was Mary Kelly really murdered

[Simon Wood]

Hi DRoy,

All the evidence proves is that someone was murdered at Millers Court.

Regards,

Simon

[miss c]

Hi once again,
i am really enjoying hearing all the different points of view , its nice to have people to discuss these things with even if they don't necessarily agree,
here is a little theory i have been working on or at least trying too lol.
i already know how unlikely if not completely impossible this theory is but sometimes it is fun to play around with ideas, i have not shared this line of thinking before for fear of ridicule but where else but amongst other jack the ripper enthusiasts can i,
so here it goes..
Firstly this goes with the Jill the ripper theory, whilst investigating this line of thinkin i realised how little, if anything we really know about Mary Kelly, so what if Jill the ripper was Mary Kelly, and that's why there are so many issues with her murder,
im ready for all comments lol, i know this is highly unlikely but an interesting twist on the whole case.
Miss c

[DRoy]

Miss C,

And that ostensibly that everyone is so quick to discount this as real evidence with no real reason.

What evidence? Do you mean Maxwell? She said she only talked with MJK a couple times before over a four month period. Maurice Lewis? He said he saw MJK at 8am and then 10:00am. He also claims he saw Mary and Barnett the previous night at the Horn of Plenty public house but Barnett was actually playing whist at a friends house.

It is highly unlikely that the witness could be wrong about the day as she gave her statement that very day and im sure she would not be mistaken about that. Also its pure speculation that she didn't know her well enough to be sure as i know people myself that i only know vaugly but would still recognise them in passing.

Yes it is speculation. But what makes more sense? She knew her and therefore the police and doctors are all wrong...or...the person she thought was MJK wasn't?

Also i have read various accounts, although i am unable to find names sorry, of there who are also meant to have seen her on the morning on the 9th but were not allowed to give testimony at the inquest so this may not be isolated incident of only one or two sightings.

Maxwell and Lewis. There was another person but can't recall who it was or whether they were ever named. It's not about being allowed to testify at the inquest, there was no benefit to do so. Based on your theory of allowing everyone to testify, we would have had a circus of people telling rubbish stories like Mary had a child, lived on the second story, etc.

Add to this the fact Mary Kelly often had other woman staying at her address and the way her face was destroyed beyond recognition then i think its fair to say that there is a strong possibility that it may not have been her who was murdered.

The people that visited Mary testified. They are alive! If they're alive then who's dead? Or are you suggesting Mary took one of her friends place and became them?

I just don't understand why people are so quick to discount this as real evidence and discount it so easily.

I think it's quite easy to discount it because it isn't evidence at all. All the evidence proves MJK was murdered.

Phil H has a true and good reason to question Maxwell's story. There could very well be more to that story. That theory has much more weight than MJK being alive.

Cheers
DRoy

[richardnunweek]

Hello Miss C,
First of all welcome to the boards,
I agree that the murder at Millers court is a complex mystery, but the Mary Kelly enigma is the most discussed out of the others.
During all the years that I have been a member, the entire episode has been discussed countless times, every single witness has been dissected , and a huge amount of speculative posts have found there way on to this site.
I appreciate that some threads appear not to have taken off, and it can be frustrating when one feels that . [ Its happened to me many times], but you have started one that is very popular, so that need not apply.
Regards Richard.

[curious]

I just don't understand why people are so quick to discount this as real evidence and discount it so easily.
Miss c

Hello, Miss C,
Welcome to the boards. Hope you enjoy your time here!

I suspect that when it seems that people are "quick" to discount something, it MAY mean only that they considered it in depth for a long time, arrived at a conclusion that makes sense to them, and are currently intrigued by other facets of this case.

In other words, they were slow to arrive at their conclusion, but have moved on since forming it.

I consider the time frame here very intriguing as it seems reasonable that the body would have been in full rigor at the time of discovery IF the earlier time was correct. Since the body was just going into rigor, it seems to make the daylight sightings possible -- but then you have the unknown because so much flesh was stripped from the body and rigor is a chemical reaction in the muscles.

The discovery of the letter with Maxwell's address has also made me re-consider my opinion of Mrs. Maxwell and her testimony -- she may have thought the life of a loved one was at stake.

I have also considered the possibility that the woman known as MJK was not the person found dead in that room. There seem to be some fair indicators in that direction.

So many people, so many opinions for so many reasons . . .

Good luck with this question and your time here!

curious

[miss c]

apology for misspelled words in post

Sorry bout the spelling blunders in previous post, i really should check my predictive txt before posting which i promise to do from now on.
I also would like to add that i understand that everyone has a different opinion on this matter and i enjoy a good debate but would love some to give this topic some real merit as one of the cases most interesting mysteries
miss c

[miss c]

Sorry bout the spelling blunders in previous post, i really should check my predictive txt before posting which i promise to do from now on.
I also would like to add that i understand that everyone has a different opinion on this matter and i enjoy a good debate but would love some to give this topic some real merit as one of the cases most interesting mysteries

[miss c]

Hi everyone.
Thanks for all your responses but i still fond what your saying is just the point i was trying tp make. And that ostensibly that everyone is so quick to discount this as real evidence with no real reason.
It is highly unlikely that the witness could be wrong about the day as she gave her statement that very day and im sure she would not be mistaken about that. Also its pure speculation that she didn't know her well enough to be sure as i know people myself that i only know vaugly but would still recognise them in passing.
Also i have read various accounts, although i am unable to find names sorry, of there who are also meant to have seen her on the morning on the 9th but were not allowed to give testimony at the inquest so this may not be isolated incident of only one or two sightings.
Add to this the fact Mary Kelly often had other woman staying at her address and the way her face was destroyed beyond recognition then i think its fair to say that there is a strong possibility that it may not have been her who was murdered.
I just don't understand why people are so quick to discount this as real evidence and discount it so easily.
Miss c

[Phil Carter]

Well, miss c, you'll now appreciate why I wrote "Your first question is certainly a vexed one"!

Phil

Hello Phil C

Bang on. Well played.

Hello Miss C,

Welcome to the boards.

You have struck upon one of THE most intruing points of discussion in the case. Many different views there will be i assure you!

Enjoy!


Phil

[Phil H]

Wickerman

My original response to the first post simply asked questions and sought to 8indicate why this issue has been so hotly debated over the years, here and elsewhere.

I think I would have been wrong to suggest that there is no problem, no controversy. Indeed, I lack the certainty of some of my fellow posters on these issues. Some of you may well be right in assuming that the explanation is simple and straightforward. It is an attractive way out. But not everyone, I think, shares that view. So I strove for a balance.

On the question of Mrs M being interviewed soon after her meeting with "MJK", I can only suggest that mistakes can still be made (of various times) or the whole thing could (I do NOT assert this) have been contrived out of whole cloth. I do not know what is right - thus I responded to miss c with what I hoped would be a summary of the situation as I recollected it, seeking not to counsel a new poster (of what level of knowledge or expertise in the case I knew not) down any one path.

Are you saying that was wrong?

Phil

[richardnunweek]

Hi
Realistically there are two explanations for Maxwell's version .
1] Mary Kelly was killed at around 9am
2]She mistook Lizzie Albrook for her.
Version one goes against medical opinion, although that was hardly accurate .
Version two , would surely have been known by Maxwell within a few days.
The police believed that Mary was killed in daylight[Times Nov 12] that is most likely the reason why Mrs Maxwell was asked to attend the inquest, and to give evidence which was in contrast to their own doctors opinion.
The maroon shawl which Maxwell described Kelly wearing that morning was found in room 13, which would suggest that a mistake in identity was not made.
Kelly being 'around' at least one Dorset street lodging house[ as mentioned by Maxwell] was confirmed by a press reports of Mary obtaining money from residents using the ''feel sorry for me '' approach.
The only other explanation has a speculative ring about it, it involves Mrs M lying in order to protect someone who may have been involved, and this uses the 14, Dorset street letter[ Maxwell's address] as its foundation.
My view is that Mrs Maxwell either saw Mary Kelly as stated, or she was lying not for five minutes of fame, but to protect someone.
Regards Richard.

[Wickerman]

Does one believe Mrs M or not? Did she get the day wronbg but the sighting right?

Maxwell was questioned on the same day that she had the sighting.
So because it was the same day, how could she get it wrong?



.

[Phil H]

Well, miss c, you'll now appreciate why I wrote "Your first question is certainly a vexed one"!

Phil

[DRoy]

Simon,

Given events, I'm just wondering why she was allowed to be so publically wrong.

I think I explained that Simon. That is the point of the inquest, establish how she died. Maxwell had something to add that could have affected the decision. That's why she was there.

DRoy

[Simon Wood]

Hi DRoy,

I'm not necessarily suggesting Mrs. Maxwell was right.

Given events, I'm just wondering why she was allowed to be so publically wrong.

Regards,

Simon