Antonia Alexander offers supposed photo of Mary Kelly.

[GUT]

G'day Pinkmoon

Thought you had two chances, good to see that they have some standards.

[pinkmoon]

shocked to say the least

Just had email from amazon to say they are removing the fifth victim from my kindle account and I will have cost refunded to my card in next 3 days also they said they were sorry a good result for common sense .

[Barnaby]

Hi everyone,

I think that's enough of ALL time wasted on this
Jenni

Jenni, your work certainly wasn't wasted exposing this. Thanks!

[GUT]

G'day Jenni

That might be my fault about the Non-fiction, sorry, I've only seen the book twice and both times it was shelved with Fiction so I didn't even pick it up, when I read ripper I want fact.

By the sounds of it I should be thankful.

[pinkmoon]

Hi everyone,
I'm coming late to the party I know, but I can't help myself and have to say something (sorry)

Firstly, I'm not sure where the idea that "Antonia Alexander" said the woman in the picture at the top of this thread was Mary Kelly came from. But to be clear it is a picture of Mary "Lizzie" Williams (nee Hughes) the wife of Sir John Williams and this is a fact and a matter of public record. It is from one of the archives, I assume the National Library of Wales, but am working from memory (in other words the copyright on the image doesn't belong to Tony Williams which I am not sure if someone may have thought).

Secondly, just on the point of my article from last year and what that showed and the notion expressed earlier in the thread that this book was not marketed as NON fiction. It was (and as far as I know still is)certainly marketed as non-fiction, in fact my copy says true crime on the back and the true story of what really happened on the front.

I know the beginning of the book reads like a novel (AND in fact the article demonstrates why, it is because it is lifted from Tony Williams novel Shadow of and Angel) This is by the by the fact is this book has been sold to the public as written by a direct descendant of Mary Kelly, when it is anything but. This can be seen on amazon and other online retailers (even John Blake's catalogue which I have a copy of from the months prior to publication has it listed as True crime). I honestly don't know how that stands legally speaking (or the fact that most of the text is directly lifted from Uncle Jack)

I'm really not blowing my own trumpet, but I do urge anyone who is remotely taken in by "Antonia Alexander" and what "she" has to say to read my article.

http://www.ripperologist.biz/fifth_victim.pdf

I think that's enough of ALL time wasted on this
Jenni

Thanks jenni for your research in am going to contact amazon regarding a refund it's not the money with me it's the principal .

[Jenni Shelden]

Hi everyone,
I'm coming late to the party I know, but I can't help myself and have to say something (sorry)

Firstly, I'm not sure where the idea that "Antonia Alexander" said the woman in the picture at the top of this thread was Mary Kelly came from. But to be clear it is a picture of Mary "Lizzie" Williams (nee Hughes) the wife of Sir John Williams and this is a fact and a matter of public record. It is from one of the archives, I assume the National Library of Wales, but am working from memory (in other words the copyright on the image doesn't belong to Tony Williams which I am not sure if someone may have thought).

Secondly, just on the point of my article from last year and what that showed and the notion expressed earlier in the thread that this book was not marketed as NON fiction. It was (and as far as I know still is)certainly marketed as non-fiction, in fact my copy says true crime on the back and the true story of what really happened on the front.

I know the beginning of the book reads like a novel (AND in fact the article demonstrates why, it is because it is lifted from Tony Williams novel Shadow of and Angel) This is by the by the fact is this book has been sold to the public as written by a direct descendant of Mary Kelly, when it is anything but. This can be seen on amazon and other online retailers (even John Blake's catalogue which I have a copy of from the months prior to publication has it listed as True crime). I honestly don't know how that stands legally speaking (or the fact that most of the text is directly lifted from Uncle Jack)

I'm really not blowing my own trumpet, but I do urge anyone who is remotely taken in by "Antonia Alexander" and what "she" has to say to read my article.

http://www.ripperologist.biz/fifth_victim.pdf

I think that's enough of ALL time wasted on this
Jenni

[Sally]

Thanks Sam, Pink,

Pink:

We march tomorrow night!!!!! On a serious note if someone did discover Kelly's descendants or if indeed her descendents did come forward because of books like the fifth victim we would think "here we go again" and it wouldn't be believed books like this cheapen and harm proper authors work and research.

I think it would be sensible to exercise caution if somebody came forward claiming to be descended from Kelly - have you seen the thread from a couple of years ago on an alleged photograph of Mary Kelly?

http://forum.casebook.org/showthread...hlight=alleged

That's a prime example of somebody coming forward who wasn't, as it turned out, to be trusted. However, I should think that if the cliam was genuine, it would become clear fairly quickly - there are seasoned researchers interested in Ripperology who would be difficult to fool for long.

Sam:

The funny/sad thing is that (as Neal Shelden's tireless work has shown) many descendants are very surprised to find out that they have a Ripper victim in the family.

Yes, so it would seem. It appears that it was something that people didn't necessarily want to talk about - and that's entirely understandable.

Doesn't help us much now though!

[pinkmoon]

Great idea Pink - I'm pretty sure you'll get a lot of volunteers!

Whilst the 'Antonia Alexander' affair is pretty reprehensible, I wonder if we should really be surprised? There's a public appetite for this sort of sensationalism; and 'Jack the Ripper' is prime territory for it because the identity of the killer has never been discovered. Same goes for Kelly - she remains unidentified.

Still, she had relatives - she had parents, and by her own account, siblings. Somebody must have known who she was at the time - for all we know, somebody out there does actually know who she was. Perhaps one day they'll come forward and put an end to the mystery.

We can live in hope, at least.

We march tomorrow night!!!!! On a serious note if someone did discover Kelly's descendants or if indeed her descendents did come forward because of books like the fifth victim we would think "here we go again" and it wouldn't be believed books like this cheapen and harm proper authors work and research.

[Sam Flynn]

Still, she had relatives - she had parents, and by her own account, siblings. Somebody must have known who she was at the time - for all we know, somebody out there does actually know who she was.

The funny/sad thing is that (as Neal Shelden's tireless work has shown) many descendants are very surprised to find out that they have a Ripper victim in the family.

As you say, let's live in hope that this won't prove true for Mary Kelly.

[Sally]

I'm trying to get a savage angry mob together so we can go and lynch the so called author if you are interested get in touch.

Great idea Pink - I'm pretty sure you'll get a lot of volunteers!

Whilst the 'Antonia Alexander' affair is pretty reprehensible, I wonder if we should really be surprised? There's a public appetite for this sort of sensationalism; and 'Jack the Ripper' is prime territory for it because the identity of the killer has never been discovered. Same goes for Kelly - she remains unidentified.

Still, she had relatives - she had parents, and by her own account, siblings. Somebody must have known who she was at the time - for all we know, somebody out there does actually know who she was. Perhaps one day they'll come forward and put an end to the mystery.

We can live in hope, at least.

[Carol]

Sausages. That didn't work either. I give up.
Carol

[Sam Flynn]

Whoever the woman in that photo is, she appears to be from a rather well-to-do family, comfortably off if not fabulously wealthy. Of course it's possible that "Mary Kelly" suffered a fall from grace not all that long after the photo was taken, but, realistically-speaking how likely is that?

I'd expect a late-teens/early-20s photo of Mary Kelly to have more the stamp of Annie Chapman than Annie Besant, which is more like what we've got here.

[pinkmoon]

Thank you, pinkmoon.

Carol

I'm trying to get a savage angry mob together so we can go and lynch the so called author if you are interested get in touch.

[Carol]

Nice try Carol we don't need to see this photo to know that this story is made up.

Thank you, pinkmoon.

Carol

[pinkmoon]

Nice try Carol we don't need to see this photo to know that this story is made up.