MJK1 and MJK3

[GUT]

Hello GUT,

It looks like that to me too, but I am no expert, just a person with two eyes that are apparently in perfect working order.

Does that mean that whoever put this series together on THIS album page clearly didnt have a copy of the STRIDE photo?

I would have thought that Scotland Yard would have had a copy of that at the turn of the century- if by that it means ca.1900 and not ca.2000

Phil

I honestly don't know what it means, but I note that it says as t looked in 2011 and it doesn't "look" like a 120 year old book.

[Stewart P Evans]

Variant

Thank you for supplying the photos.
Question
.
1. Are the numbers printed on the photographs themselves or on the page as a presentation?
I also note that whoever typed the labels of the victims names has changed MJK's middle name to Janette.....

The numbers are not printed on the photographs, they are numbers allocated by the Public Record Office (in 1988) and appear on the mounting page.

Mary Jeanette Kelly was a variant rendering of her name which appears in the official files, as well as Mary Jane Kelly.

[GUT]

The numbers are not printed on the photographs, they are numbers allocated by the Public Record Office (in 1988) and appear on the mounting page.

Mary Jeanette Kelly was a variant rendering of her name which appears in the official files, as well as Mary Jane Kelly.

Thanks Stewart

Also Marie (sp) Jeanette was on her coffin plate I believe.

[Stewart P Evans]

Album

...
Does that mean that whoever put this series together on THIS album page clearly didnt have a copy of the STRIDE photo?
I would have thought that Scotland Yard would have had a copy of that at the turn of the century- if by that it means ca.1900 and not ca.2000
Phil

The album page shown by Rob is the album compiled at the Public Record Office circa 1988.

Scotland Yard was in possession of all the known victim photographs at the turn of the century (1899/1900) and they were mounted in the album (later borrowed by Millen) in the early 20th century, before Millen joined the Metropolitan Police Force in 1933.

The Stride photograph never migrated to the Public Record Office, hence it is not in the album compiled by them in 1988.

Do try and stop making a big mystery out of everything.

[GUT]

Also the name on her death certificate is

"Marie Jeanette Kelly, otherwise Davies".

[Phil Carter]

The numbers are not printed on the photographs, they are numbers allocated by the Public Record Office (in 1988) and appear on the mounting page.

Mary Jeanette Kelly was a variant rendering of her name which appears in the official files, as well as Mary Jane Kelly.

Hello Stewart,

Thank you for the reply

Not one to correct you- nor to in any way cause even the slightest feeling of ill-will nor embarrasrment, but the printed label on that page states JANETTE- not Jeanette.

That is why I noted it.


best wishes

Phil

[Stewart P Evans]

Please...

Hello Stewart,
Thank you for the reply
Not one to correct you- nor to in any way cause even the slightest feeling of ill-will nor embarrasrment, but the printed label on that page states JANETTE- not Jeanette.
That is why I noted it.
best wishes
Phil

Please feel free to correct me whenever you wish.

This misspelling of Jeanette appears to be a typing error in the original album page which was merely copied at the PRO when they prepared their album. Was there any reason that you hadn't noted this on the album page photograph, on this thread, from Shirley Harrison's book? Otherwise I thought you would have commented on that when you noted it (if you noted it).

Do you wish to start a new thread on typing errors and spelling mistakes? Perhaps we could build another conspiracy theory on this.

PS I'm too old to get embarrassed.

[Phil Carter]

The album page shown by Rob is the album compiled at the Public Record Office circa 1988.

Scotland Yard was in possession of all the known victim photographs at the turn of the century (1899/1900) and they were mounted in the album (later borrowed by Millen) in the early 20th century, before Millen joined the Metropolitan Police Force in 1933.

The Stride photograph never migrated to the Public Record Office, hence it is not in the album compiled by them in 1988.

Do try and stop making a big mystery out of everything.

Hello Stewart,

Do forgive me- but my natural cynicism rises to the surface when I quite reasonably consider that this album first made its own worldwide public appearance in THE single most problematic, debated, and controversial book ever entered into the field- The Maybrick Diary... regarded by many experts and enthusiasts alike to have been a massive con. Anything connected to that piece of work in any way raises alarm bells.
Therefore It isn't being in any way unreasonable to question this presentation nor anyone in the seat of knowledge that some of us other mere enthusiasts are not sufficiently up to date upon... ESPECIALLY when connections such as the above occur. The link between the then owners of that album (Black Museum/Scotland Yard) and the Diary book raises the natural question of permission given through allowing the pages to be photographed.

For I am firmly of the belief that only invited guests (and moreso at that time) serving and ex-policemen were allowed to even visit the museum. Total stoicism is not the order of the day when that Diary raises its infamous head. So may I ask who actually took the photograhs of the victims used in Shirley Harrisons book, when and where?
I ask because many of the enthusiasts around the world (including myself) reading these threads have no idea of the exact details of the above. Also because at the moment (thankfully) you are kindly sharing your knowledge with us all.


best wishes

Phil

[Stewart P Evans]

Homework

Hello Stewart,
Do forgive me- but my natural cynicism rises to the surface when I quite reasonably consider that this album first made its own worldwide public appearance in THE single most problematic, debated, and controversial book ever entered into the field- The Maybrick Diary... regarded by many experts and enthusiasts alike to have been a massive con. Anything connected to that piece of work in any way raises alarm bells.
...
Phil

You really should do your homework before entering into debates.

The Harrison book was not the first place the album 'made its own worldwide public appearance'. That occurred some five years earlier when it received huge press publicity, with photographs, on its return to New Scotland Yard.

[Stewart P Evans]

Why...

...
Therefore It isn't being in any way unreasonable to question this presentation nor anyone in the seat of knowledge that some of us other mere enthusiasts are not sufficiently up to date upon... ESPECIALLY when connections such as the above occur. The link between the then owners of that album (Black Museum/Scotland Yard) and the Diary book raises the natural question of permission given through allowing the pages to be photographed.
...
Phil

Why ask me? I had nothing to do with permission being given to photograph the pages. They had appeared widely in the press years earlier, so they were no secret.

[Dave O]

Hi Phil,

A similar variation of Jannette, this one in Macdonald's hand, appears at the top of Joseph Barnett's police statement.

Best,
Dave

[Stewart P Evans]

As I said...

...
For I am firmly of the belief that only invited guests (and moreso at that time) serving and ex-policemen were allowed to even visit the museum. Total stoicism is not the order of the day when that Diary raises its infamous head. So may I ask who actually took the photograhs of the victims used in Shirley Harrisons book, when and where?
I ask because many of the enthusiasts around the world (including myself) reading these threads have no idea of the exact details of the above. Also because at the moment (thankfully) you are kindly sharing your knowledge with us all.
...
Phil

The Metropolitan Police Crime Museum is not a public museum. It was formed for police training purposes and is subject to strict security.

As I said, the photographs in the Harrison book are nothing to do with me, perhaps you should be asking Shirley Harrison. I am sure that there are many photographs in many books that you (and I for that matter) 'have no idea of the exact details of'.

[Phil Carter]

Hello Stewart,

Believe it or not- and totally contrary to your own publically belittling response shown over the last few posts on here towards me- I ask you because

a) it is out of RESPECT knowing that your knowledge in the field is backed with probably the greatest and most complete collection and catalogue of everything that has occured at one time or another over the decades and

b) it would save going to an awful lot of bother had you known the answer (which from what I read in your answer you did not) in taking the liberty of emailing you or another enthusiast to consider emailing me Shirley Harrison's contact details and then contacting her in the hope of a positive reply.
It is called, in my, cleary regarded as ignorant world- as trying to save time and seeing an opportunity of respectfully asking the man widely regarded as THE most knowledgable on the subject, whilst the opportunity appears, as I dont like to infringe on your time when you are away from the boards, knowing the value of privacy.

If any written reply is met with the same courtesy and respect shown here in this post... it would be appreciated. Thank you :-)

best wishes

Phil

[Phil Carter]

Hi Phil,

A similar variation of Jannette, this one in Macdonald's hand, appears at the top of Joseph Barnett's police statement.

Best,
Dave

Hello Dave,

Most appreciated- thank you :-)
Yes the variations are not but a few!

Long time no see- hope you are well?


best wishes

Phil

[Dave O]

Hi Phil,

Thanks, I am well and I hope you and everyone else are, too.

Best,
Dave