It wasnt Kelly theory

[GBinOz]

From The Echo 10 Nov 1888:

Many persons who have been interviewed, state that the unfortunate woman never left her house at Dorset-street after she had entered it on Thursday night, while, on the other hand, numerous persons, who declare that they were companions of the deceased and know her well, state that she came out of her house at eight o'clock on Friday morning for provisions, and furthermore, that they were drinking with her in the Britannia, a local tavern, at ten o'clock on the same morning as her mutilated body was found at eleven.

The circumstances connected with the tragedy are more mysterious than ever. Some persons have reiterated the statement that the unfortunate woman was seen between eight and nine o'clock yesterday morning. One of her companions, more positive than the rest saw Mary Jane Kelly at nine o'clock, and the officers of justice are this afternoon inquiring into the truth or otherwise of the woman's assertion. From the nature of the mutilations and the loss of blood the doctors can only form a very vague idea as to the time when death actually occurred. If, as assured, the crime actually took place in daylight time, the miscreant could only have completed his work - which, it is calculated, could scarcely have been done in less time than an hour - a few minutes before the ghastly discovery was made.

[Wickerman]

Throw in Occam's Razor on top of all those "dunnos" and the conclusion is that it was MJK. That should be the default position until proven otherwise.

c.d.

Then wouldn't we have found her in some records, somewhere?

[Wickerman]

Can't possibly contradict Joseph Barnett, Kelly it was.

All that means is he identified a woman who went by the name Kelly, not that it was her true name.

[Wickerman]

Following on from another post/thread

Hi wulfy
Lord orsam did an analysis of the Marice Lewis and maxwell sightings of Kelly, and if Im not mistaken, concluded that Lewis was not reliable and was probably parrotting maxwell and or news accounts....

M.Lewis's account was in the Friday evening papers, whereas Maxwell's did not appear in print until Saturday. Though I do agree there is something amiss with Lewis's account. It was Maxwell who went for milk, not Kelly. So, rather than Lewis being confused about who he saw, I would look to the reporter who messed up his reporting and confused a sighting of Maxwell with that of Kelly.

[Varqm]

All that means is he identified a woman who went by the name Kelly, not that it was her true name.

The argument is who was the dead woman in Millers Court, the one Barnett lived with or not. It has little to do with names.

[mpriestnall]

Yes but that was Norman Galileo the stand up comedian for Rochdale.

Very good!

[mpriestnall]

Hi Martyn!

I thought you might have some input on this thread!

Quite. I can resist anything but temptation...

[Aethelwulf]

Annie seemed quite distraught, and claimed she was attacked by Jack the Ripper, as her throat was lightly cut and bleeding. The crowds of George Street once again thought the Ripper had struck and gone free, and it wouldn't be long before panic overtook reason.

The police, however, were skeptical of her claims, as her injury was quite superficial and done with a blunt blade, quite unlike the Ripper's deep wounds with a sharp weapon. And once it was discovered that she was hiding coins in her mouth, it was concluded she had attempted to steal from the man and, once discovered, lightly brushed her own throat with a blunt knife and screamed "Murder!" at her client, accusing him of being Jack the Ripper. The man, understandably frightened due to the very salient possibility of lynching, left as quick as possible.

So as not to derail a new thread have a look at the Bury's neck thread where we discussed this and concluded that it was Bury.

[The Baron]

Can't possibly contradict Joseph Barnett, Kelly it was.

The best post in this thread!



The Baron

[Wickerman]

The argument is who was the dead woman in Millers Court, the one Barnett lived with or not. It has little to do with names.

I think it's kind of redundant to argue whether the body was really Kelly, when Kelly wasn't really Kelly anyway.

[mpriestnall]

I think it's kind of redundant to argue whether the body was really Kelly, when Kelly wasn't really Kelly anyway.

The official line was the Miller's Court victim was the partner of Barnett. The partner who shared No 13 for x number of months.

It wasn't. Like Varqm said the name is immaterial.

[Simon Wood]

Hi Jon S.,

If Kelly really was Kelly, by now Debra Arif would have tracked her down.

Simon

[Wickerman]

The official line was the Miller's Court victim was the partner of Barnett. The partner who shared No 13 for x number of months.

It wasn't. Like Varqm said the name is immaterial.

It wasn't?
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

[GBinOz]

The Echo from 10 Nov 1888 stated:
numerous persons, who declare that they were companions of the deceased and know her well, state that she came out of her house at eight o'clock on Friday morning for provisions, and furthermore, that they were drinking with her in the Britannia, a local tavern, at ten o'clock on the same morning as her mutilated body was found at eleven.

Maxwell's testimony was rock solid. How many others may have presented similar testimony at the inquest had it not been ended prematurely.

Elizabeth Prater told the press she heard nothing, but testified she was sleeping soundly when disturbed by a kitten and heard a shout of murder. Sarah Lewis also testified she heard a shout of "murder". Both testified that they took no notice.
Julia Vanturney testified she heard no screams of "murder", and Mary Ann Cox testified: [Coroner] Did you go to sleep ? - No; I was upset. I did not undress at all. I did not sleep at all. I must have heard what went on in the court. I heard no noise or cry of "Murder," but men went out to work in the market.
Hardly convincing evidence to establish a 4am ToD.

This was originally posted by jerryd here:https://forum.casebook.org/forum/rip...nington-street
************************
Mary Kelly's return to Pennington Street

07-03-2021, 01:16 PM
Hull Daily Mail
Nov 12, 1888


Anyone care to comment on why Mary Kelly returned to take a bed at Mrs. McCarthy's in Pennington Street at 2 a.m. with a strange man? Was this while she was with Barnett or after he left? Why would she need a private room in her old stomping grounds when she had one in Miller's Court? "
******************************************

Could the "short time ago" conceivably be 2am in the morning of 10 Nov? Was the 2s a thank you, goodbye and farewell gesture? Almost certainly just coincidence, but this is from the inquest:
Maria Harvey:
[Coroner] Were you in the house when Joe Barnett called ? - Yes. I said, "Well, Mary Jane, I shall not see you this evening again," and I left with her two men's dirty shirts, a little boy's shirt, a black overcoat, a black crepe bonnet with black satin strings, a pawn-ticket for a grey shawl upon which 2s had been lent, and a little girls white petticoat.

On one hand there is solid consistent testimony by Maxwell, which was corroborated by Maurice Lewis, and possibly others, which is difficult to just dismiss. On the other hand there is unconvincing testimony regarding screams of "murder" by two women that are contradicted by two other women. There is an ID made by a partner in horrific circumstances when he knew who he was there to identify, and medical ToD's, which seem to be scorned by many posters, that are broad and conflicting.

I think we have three choices:

1. MJK was murdered about 4am and Maxwell, Lewis and possibly others were all lying or mistaken.

2. Maxwell, Lewis and possibly others were correct and MJK was murdered after their sightings.

3. Someone else was murdered and MJK took the opportunity to disappear either from fear or the desire to start again somewhere else.

Cheers, George

[mpriestnall]

It wasn't?
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

I'm working on it!