
                  Regards, Jon S.

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Originally posted by Wickerman View Post

                    As a suspect no, pretty poor in fact.




                    Hutch did say he recognised the man, which makes you wonder just how many Astrachan-looking men lived in the neighborhood, besides Isaacs?




                    I think that is less likely, Sarah Lewis saw Kelly with a man as Hutchinson looked on, so we know Astrachan was not an invention - he existed.
                    We could query whether the actual suspect was dressed so ostentatiously as Hutchinson described.
                    Sarah Lewis did not know Mary Kelly. She said she saw a man with a woman at the bottom of Dorset Street, a man she knew as he had previously behaved suspiciously towards her in Bethnal Green but the woman could have been anyone. It can't have been astrachan man she saw though - her man wore no overcoat.
                    Last edited by seanr; 06-21-2021, 04:19 PM.

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Originally posted by seanr View Post

                      Well, I note that Astrachan Man is very definitely associated with Joseph Isaacs who was said to have answered the description given by George Hutchinson but turned out to have a cast iron alibi (was at her majesty's pleasure) on November the 8th, but had also stayed at a local lodging house so his description might be known to local people. His description may have been singularly distinctive... what are the chances of two Astrachan Men in the East End at the time?

                      You may also note that in the case of the Kitty Ronan murder at Miller's Court in 1909, there was coincidentally again a man stood in Dorset Street opposite Miller's Court; we have Alfred Wilkins as a witness apparently seeing the victim with a man before entering the court and waiting until he sees the man leave.

                      Almost every picture we have, whether illustration or photograph, appears to have a chair or a group of women sat outside Miller's Court. In George Duckworth's walk through Dorset Street the PC guiding him notes a woman who has always sat staring out of the window (of what maybe Crossingham's lodging house) for years. The street seems like it is under constant watch.

                      Then add a dose of the claims the lodging house keepers, specifically John McCarthy were 'gang' leaders. McCarthy was certainly involved in illegal boxing... which may also suggest illegal sports betting and so maybe the more organised crime such as the illegal casinos, protection rackets and the tobacco smuggling in the East End at the time. More directly related though is the suspicions of the Dorset Street lodging houses operating as brothels, and more specifically Miller's Court being such. This would provide a reason for the street to be watched. George Hutchinson may have been working on behalf of John McCarthy, either on the 8th of November or afterwards when he came forward and fingered a locally recognisable eccentric.

                      John McCarthy may have been operating as police informant against the Fenian's who were operating in London at the time and with whom, as an alleged Irish gang leader, he may have had associations with. You may have illicit money, useful police information (about affairs of state no less, which might be judged as 'more important' than the lives of East End unfortunates) and perhaps organised crime. All the kinds of associations which tend to be found in situations where police corruption is present. I believe John McCarthy attended Abberline's retirement party, by the way.

                      Then there's Blotchy... possibly identified (by a modern source and not necessarily reliable) as Henry Buckley, a man employed by John McCarthy as a shopman but some seem to be of the opinion he was McCarthy's hired muscle.
                      Some wonder if Blotchy so exactly matched the description of a man who lived in Dorset Street, how he wasn't ever brought into the investigation. He was in police custody for a stabbing in Dorset Street in December 1888. I wonder why the police wouldn't be interested in him, too, but don't necessarily conclude it was because he might not reasonably be considered a suspect.

                      A lot of crazy speculation, but if only a little more of it could more definitely proved...
                      Thanks seanr. That's a lot to digest!

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Originally posted by seanr View Post

                        Sarah Lewis did not know Mary Kelly. She said she saw a man with a woman at the bottom of Dorset Street, a man she knew as he had previously behaved suspiciously towards her in Bethnal Green but the woman could have been anyone. It can't have been astrachan man she saw though - her man wore no overcoat.
                        It's the other sighting at Miller's Court I'm talking about.
                        Regards, Jon S.

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Originally posted by Wickerman View Post
                          I think that is less likely, Sarah Lewis saw Kelly with a man as Hutchinson looked on, so we know Astrachan was not an invention - he existed.
                          We could query whether the actual suspect was dressed so ostentatiously as Hutchinson described.
                          Hi Jon,

                          If Hutch had only come forward because he had been seen loitering by Sarah Lewis [which is what some suspect theorists believe], he'd have been taking a risk if he gave a totally false description of the man with MJK, given that Lewis also saw the couple.

                          Love,

                          Caz
                          X

                          "Comedy is simply a funny way of being serious." Peter Ustinov


                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Originally posted by erobitha View Post
                            As I'm the proponent of the Mary Thomas theory which Martyn feels is a waste of time, I can assure you whilst it is pain-staking, I do believe I am making headway and producing good evidence is time-consuming. That's the nature of evidence versus theory.
                            If I was on the Emerald Isle, I'd bite the bullet, park myself in front of a microfilm reader, and go through the painful task of studying every page of every Limerick newspaper, 11 Nov 1888- 31 January 1889, and see if something hasn't been missed.

                            If there is a trace left to be found, I suspect it will be found locally, either in County Limerick or in Wales.

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Originally posted by caz View Post

                              Hi Jon,

                              If Hutch had only come forward because he had been seen loitering by Sarah Lewis [which is what some suspect theorists believe], he'd have been taking a risk if he gave a totally false description of the man with MJK, given that Lewis also saw the couple.

                              Love,

                              Caz
                              X
                              Agreed, it's just a shame Lewis was not close enough to describe the man.
                              Mrs McCarthy did say "such a funny man" was seen in the court this morning.
                              Bowyer saw a man in the court at 3:00am ("who's description tallies with that of the supposed murderer"), he described the man to Abberline. This was reported in the Echo, on the 14th. The only suspect in the papers on the 13th & 14th was Hutchinson's "Astrachan".
                              It would appear then that Bowyer had also confirmed Hutchinson's story in so far as how the man looked.
                              As Bowyer saw the man around 3:00am, but makes no mention of Kelly, it may be Bowyer had seen him leaving.
                              Regards, Jon S.

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                Originally posted by Debra A View Post



                                I do recall, but can't find it now, that Alice gave her exact age in her sworn testimony (x years and x months, or x months from her x birthday, something like that) it would be useful if anyone can find that again as Alice was born 28 April 1866 and this could then be compared. A more precise age other than about 17 was definitely given in one source at least.
                                Just to tie up this loose end. I found the report I mentioned above and during cross examination by by Mr J.O. Byrne at hearing in January 1883; when asked how old she was, Alice replied that she would be seventeen years of age next April. The Alice Carroll I traced was born 28 April 1866, meaning she would have turned seventeen in April 1883.
                                Derry Journal 29/01/83
                                ,,`,, Debs ,,`,,

                                I am not DJA. He's called Dave.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X