Suggestion

[MysterySinger]

Thanks Michael.

So, JTR knew how to gain access to the room via the broken window and the latch on the door (and had perhaps visited there before then).

[Rosella]

^ But we don't know when Blotchy left. The fact that Mary sang for over an hour (and that may have been a bit of an exaggeration) doesn't mean that she had Blotchy, or any other male in with her for that entire time. She may have been singing to entertain herself, because she simply liked singing when she was a bit tight.

I don't think we know enough about the habits of Victorian 'unfortunates' (especially very poor women who prostituted sometimes to get rent and food) to say categorically whether they would or wouldn't have sang to any male clients before or after the act. This would be especially so if one or the other of them was feeling merry after a few drinks.

Mary's room would have been quiet and dark (and empty) if she was absent from it for a while, surely?

[Michael W Richards]

That last post is interesting Michael - if MJK was seen entering her room with someone then from that it must have been a friend - not a client. Of course, the witness who saw her with the man carrying the beer could have been an attention seeker. Does it also rule out Hutchinson's account?

Hutchinsons account takes place later than the encounter Mary Ann had with Mary and Blotchy, which implies that Mary left her room again after entering at 11:45pm Thursday. The problem with that is that no-one saw Mary leave, that Marys room remained quiet and dark from 1:30am, and that based on the fact that she was so drunk she could barely walk when seen entering the room, and that she sang off an on for over an hour, my guess is that the quiet and dark of her room signified her being retired for the evening.

Which ties in nicely with my belief that she was woken at around 3:45 and exclaimed "oh-murder" to voice her dismay at whom, and why, she was woken.

[Michael W Richards]

I agree that the partition/cladding must have covered a doorway space - but are we presuming a single door space or something wider?

If a single door space, would they have needed to put (what was once) an external door to 26 Dorset Street there? Was it already there and functioning when they put the partition/cladding in/over it. Clearly there would have needed to be access rest of 26 Dorset Street and the stairs leading to Prater's room. I believe MJK1 shows that the door was once covered over but at some point had become exposed again.

Also where would the stairs have been to the other 2 floors above Prater's room?

If you look at entranceways to salons in Victorian architecture you will see that the opening from the salon to the hallway or adjoining rooms is double wide, something that could accommodate French doors for example.

The salon was something where a number of occupants could sit and enjoy the fire, some conversation, a drink, and as such was made to accommodate more than just a single persons entry and exit. That's why the double wide access. I believe that the stairs to the floors above Prater were at the front of the first floor level, where the access stairs from ground level were behind that partition wall of Marys. Many plans Ive seen have the stairs at opposite ends of each floor.

I guess the simplest way to address this issue is that Mary had no access to 26 Dorset from her room after the partition wall was erected. That access was inside the stone archway. The door to the shed, formerly bearing the number 26, was replaced and the door that was there was used as building materials for the partition wall.

[MysterySinger]

I agree that the partition/cladding must have covered a doorway space - but are we presuming a single door space or something wider?

If a single door space, would they have needed to put (what was once) an external door to 26 Dorset Street there? Was it already there and functioning when they put the partition/cladding in/over it. Clearly there would have needed to be access rest of 26 Dorset Street and the stairs leading to Prater's room. I believe MJK1 shows that the door was once covered over but at some point had become exposed again.

Also where would the stairs have been to the other 2 floors above Prater's room?

[MysterySinger]

That last post is interesting Michael - if MJK was seen entering her room with someone then from that it must have been a friend - not a client. Of course, the witness who saw her with the man carrying the beer could have been an attention seeker. Does it also rule out Hutchinson's account?

[Michael W Richards]

I see now. The gentleman she escorted into her room was an impresario like Carl Rosa, and she was giving him an example of singing about plucking roses on her mother's grave to see if she could have a new career in the west end!

The point being of course that prostitutes were not in the habit of serenading anyone. There isn't one shred of evidence in existence that Mary EVER brought clients into her room, and we also have Barnett objecting to her "working the streets". Marys brothel days were behind her, and room 13 was in her own name, something rare for women without known occupations, so its entirely conceivable that this room was her place away from work...like it would seem Mary Ann Cox's may have been.

[Rosella]

We don't have photos to prove it completely but I do believe that Mary's bed was very close if not flat against the wall, including the partition wall/door. The bed may have been a couple of inches away as how could Mary otherwise have made the bed each day (if she did) tucking a sheet and blanket in on the far side?

It has been said that, because of the uneven size of the windows in Mary's room, the room could have been made up from a pantry and scullery in the old house, with the 'shed' once having been a kitchen, I suppose.

[Michael W Richards]

Michael - from that I take it you believe that Simon Wood's dissertation has no legs?

Does everyone else conclude that MJKs bed, in MJK1 is directly in the corner of the room, the head against a wall and the far side of the bed against the partition/cladding? I'm not 100% convinced now (though I was once!).

What bothers me a little, is why would they need partitioning across (the whole of) that wall if, as it seems, the wall was a load bearing one? Might be risky not having a proper wall there? Is there a really good photo that proves the opposite?

Im a fan of Simon and a friend, but that doesn't mean that we agree on everything. The partition wall was built into a doorway space, so the framing there would bear the weight, not the wall. The doorway space was needed to allow people access to the salon, lounge or rec room...whathaveyou...and from the room to the stairs and exit/entrance door under the archway.

Short form....there are 2 windows on the wall of Marys room that face the alcove and pump therein, there is a door that was added from Marys room to the courtyard, and there is a wall separating the room from the rest of the house. That's it for room 13. No secret doors, no door that allows access from her room to the hallway.

The windows to room 13 were boarded up...often the address on Dorset is given for the location of the murder site, so when its said the "windows at #26 were boarded up after removing Mary, its referring to the windows in the back of #26 that were in the old salon They can be accurately said to be part of #26..despite the partition wall and the name given to the small courtyard outside Marys room. Technically her room is still part of #26 Dorset, with access to Millers Court via that salon, then named room 13.

There was 3 ways to get into Marys room, from either alcove window, or from the door made to access the courtyard.

[Mayerling]

There is no record ever found that suggests Mary Kelly EVER brought clients into her room in Millers Court, so you've missed nothing.

All we know is that she was accompanied by someone to her room her last night and that she sang to him for over an hour.

I see now. The gentleman she escorted into her room was an impresario like Carl Rosa, and she was giving him an example of singing about plucking roses on her mother's grave to see if she could have a new career in the west end!

[Robert St Devil]

MysterySinger.
I cant decide if the headboard is flush up against the wall.

[Elamarna]

MysterySinger

Think I agree with Michaael.

the bed head is against the outside wall, and the long side close to, if not right against the partition wall, it is hard to be 100% on this given that we do not have a view from the foot of the bed.

Simon Wood gives a good argument for his view, but it is only that, his view.

Can you recall any actual evidence given on this thread which would support the view that the bed was moved.

I think, unless some new evidence is given you can stay with your original point of view.

[MysterySinger]

Michael - from that I take it you believe that Simon Wood's dissertation has no legs?

Does everyone else conclude that MJKs bed, in MJK1 is directly in the corner of the room, the head against a wall and the far side of the bed against the partition/cladding? I'm not 100% convinced now (though I was once!).

What bothers me a little, is why would they need partitioning across (the whole of) that wall if, as it seems, the wall was a load bearing one? Might be risky not having a proper wall there? Is there a really good photo that proves the opposite?

[Michael W Richards]

I must have missed something - if Mary Kelly was in the habit of inviting her "johns" (or in this case "jacks") into her room for business purposes, why would she be moving furniture around to bar doors of entrance or egress to the room?

As for the fact that the "winners" always write the histories we get at the end, first much of what we consider written history (paper or papyrus manuscripts) have to survive more than man made disasters (burnings of books, war bombings). They also have to survive fires, volcanic eruptions, floods, shipwrecks, and other disasters, but occasionally something does turn up showing a fragment of what we lost due to time. Secondly, liars do sometimes manage to create their legends that briefly are absorbed by a willing local populace. The recent assault on Woodrow Wilson's reputation (somewhat deserved) for his anti-Black racism, includes his five volume history of the United States which included a respecting nod towards the usefulness of the Ku Klux Klan in keeping down the former slaves in the South. That is now believed by only fanatical white supremacists. The so-called "stab-in-the-back" theory of the defeat of Wilhelmine Germany in 1918 was pushed in "Mein Kampf" by Hitler, and "The Myth of the 20th Century" by Hitler's "philosopher of Nazism", "Dr." Alfred Rosenberg. Most people no longer believe them and their views on how Jews betrayed Germany, or how the Slavs and Jews and Gypsies were racially inferior types. Only the far-right fanatics do.

Somehow I keep thinking that we may be in for the creation of "The Myth of 1888" in the future.

Jeff

There is no record ever found that suggests Mary Kelly EVER brought clients into her room in Millers Court, so you've missed nothing.

All we know is that she was accompanied by someone to her room her last night and that she sang to him for over an hour.

[IchabodCrane]

It is worth repeating that there is no evidence for the entrance door being barricaded - in fact, the evidence is very clear that it was not - nor any reason to think it might have been.

Could not agree more. The whole premise (suggestion) of this thread is absurd, and the fact that it's being debated for so long shows we all have either too much time on our hands, or there seem to be too few other subjects to have a meaningful discussion about.