MJK's Body Identification?

[packers stem]

Hi John

Hi Packers,

I would contrast what happened in the Stride investigation, in respect of witnesses, with the Kelly investigation. Thus, Stride was wandering around a neighbourhood where she wouldn't have been well-known-or known at all-at a time when it would have been very dark, and when relatively few people were about. Nonetheless, she was identified, or allegedly identified, by numerous witnesses: Best and Gardner, Marshall, Schwartz, PC Smith, James Brown and Matthew Packer. This clearly suggests to me that not only were witnesses with potentially vital information willing to come forward, but so were individuals with dubious accounts-possibly attention seekers, or people hoping to claim a share of the reward, or to sell their story to the press.

The main difference with the stride case, other than very different demographics meaning more people willing to come forward, was a fixed TOD
People will have considered what they may have seen in the previous half hour not the previous 24.
One spoke to and sold grapes to a couple, one was a policeman, one believed he witnessed a physical assault.I would definitely expect all those 3 to come forward. Could also have as much to do with the enquiries of White knocking on doors and prompting witnesses.

However, if Lewis and Maxwell's evidence is to be accepted, then Kelly may well have been wandering around her local neighbourhood-where she was presumably very well-known-for over two hours, in broad daylight, at a time when the locality could have been teaming with people, and yet she was only seen by a maximum of two people during this period-or at least they were the only witnesses willing to come forward. This really makes little sense to me.

Lewis also saw her the previous night talking to 'dan', seems clear that he meant Barnett as he said Dan worked at billingsgate.Seems little doubt that he knew Kelly but where were the other drinkers that night? If not for Lewis and Kelly's immediate neighbours we would be debating wether she actually went out the night before or sat in her room sewing as none of these pub goers came forward.... Yet we know she was there!
An unidentified witness, who's name was known by the times did come forward and corroborate the morning sighting making 3 witnesses. Why would you suggest she gave her name to the reporter but didn't want it in print?
The times report also claims that she had been interviewed by the police.Truth is we can not know how many people may have approached the police with a sighting only to be told they were wrong as she was already dead by then.Thankfully Maxwell was not dissuaded from giving her evidence.
Vital witnesses were all too often ignored and kept away from inquests Packer,Schwartz and I would suggest possibly Kennedy

The point I was making about Maxwell is that she had plenty of time to consider her evidence prior to the inquest, and yet she starts of by saying that she saw Kelly, outside the Britannia, between "eight and nine o'clock' and then immediately corrects herself and says it was "about a quarter to nine." That suggests to me she was somewhat confused as to timings.

Doesn't suggest confusion to me at all John.
It suggests someone thinking aloud
Well it was between 8 and 9
Allowing for the earlier chat
And I was absent for about half an hour
Then about quarter to nine

Maxwell's main focus prior to taking the stand would have concerned the first sighting,the conversation,the clothing.

Finally, a woman was discovered in MJK's room and MJK was never seen or heard from again. It's therefore reasonable to assume that the victim was Kelly, and any other scenario would surely have to involve a major conspiracy for which there's no evidence. And, anyway, a Forest Street conspiracy didn't exactly turn out too well in the Austin case!

Kelly gave enough hints to friends that she was planning to "make away" with herself and enough reports of 'other women' staying in her room to make assuming anything unwise

[Pierre]

That doesnt mean it was visible from the court as you said. What I pointed out was that we only have one visual reference that suggests it was visible, and others that do not. The door to Marys room was certainly visible.

Come on Michael. And the people who entered and left the doorway in the passage, where they invisible, or perhaps floating through the air above it?

Sometimes the arguments in this forum are ridiculous.

There was a door in the passage and the tenants used it all the time. The whole passage was visible from the court and so was the door an the people who used it.

There was no invisible door, no invisible passage and no invisible tenants.

Regards, Pierre

[Michael W Richards]

Come on Michael. And the people who entered and left the doorway in the passage, where they invisible, or perhaps floating through the air above it?

Sometimes the arguments in this forum are ridiculous.

There was a door in the passage and the tenants used it all the time. The whole passage was visible from the court and so was the door an the people who used it.

There was no invisible door, no invisible passage and no invisible tenants.

Regards, Pierre

Im not sure what your on about Pierre, is it that I said we dont know how visible the door was from inside the courtyard?...since we know for a fact that it was partway down the 20ft long stone covered passage and near to the entrance to the court, it seems obvious that some vantage points within the court would not be able to see the door. The fact that it is visible in one sketch that I know of may just be the artist taking license with the exact location in order to better illustrate the fact that its inside the passageway.

I wouldnt assume that all comings and goings out of the entrance to 26 and out to Dorset would be visible to the courtard POV.

[John G]

HI John
Thanks for the quote which pretty much confirms that the reasoning behind why digestion of food should be used with caution in determing TOD is that digestion does continue after death .So basically after all that were back where I first suggested at between 1 and 3 hours. It's a surprise that Bond found anything at all considering digestion does continue after death ,although the rate of which is likely reduced considerably .
Incidentally there is no mention of guesswork on Bond's part
"In the abdominal cavity was some partly digested food of fish and potatoes and similar food was found in the remains of the stomach attached to the intestines "

Hi Packers,

Thanks. Well, I certainly wouldn't rule out the possibility that Kelly was murdered 1-3 hours after her last meal. Of course, if we speculate that she eat at, say, 8:00am, that doesn't rule out Maxwell's or Lewis' sighting, purely on possible time of death grounds. That's what makes things so frustrating in my opinion: possible time of death scenarios makes it difficult to positively rule anything out or anything in although, as I've indicated in earlier posts, other evidence also needs to be taken into consideration.

As an aside, there is no intrinsic reason why either Lewis' or Maxwell's evidence should be considered more reliable than that of George Hutchinson- a questionable witness in my opinion-who also claimed to have known Kelly for some significant time.

[Michael W Richards]

Hi Packers,

Thanks. Well, I certainly wouldn't rule out the possibility that Kelly was murdered 1-3 hours after her last meal. Of course, if we speculate that she eat at, say, 8:00am, that doesn't rule out Maxwell's or Lewis' sighting, purely on possible time of death grounds. That's what makes things so frustrating in my opinion: possible time of death scenarios makes it difficult to positively rule anything out or anything in although, as I've indicated in earlier posts, other evidence also needs to be taken into consideration.

As an aside, there is no intrinsic reason why either Lewis' or Maxwell's evidence should be considered more reliable than that of George Hutchinson- a questionable witness in my opinion-who also claimed to have known Kelly for some significant time.

We do not have any secondary spurces to confirm any of the above knew Mary..at all or to any great degree, there is just the proximity to #26 that suggests Maxwell and Lewis may have met her on the street at some point.

[packers stem]

Hi John

Hi Packers,

Thanks. Well, I certainly wouldn't rule out the possibility that Kelly was murdered 1-3 hours after her last meal. Of course, if we speculate that she eat at, say, 8:00am, that doesn't rule out Maxwell's or Lewis' sighting, purely on possible time of death grounds. That's what makes things so frustrating in my opinion: possible time of death scenarios makes it difficult to positively rule anything out or anything in although, as I've indicated in earlier posts, other evidence also needs to be taken into consideration.

My issue with that is that fish and chips/potatoes is a lunchtime or evening meal. Fish suppers were commonplace with many streetvendors selling fried fish with potato shavings as they called the chips then.
The vendors at breakfast time were selling coffee,bread etc
I've seen other posters mention she could have ate it cold the next day but we surely have to go more with the probability that she ate before sleeping rather than extremely remote possibilities

As an aside, there is no intrinsic reason why either Lewis' or Maxwell's evidence should be considered more reliable than that of George Hutchinson- a questionable witness in my opinion-who also claimed to have known Kelly for some significant time.

As for Hutchinson, posters, last I was aware,and I do try to avoid most of the Hutchinson threads lol,were still scratching around for evidence of his actual existence.
To me the whole scenario is a nonsense purely down to light or the lack of compared to the description.
Red handkerchief,brown gloves..... Limited Victorian gas lamps. I've never bought it and never will.
Many people approached the police but were not called to the inquest. Here we apparently have a man with a hugely significant sighting who approached them within minutes of the inquest closing. Nothing to trust at all here for me.
Whereas Maxwell was determined despite attempts to persuade her not to

[Abby Normal]

Good post JohnG
added to the fact that there simply is not enough time after the Maxwell sighting, let alone the Maurice lewis sighting, that Mary could meet her killer, walk back to her place, and be mutilated like that. plus you have the fact of the large fire and burnt clothes-indicating a much earlier encounter with her killer.

Another thing-according to Maxwell mary was so sick from drinking that she vomited, after already going to the pub. So shes going to head back out to the pub after that? In the shape shes in? and be in any mood/condition to have sex/ solicite for sex?
Its ridiculous.

also, whats your take on Muarice lewis saying the woman he thought was Kelly was carrying milk? sounds like he saw Maxwell!?! and Maxwell saw Lizzie as Michael suggested. Do we know if Lizzie had been drinking? maybe it was her that vomited and who Maxwell spoke to, thinking it was mary?

Hi JohnG
I think you may have missed this post?
I respect your opinion and would like your take on it and the questions. especially the questions in the last paragraph.

(If you didn't miss it and just didn't feel like it merited a response then nevermind. LOL.)

[John G]

Hi JohnG
I think you may have missed this post?
I respect your opinion and would like your take on it and the questions. especially the questions in the last paragraph.

(If you didn't miss it and just didn't feel like it merited a response then nevermind. LOL.)

Hi Abby,

Really sorry for not replying. I greatly respect your opinions also, and your posts are always informative and perceptive. To be honest, I did read your post, and was intending to reply, but I decided I needed more time for reflection, and then seem to have got distracted!

Okay, I completely agree with your argument about Kelly: It makes no sense that she would return to the pub, particularly as she had told Maxwell that she had "the horrors of drink upon her", and then rejected her advice that she go to the Ringers for half a pint of beer, i.e. because she'd already had a drink and had vomited (I must admit that I'd forgotten about this part of Maxwell's evidence, so thanks for reminding me!).

I must also admit that I wasn't aware of the story of Maurice Lewis and the milk- didn't this appear in the Hertfordshire Mercury? I suppose one problem is how much credence we should place on reports from obscure provincial newspapers. Also, wasn't it the case that Maurice Lewis wasn't expressly named as the supposed witness? And did Lewis say that he'd actually spoken to Kelly? Because the account that I read states that she had supposedly left her room at 8:00am to buy milk, but how would he know if they hadn't conversed?

However, if the account is accurate, I would agree that he may well have seen Maxwell-I'd forgotten that she'd pointed out in her evidence that she'd been to the milk shop for some milk! so that's a very good argument you make-and Maxwell might have seen Lizzie.

[Abby Normal]

Hi Abby,

Really sorry for not replying. I greatly respect your opinions also, and your posts are always informative and perceptive. To be honest, I did read your post, and was intending to reply, but I decided I needed more time for reflection, and then seem to have got distracted!

Okay, I completely agree with your argument about Kelly: It makes no sense that she would return to the pub, particularly as she had told Maxwell that she had "the horrors of drink upon her", and then rejected her advice that she go to the Ringers for half a pint of beer, i.e. because she'd already had a drink and had vomited (I must admit that I'd forgotten about this part of Maxwell's evidence, so thanks for reminding me!).

I must also admit that I wasn't aware of the story of Maurice Lewis and the milk- didn't this appear in the Hertfordshire Mercury? I suppose one problem is how much credence we should place on reports from obscure provincial newspapers. Also, wasn't it the case that Maurice Lewis wasn't expressly named as the supposed witness? And did Lewis say that he'd actually spoken to Kelly? Because the account that I read states that she had supposedly left her room at 8:00am to buy milk, but how would he know if they hadn't conversed?

However, if the account is accurate, I would agree that he may well have seen Maxwell and Maxwell might have seen Lizzie.

Thanks JohnG!
No worries. I don't know much about the Maurice lewis account-hence the questions. I don't think he ever claimed to speak to mary. I was actually surprised that his account included playing his game in Millers court! I thought that was somewhere else.

Howver I am intrigued my Michaels comments that Maxwell may have actually see Lizzie. and that in Maurice Lewis account mary was carrying milk (as we know Maxwell was).

If anyone knows more specifics and want to chime in that would be great.

at this point I still believe the most likely explanation is that Maxwell simply had mary confused with someone else. when Maxwell (and lewis) saw whoever they saw, Mary Kelly was lying dead in her bed.

[John G]

Thanks JohnG!
No worries. I don't know much about the Maurice lewis account-hence the questions. I don't think he ever claimed to speak to mary. I was actually surprised that his account included playing his game in Millers court! I thought that was somewhere else.

Howver I am intrigued my Michaels comments that Maxwell may have actually see Lizzie. and that in Maurice Lewis account mary was carrying milk (as we know Maxwell was).

If anyone knows more specifics and want to chime in that would be great.

at this point I still believe the most likely explanation is that Maxwell simply had mary confused with someone else. when Maxwell (and lewis) saw whoever they saw, Mary Kelly was lying dead in her bed.

Hi Abby,

Just updated my earlier post. I'd inexplicably forgotten that Maxwell had gone to the milk shop to buy milk, so you make an excellent point when you suggest that Lewis may have got her mixed up with Kelly, always supposing, of course, that the obscure provincial newspaper account is accurate.

I also agree that Maxwell most likely got Kelly mixed up with someone else, particularly as I consider it very unlikely that such a casual acquaintance-who she'd only briefly spoken to twice over a four month period-would have referred to her so informally, i.e. by calling her Carrie.

[Abby Normal]

I would add that Maurice lewis was playing in the court at 10:00am, then went to the ringers where he claimed to have seen mary.

At 10:45 Bowyer discovered her mutilated body in her room.

how long does it take to get from millers court to the ringers?

and mary is supposed to go from drinking in the ringers, picking up her killer to walking back to her place, get murdered and mutilated and then discovered by Bowyer in less than 45 minutes?

yeah right. Maurice lewis is even less credible then Maxwell.
Useless witness.

[Paddy]

I would add that Maurice lewis was playing in the court at 10:00am, then went to the ringers where he claimed to have seen mary.

At 10:45 Bowyer discovered her mutilated body in her room.

how long does it take to get from millers court to the ringers?

and mary is supposed to go from drinking in the ringers, picking up her killer to walking back to her place, get murdered and mutilated and then discovered by Bowyer in less than 45 minutes?

yeah right. Maurice lewis is even less credible then Maxwell.
Useless witness.

And have some fish and chips or whatever as she had been sick when Maxwell saw her....

Pat

[Abby Normal]

And have some fish and chips or whatever as she had been sick when Maxwell saw her....

Pat

right-well then they'll say that proves it wasn't mary found dead in her bed(with meat and potatoes in her stomach) as Maxwell saw her throw it all up! LOL!

[John G]

Hi John



My issue with that is that fish and chips/potatoes is a lunchtime or evening meal. Fish suppers were commonplace with many streetvendors selling fried fish with potato shavings as they called the chips then.
The vendors at breakfast time were selling coffee,bread etc
I've seen other posters mention she could have ate it cold the next day but we surely have to go more with the probability that she ate before sleeping rather than extremely remote possibilities



As for Hutchinson, posters, last I was aware,and I do try to avoid most of the Hutchinson threads lol,were still scratching around for evidence of his actual existence.
To me the whole scenario is a nonsense purely down to light or the lack of compared to the description.
Red handkerchief,brown gloves..... Limited Victorian gas lamps. I've never bought it and never will.
Many people approached the police but were not called to the inquest. Here we apparently have a man with a hugely significant sighting who approached them within minutes of the inquest closing. Nothing to trust at all here for me.
Whereas Maxwell was determined despite attempts to persuade her not to

Hi Packers,

Yes, I agree, it's far more likely that the meal was consumed in the evening, and your point about street vendors selling fish and chips in the evening, but not the morning, is well made.

I have little doubt the Maxwell believed the woman she spoke to was Kelly but, of course, that doesn't necessarily mean she was correct!

Hutchinson is an intriguing witness. I think he most likely lied, but I just can't rule him out completely, i.e. because Abberline believed him initially-and he was in a far stronger position than anyone today to assess the credibility of Hutchinson's story-and there's always the possibility, however slim, that he exaggerated rather than lied.

[John G]

I would add that Maurice lewis was playing in the court at 10:00am, then went to the ringers where he claimed to have seen mary.

At 10:45 Bowyer discovered her mutilated body in her room.

how long does it take to get from millers court to the ringers?

and mary is supposed to go from drinking in the ringers, picking up her killer to walking back to her place, get murdered and mutilated and then discovered by Bowyer in less than 45 minutes?

yeah right. Maurice lewis is even less credible then Maxwell.
Useless witness.

Hi Abby,

Which is why some would argue that the woman found dead in Kelly's room wasn't Kelly, suggesting she disappeared into the ether- presumably to live happily ever after under another assumed name- and implying a conspiracy theory for which, as I've noted, there's absolutely no evidence. And, as I've also noted, the local conspiracy in the later Austin murder in Dorset Street-she was also mutilated-didn't exactly turn out too well, even though it was orchestrated by Crossingham's brother-in-law!