Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

When was the estimation of when Mary took her last meal of fish and potatoes?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Sorry, but an educated guess will not give us an accurate TOD.

    C4

    Comment


    • Originally posted by curious4 View Post
      Sorry, but an educated guess will not give us an accurate TOD.

      C4
      Hi C4
      Oh dear...maybe I'll pop to the local kebab house at 6 tomorrow morning...oops no,I can't, they're not open... They cater for evenings and pub closing.
      It's more than an educated guess really,is blindingly obvious a better term...
      You can lead a horse to water.....

      Comment


      • Originally posted by packers stem View Post
        Hi C4
        Oh dear...maybe I'll pop to the local kebab house at 6 tomorrow morning...oops no,I can't, they're not open... They cater for evenings and pub closing.
        It's more than an educated guess really,is blindingly obvious a better term...
        Ah well, case closed then.

        C4

        Comment


        • Originally posted by richardnunweek View Post
          Hi,
          Thanks Jerry D.
          We know the bonnet was most likely Mrs Harvey's as she stated she told Mary''I shall be leaving my bonnet then''...also Mrs Prater saw Kelly wearing the said jacket and said bonnet at 9PM, at the bottom of the passage, they engaged conversation.
          Strangely at midnight, Mrs Cox sees Kelly wearing different clothing..?
          In order for the Velvet jacket, and bonnet, to have become bloodstained, they either were on the bed, when she was attacked, or Kelly was wearing them when attacked.
          If she was wearing them ,she must have changed back into the smart outfit after returning home with Blotchy...unless Cox was lying?
          If she went to sleep , and was attacked, the clothing must have been local to the bed.
          Either way we are posed the question...
          Why did the killer burn these items ..because they were bloodstained..?
          It has to be relevant to the murderer.
          Scenario..Mary Kelly is alive in daylight, she is seen by Maxwell , and Maurice Lewis as witnessed, she then goes home to get ready to go to the Lord Mayors parade, and when dressed welcomes a person into her room. who kills her whilst wearing that outfit..
          The killer who may have a cast iron night alibi, wishes to give the impression she was killed during the night, therefore burns these objects,that might give cause for doubt...
          Regards Richard.
          there were no confirmed sightings of Mary from 8:00 (Barnett)till 11:45 (Cox).

          Praters account is not on the police/inquest record as seeing mary at 9:00.

          Where is the account of "blood Stained" clothes you keep mentioning?

          Also, even if Prater did see her at 9:00 with bonnet and jacket on, she was near home so she could have just taken them off, put them in her place and then ventured out.
          Last edited by Abby Normal; 09-17-2015, 12:19 PM.
          "Is all that we see or seem
          but a dream within a dream?"

          -Edgar Allan Poe


          "...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
          quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

          -Frederick G. Abberline

          Comment


          • Originally posted by packers stem View Post
            The TOD is correct,this is determined by the Fish supper... I've no doubt that maxwell and Maurice Lewis(twice) were also correct....
            ...and back to the dishevelled looking woman seen by Kennedy
            Well I guess Maxwell and M Lewis saw Marys ghost then. JK ; )

            seriously though Im having a hard time following your reasoning. If TOD is in the middle of the night, how can cox and M. Lewis be right?
            "Is all that we see or seem
            but a dream within a dream?"

            -Edgar Allan Poe


            "...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
            quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

            -Frederick G. Abberline

            Comment


            • I have been interested in the Maxwell sighting of a sickened Mary Kelly since encountering it in Moore's graphic novel "From Hell". There is another scene in which Abberline is puzzling over the report of a laundress who has her own room, yet apparently also had an arrangement with Mary Kelly to use Mary's room at times. Why?

              My thought was perhaps to avoid an abusive husband, if there was one. So perhaps the woman murdered in Mary's bed was not Mary? Perhaps Mary had left, and another woman had borrowed her room and bed.
              Arguments against this speculation are:
              1) Moore mixed history and fiction in his story, so we don't know if Abberline actually debated this point about the laundress.
              2) Kelly identified the corpse as Mary Jane Kelly.
              3) The various witnesses in the time-line before and after MJK's death.
              4) The missing articles of clothing may have been burned or stolen, we don't know.
              Pat D. https://forum.casebook.org/core/imag...rt/reading.gif
              ---------------
              Von Konigswald: Jack the Ripper plays shuffleboard. -- Happy Birthday, Wanda June by Kurt Vonnegut, c.1970.
              ---------------

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Pcdunn View Post
                I have been interested in the Maxwell sighting of a sickened Mary Kelly since encountering it in Moore's graphic novel "From Hell". There is another scene in which Abberline is puzzling over the report of a laundress who has her own room, yet apparently also had an arrangement with Mary Kelly to use Mary's room at times. Why?

                My thought was perhaps to avoid an abusive husband, if there was one. So perhaps the woman murdered in Mary's bed was not Mary? Perhaps Mary had left, and another woman had borrowed her room and bed.
                Arguments against this speculation are:
                1) Moore mixed history and fiction in his story, so we don't know if Abberline actually debated this point about the laundress.
                2) Kelly identified the corpse as Mary Jane Kelly.
                3) The various witnesses in the time-line before and after MJK's death.
                4) The missing articles of clothing may have been burned or stolen, we don't know.
                Hi PCdunn
                with all due respect-not only are we veering off topic with this post, its going way off non-fiction.

                Can we reel it back in? : )
                "Is all that we see or seem
                but a dream within a dream?"

                -Edgar Allan Poe


                "...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
                quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

                -Frederick G. Abberline

                Comment


                • The woman was found in Mary Kelly's room, identified by Mary Kelly's on/off lover, and Mary Kelly was never seen alive again after the murder. Ergo, it was Mary Kelly in the bed.

                  Eyewitness testimony is notoriously dodgy. If they honestly believe they saw Mary Kelly that morning, they were either mistaken about the day or mistaken about the person's identity.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post
                    Well I guess Maxwell and M Lewis saw Marys ghost then. JK ; )

                    seriously though Im having a hard time following your reasoning. If TOD is in the middle of the night, how can cox and M. Lewis be right?
                    Hi Abby
                    I'm not doubting Cox, I've no need to, she said she was going to sing and sing she most certainly did.
                    I'm not doubting maxwell or Maurice Lewis as they both knew her and it was broad daylight. Lewis was 'playing pitch and toss ' in the court.If it was an ideal place to play it I'm sure they did it often and probably bumped into Mary often.Maxwell spoke to her at length....strongest witnesses we've got in the whole jtr case by a country mile...only doubted because if you accept the ID by Barnett it doesn't make sense..
                    Read the press reports Abby,I know you don't like them but look at how many different reports have eagle eye McCarthy saying 'the poor woman was totally unrecognisable '..... Yet he gets to the inquest and it's 'yes,I'd recognise her dead or alive'.... Why did he change his mind...truth is he didn't, he told the truth to the press when he first spoke and described in great detail the injuries and the room.Most odd for someone who said 'he couldn't look at her'
                    Was he asked to ID the body officially and just changed his tune at that point?
                    So what do we have?Mary Kelly alive and a dead body...
                    I'll say again.. Think of the dishevelled woman seen by Kennedy
                    You can lead a horse to water.....

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Harry D View Post
                      The woman was found in Mary Kelly's room, identified by Mary Kelly's on/off lover, and Mary Kelly was never seen alive again after the murder. Ergo, it was Mary Kelly in the bed.

                      Eyewitness testimony is notoriously dodgy. If they honestly believe they saw Mary Kelly that morning, they were either mistaken about the day or mistaken about the person's identity.
                      Yup. or looking for some attention.
                      "Is all that we see or seem
                      but a dream within a dream?"

                      -Edgar Allan Poe


                      "...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
                      quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

                      -Frederick G. Abberline

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post
                        Yup. or looking for some attention.
                        That wouldn't be honest, though.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Harry D View Post
                          The woman was found in Mary Kelly's room, identified by Mary Kelly's on/off lover, and Mary Kelly was never seen alive again after the murder. Ergo, it was Mary Kelly in the bed.

                          Eyewitness testimony is notoriously dodgy. If they honestly believe they saw Mary Kelly that morning, they were either mistaken about the day or mistaken about the person's identity.
                          Hi Harry
                          There was very little left to ID
                          We've been through the eyes and ears/hair many times The ears were cut off,the eyelids removed and the hair bloodsoaked due to the skinning if the forehead etc
                          McCarthy who knew Kelly well also described her more than once as being totally unrecognisable
                          And other women had been sleeping in the room over the previous week so the body just being in her room is not evidence of the body being hers
                          You can lead a horse to water.....

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by packers stem View Post
                            Hi Abby
                            I'm not doubting Cox, I've no need to, she said she was going to sing and sing she most certainly did.
                            I'm not doubting maxwell or Maurice Lewis as they both knew her and it was broad daylight. Lewis was 'playing pitch and toss ' in the court.If it was an ideal place to play it I'm sure they did it often and probably bumped into Mary often.Maxwell spoke to her at length....strongest witnesses we've got in the whole jtr case by a country mile...only doubted because if you accept the ID by Barnett it doesn't make sense..
                            Read the press reports Abby,I know you don't like them but look at how many different reports have eagle eye McCarthy saying 'the poor woman was totally unrecognisable '..... Yet he gets to the inquest and it's 'yes,I'd recognise her dead or alive'.... Why did he change his mind...truth is he didn't, he told the truth to the press when he first spoke and described in great detail the injuries and the room.Most odd for someone who said 'he couldn't look at her'
                            Was he asked to ID the body officially and just changed his tune at that point?
                            So what do we have?Mary Kelly alive and a dead body...
                            I'll say again.. Think of the dishevelled woman seen by Kennedy
                            Hi PS
                            can you stop beating around the bush and just say flat out what your idea/theory is?

                            Im not smart enough to decipher the bits and pieces...
                            "Is all that we see or seem
                            but a dream within a dream?"

                            -Edgar Allan Poe


                            "...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
                            quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

                            -Frederick G. Abberline

                            Comment


                            • Got to say I do find it amazing when anyone suggests they've mistaken the day....the thought if it happening in reality is too ridiculous for words.
                              I've just been out to the shop to buy milk and tobacco.I know it was today because it was only half an hour ago...
                              You can lead a horse to water.....

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by packers stem View Post
                                Hi Harry
                                There was very little left to ID
                                We've been through the eyes and ears/hair many times The ears were cut off,the eyelids removed and the hair bloodsoaked due to the skinning if the forehead etc
                                McCarthy who knew Kelly well also described her more than once as being totally unrecognisable
                                And other women had been sleeping in the room over the previous week so the body just being in her room is not evidence of the body being hers
                                HI PS
                                I could ID the mutilated body of my lover if there was only an armpit and eyelash left.

                                Back to non fiction please folks.
                                "Is all that we see or seem
                                but a dream within a dream?"

                                -Edgar Allan Poe


                                "...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
                                quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

                                -Frederick G. Abberline

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X