MJK’s appearance

[Natasha]

Why are there two different descriptions of her appearance? “Tall, pretty and fair as a lilly” said by McCarthy & Prater, and “Short, stout and dark with protruding teeth" said by Elizabeth Phoenix and Maurice Lewis

Caroline Maxwell said she (MJK) had a speech impediment. Could this be because of her accent or her teeth? If the protrusion was slight then I feel no one would have commented on it, so for this purpose I’m going to opt for an obvious protrusion.

For what purpose would Lewis lie? He said he knew Kelly for 5 years and phoenix knew Kelly 3 years before Kelly moved away.
Lewis said that he saw this woman entering 13 Millers court and of course Caroline Maxwell saw her as well, contradicting the doctor‘s verdict of time of death. So who was this woman, if it wasn’t Kelly? Could she have something to do with the murder?

If the death picture taken at millers court is real, then I think the description given by McCarthy and Prater of Kelly is correct. The legs look like that of a tall woman, and the limbs are quite slim. Also the mouth was closed, and I feel judging by what is visible in the picture, that would rule out protruding teeth.

[packers stem]

Hi Natasha
The descriptions do appear worlds apart as you say.
I've never doubted Maxwell,but McCarthy was her landlord and obviously he wouldn't have reason to give a false description....would he??

All the best

[Natasha]

This might sound mad, but would it be possible that Mary Eleanor Wheeler Pearcey was mistaken for Kelly by Lewis & Phoenix? As you know she has been put forward as a possible suspect. There are similarities in regards to what Lewis and Phoenix said of the description.
Wheeler was described as 5ft 6"tall, 9 stone, with russet hair and blue eyes, she also has protruding teeth.

[Sam Flynn]

Why are there two different descriptions of her appearance? “Tall, pretty and fair as a lilly” said by McCarthy & Prater, and “Short, stout and dark with protruding teeth" said by Elizabeth Phoenix and Maurice Lewis.

Mrs Phśnix (actually "Felix", as the Sheldens have discovered) described Kelly as being about 5' 7" - hardly short, even by today's standards. In addition, "rather stout" might simply mean well-built - which she certainly seems to be in the photograph, judging by her shins and forearms.

As to protruding teeth, (a) I know of a number of women with protruding teeth who are also fair and pretty; and (b) she may have lost those teeth at some point after leaving Breezer's Hill. Particularly if they were dentures.

I'd trust Felix's description, for she seems to have known a lot about Kelly's back-story which checks out. With Maurice Lewis, I'm not so sure.

[Natasha]

Mrs Phśnix (actually "Felix", as the Sheldens have discovered) described Kelly as being about 5' 7" - hardly short, even by today's standards. In addition, "rather stout" might simply mean well-built - which she certainly seems to be in the photograph, judging by her shins and forearms.

As to protruding teeth, (a) I know of a number of women with protruding teeth who are also fair and pretty; and (b) she may have lost those teeth at some point after leaving Breezer's Hill. Particularly if they were dentures.

I'd trust Felix's description, for she seems to have known a lot about Kelly's back-story which checks out. With Maurice Lewis, I'm not so sure.

Hi

I’m not saying the protrusion of the teeth is necessarily classed as ugly, I’m just pointing out that it is obviously a distinguishing feature, and it isn’t mentioned in the reports and the picture doesn’t display this

I discounted the loss of teeth, because there seems to be no mention of it in the autopsy reports and I feel that Barnett would have commented on it, in regards to identifying her.

She could have had a set of dentures (in place of lost teeth) which may have contributed to a possible speech impediment, but again it isn’t mentioned in the report.

I agree with the height thing

In regards to being stout: stout has a couple of connotations, the first, being big boned, and the other referring to weight. I apply my suggestion to weight based on the description account made by Lewis & phoenix/Felix

The picture indicates long limbs, which can be perceived as being based on bone mass

[DVV]

I'd trust Felix's description, for she seems to have known a lot about Kelly's back-story which checks out.

Indeed, Gareth.
But apparently she didn't know her fiancé was the tallest man in London.

[Sam Flynn]

I’m just pointing out that it is obviously a distinguishing feature, and it isn’t mentioned in the reports and the picture doesn’t display this

To be fair, Natasha, the photograph doesn't show much at all - such is the carnage.

I discounted the loss of teeth, because there seems to be no mention of it in the autopsy reports and I feel that Barnett would have commented on it, in regards to identifying her.

Good point, but (a) the report isn't exhaustive; and (b) if Barnett could already positively identify her by hair/ear and eyes, the police surely wouldn't have subjected him to any further distress by insisting on more points of ID.

In regards to being stout: stout has a couple of connotations, the first, being big boned, and the other referring to weight. I apply my suggestion to weight based on the description account made by Lewis & phoenix/Felix

To me, there's nothing in Mrs Felix's description that suggests Kelly was fat.

Maurice Lewis, I believe, was simply mistaken. He puts Kelly at a mere 5' 3", which doesn't match the woman on the bed at all. He says he'd known Kelly for 5 years, which is very unlikely, unless he'd been shadowing her every move since her days in the Ratcliff Highway. To cap it all, he was also adamant that he'd seen Kelly hours after her apparent death. A most unreliable witness.

[Sally]

The hair in the photograph is quite distinctive - I'd guess Barnett probably did mean hair rather than ears. It looks as though it would have been of a light colour and curly in life.

[Natasha]

To be fair, Natasha, the photograph doesn't show much at all - such is the carnage.Good point, but (a) the report isn't exhaustive; and (b) if Barnett could already positively identify her by hair/ear and eyes, the police surely wouldn't have subjected him to any further distress by insisting on more points of ID.
To me, there's nothing in Mrs Felix's description that suggests Kelly was fat.

Maurice Lewis, I believe, was simply mistaken. He puts Kelly at a mere 5' 3", which doesn't match the woman on the bed at all. He says he'd known Kelly for 5 years, which is very unlikely, unless he'd been shadowing her every move since her days in the Ratcliff Highway. To cap it all, he was also adamant that he'd seen Kelly hours after her apparent death. A most unreliable witness.

Hi

The picture isn't clear, but it does look like the mouth is closed. I take that Bond's report isn't exhaustive, I have questioned where the other reports are before.

I don't think Barnett would not need to view the body to describe if teeth were missing, he could have said to the coroner, a few teeth are missing at the front etc. Also if Barnett really did care for Kelly, would it not be feasible that he would have hoped the body wasn't her, and would try to discount it by describing distinguishing features etc

I have always thought of stout in terms of weight. I would think that if they didn't mean weight they would have used another terminology.

What do you think about the theory that Lewis & Phoenix had mistaken Kelly for someone else?

[Sam Flynn]

I have always thought of stout in terms of weight. I would think that if they didn't mean weight they would have used another terminology.

Perhaps not in 19th Century usage, Natasha. We have to factor into our thinking the way in which words change over time. (Only today, Wickerman has made an interesting post about the way in which "afternoon" was used in previous centuries, for example.) "Stout" could mean robust; haughty; healthy; and - yes - "heavy", but the latter usage does not follow unavoidably. Anyhow, as observed, Kelly's forearms and shins were rather chunky, so it's not inconceivable that she was well-built - "stout" in that sense, rather than in the sense of "overweight".

What do you think about the theory that Lewis & Phoenix had mistaken Kelly for someone else?

Mrs Felix, no; Maurice Lewis, almost certainly. I don't think they were describing the same person, anyway.

[The Good Michael]

Anyhow, as observed, Kelly's forearms and shins were rather chunky, so it's not inconceivable that she was well-built - "stout" in that sense, rather than in the sense of "overweight".

that's just opinion of course. I opt for 'overweight' as the meaning though I believe only one source called her stout. Then we have 'stout-looking' describing the man near the Court, which I take to mean, 'Looking brave or fearless' rather than 'fat-looking'. I say this because someone is either fat or not in a witness' opinion, rather than fat-looking. Yet, that is an aside and not for this thread/

Mike

[Wickerman]

Why are there two different descriptions of her appearance? “Tall, pretty and fair as a lilly” said by McCarthy & Prater, and “Short, stout and dark with protruding teeth" said by Elizabeth Phoenix and Maurice Lewis

There was no standard definition for height, if McCarthy & Prater were short, then Kelly was tall. Likewise, if Felix & Lewis were tall & skinny, then Kelly was short and stout.
What a witness describes is often with respect to themselves in so far as height & build are concerned.
On the other hand, just to confuse the issue even more, I suspect the woman seen in the morning by M. Lewis & Mrs. McCarthy was a different woman.

As Dr. Bond observed her 'ears partially removed', this mutilation would not help in identification. Barnet most likely said "hair", her most obvious and distinguishing feature.

[Natasha]

Perhaps not in 19th Century usage, Natasha. We have to factor into our thinking the way in which words change over time. (Only today, Wickerman has made an interesting post about the way in which "afternoon" was used in previous centuries, for example.) "Stout" could mean robust; haughty; healthy; and - yes - "heavy", but the latter usage does not follow unavoidably. Anyhow, as observed, Kelly's forearms and shins were rather chunky, so it's not inconceivable that she was well-built - "stout" in that sense, rather than in the sense of "overweight".
Mrs Felix, no; Maurice Lewis, almost certainly. I don't think they were describing the same person, anyway.

Hi

You & Wickerman do indeed highlight some interesting points in relation to the use of language back then. So I get your point.

It is Lewis who had me questioning his account of what he saw, according to him he knew Kelly or at least a Kelly. He said he saw Kelly enter Millers Court, so that made me wonder, why he would say this if it wasn’t Kelly. Could it be that there was a woman who was involved with Kelly's death?

[Natasha]

There was no standard definition for height, if McCarthy & Prater were short, then Kelly was tall. Likewise, if Felix & Lewis were tall & skinny, then Kelly was short and stout.
What a witness describes is often with respect to themselves in so far as height & build are concerned.
On the other hand, just to confuse the issue even more, I suspect the woman seen in the morning by M. Lewis & Mrs. McCarthy was a different woman.

As Dr. Bond observed her 'ears partially removed', this mutilation would not help in identification. Barnet most likely said "hair", her most obvious and distinguishing feature.

Hi Wickerman

Again you make an interesting point

I’m also thinking that maybe there was another woman

In regards to Kelly's ears, I also don't think it would be a definite means of identification due to the damage caused.

[Wickerman]

.... Anyhow, as observed, Kelly's forearms and shins were rather chunky, so it's not inconceivable that she was well-built - "stout" in that sense, rather than in the sense of "overweight".

Or as my mother would often say, "big boned".