Let there be light!

[Observer]

I find it a little hard to take seriously the comments of the local dossers (did MJK actually require "doss money"?) and I'm not aware of the press interviews which said Kelly was "well known in the area". Are you able to dig them out?

Not that you'll take any notice of this for you are somewhat selective in what you want to believe and not to believe, but here it is anyway

"Tom Cullen, author of The Autumn of Terror , interviewed a retired market porter named Dennis Barrett. As a boy, he knew Mary Kelly by sight. She also went by the name of "Black Mary". Barrett stated "she had her pitch outside the Ten Bells Pub in Commercial Street, and woe to any woman who tried to poach her territory. Such a woman was likely to have her hair pulled out in fistfuls." So when you stand outside the entrance to the Ten Bells Pub, you are truly standing in the footsteps of perhaps the most famous of the Ripper's victims, Mary Kelly!"

[David Orsam]

Insp. Drew wrote that Mary had been well-known to every resident and, sunny of nature, had been very popular

The full quote of Inspector Dew in his memoirs was:

"Meanwhile, in Miller's Court itself, there was something approaching panic. Marie had been well-known to every resident and, sunny of nature, had been very popular."

So he was there talking about the residents of the few houses in Millers Court.

And even then, do you really think he had spoken to "every resident" to establish this?

I find it a little hard to take seriously the comments of the local dossers (did MJK actually require "doss money"?) and I'm not aware of the press interviews which said Kelly was "well known in the area". Are you able to dig them out?

[Wickerman]

Earlier in this thread you called her a "local celebrity". Where are you getting this idea from?

Hi David, yes, I did see your earlier question but couldn't recall anything specific at that moment.

According to press interviews with her friends Kelly was well known in the area and easily recognisable, not many women wore their hair long and loose and the colour made her stand out. Her apron always clean and white.

Insp. Drew wrote that Mary had been well-known to every resident and, sunny of nature, had been very popular.

An Echo reporter visited a local doss-house to ask if anyone knew the victim...two local dossers are quoted...

When asked, "Did anyone know her?"

- "Did anyone not know her? - a remark which hugely tickled his companions. Poor Mary Jane Kelly was a figure, it appears, in street brawls, sudden and quick in quarrel, and - for a woman - handy with her fists.

- An elderly man who wore a coat and waistcoat, but no shirt beneath, averred in pessimistic tones it was better for Mary Jane Kelly to have been done to death. "Wot was her life?" he muttered, spreading out his thin and not too clean hands to the fire. "Starvation three days a week, and then, when she got money, drink for the other three days. I knowed her. I guv her the money for her doss three weeks ago cos she hadn't none. Yes, matey, and that at two in the mornin'," he said, turning to our reporter whose intent bearing may possibly have suggested incredulity. "Mary Jane was a good soul." This testimony was freely offered. "She would spend her money lavishly when she had any, and when she hadn't any, why -"

These are the only snippets I could locate at the moment, so yes, she was well known, and people are said to have liked her.
In that sense, a local celebrity, someone remembered by many.

[David Orsam]

There are a range of versions of what Maxwell said in different press accounts, but I find this a little contrary to her seemingly popularity in the neighbourhood.

Earlier in this thread you called her a "local celebrity". Where are you getting this idea from?

[David Orsam]

By the time she stepped onto the stand the news was common knowledge

Read my post again Michael. I quoted from her written statement which she gave to the police prior to stepping onto the stand.

[richardnunweek]

Hi
Around 1974 whilst on my way to the dogs, I took with me a couple of articles/books,[ to read on the train] I came across an interesting point.
It was a reference allegedly made by Mrs Maxwell, stating the following.
''Her eyes looked queer, as if suffering from a heavy cold,'' that is the quote I remember reading.
I also believe McCormack wrote in his book ''She was all muffled up , as in cold''
Words that differ from the first quote, but meaning the same.
It then dawned on me that Hutchinson had Kelly saying ''I have lost my handkerchief'', and the two previous quotes, had me contemplating the following.
If Mary Kelly was suffering with a cold, and if Mrs Maxwell saw her as in cold, then both Hutchinson's account and hers go together, but that would not have been possible if she was killed prior to 8.am.
I wrote to Colin Wilson , and he was fascinated by that observation, but obviously mentioned ''We cannot know if she did have a cold unfortunately.
If she did need the hanky for blowing her nose, its possible that she was in cold, which would give strength to Hutchinson's account. and Mrs Maxwell's.
Regards Richard.

[Wickerman]

The truth is though, with all of our modern technology we still can't really reliably narrow down a time of death to the extent that Dr Bond did. It's just impossible to say '2am', and have that be the end of it.

Completely agree, previously I was debating Bond's conclusion after he considered digestion as a means to arrive at an estimate. My only point was that I do not believe Bond would have tried to make that case without some indication of when Kelly last ate, and that would come from the police.

I was not at all suggesting his conclusion was correct - in fact as I said to David, I'm sure the 1:00 - 2:00 was wrong.

As I've said, my own best guess is around the time of the cry of murder - however, I can't say that the witnesses who saw Mary alive much later are wrong because I have absolutely no evidence to back that assertion up. All I can say is that I think it's improbable and they were probably mistaken. It's certainly not impossible, though.

Which pretty much encompasses my own thoughts - I champion no particular "time of death", though I lean more towards 4:00 am, except to say it was not 1:00 - 2:00 am.

[MsWeatherwax]

In the 19th century the physicians were aware of four methods to help in determining time of death; Rigor mortis, Algor mortis, Livor mortis and digestion. However, they also knew these methods were only a guide, and all had severe limitations.

Incidentally, when a body was mutilated to such a degree as to dissipate body heat, as in some of these cases, the body temperature was taken by inserting the thermometer into the head, as the only available intact portion.

If you compare the late 19th century methods of autopsy to today's methods, aside from advances in technology and more understanding of body science, the differences are not that great. They had all the basics pretty well covered.

Hi Fish.

I don't disagree - and I have gone to pains to note that I don't believe that the attending Doctors of the day have deliberately misrepresented the facts.

The truth is though, with all of our modern technology we still can't really reliably narrow down a time of death to the extent that Dr Bond did. It's just impossible to say '2am', and have that be the end of it.

We really are left with saying that the TOD was likely to be within the last 24 hours, and then using witness statements and other evidence to narrow that window down.

The problem with this, though, is determining which if any of the witness statements are reliable isn't it? I guess that's why, well over a century later, we're all still arguing about it.

As I've said, my own best guess is around the time of the cry of murder - however, I can't say that the witnesses who saw Mary alive much later are wrong because I have absolutely no evidence to back that assertion up. All I can say is that I think it's improbable and they were probably mistaken. It's certainly not impossible, though.

[Wickerman]

I do not believe that we have enough medical evidence to establish a time of death for Mary Kelly. Rigor is unreliable to due to the extensive mutilation, digestion is unreliable for reasons already explained, as far as I'm aware there was no mention of livor mortis. I'm not aware that a core body temperature has ever been mentioned.

In the 19th century the physicians were aware of four methods to help in determining time of death; Rigor mortis, Algor mortis, Livor mortis and digestion. However, they also knew these methods were only a guide, and all had severe limitations.

Incidentally, when a body was mutilated to such a degree as to dissipate body heat, as in some of these cases, the body temperature was taken by inserting the thermometer into the head, as the only available intact portion.

If you compare the late 19th century methods of autopsy to today's methods, aside from advances in technology and more understanding of body science, the differences are not that great. They had all the basics pretty well covered.

[MsWeatherwax]

You are absolutely wrong, Michael, to say that Mrs Maxwell's evidence is the foundation on which credibility attacks on a PM physician's abilities to determine a rough cause of death have been launched. Those credibility attacks exist entirely independently of Mrs Maxwell. Go and read the book by Jessica Snyder Sachs about the difficulties of estimating a time of death.

Again, have to concur with this statement.

I am not attacking the credibility of the doctors concerned - it is simply fact that through the years we have learned so much more about the difficulties in establishing a time of death.

I do not believe that we have enough medical evidence to establish a time of death for Mary Kelly. Rigor is unreliable to due to the extensive mutilation, digestion is unreliable for reasons already explained, as far as I'm aware there was no mention of livor mortis. I'm not aware that a core body temperature has ever been mentioned. All that can be said with certainty is that she died sometime in the 24 hours prior to her body being discovered. That can only be narrowed down by looking at witness statements, and unfortunately we can't really 'cherry pick' which statements we want to keep.

If I had to chuck my hat into the ring, I'd say that the 4am cry of 'murder' is key. Yes, it may have been common-place in Victorian London. However, taken with the fact that someone was actually murdered in this instance I don't think it's completely unreasonable to assume that the two events were linked.

[Wickerman]

That could have left us with a record of Mrs Maxwell recanting her story after she sees "Mary Jane Kelly" walking around Dorset St on the 12th, 13th, 14th, or... and realizes that she didn,t really see Mary Jane Kelly outside Miller,s Court the morning of the 9th.

A number of the Millers Court tenants left following this murder, if Albrook was one of them then Maxwell may never have seen her again.

[Wickerman]

Hi,
I believe we have never got the time of Mary Kelly's death correctly.the police believed she was killed in daylight,but because of the reported cry, and the visitors the dead woman had in her room that night, and the medical opinion, it was assumed that the death was around 4.am
If Maxwell indeed saw Kelly after 8 am and gave that statement under oath some three days later, we should suggest she had ample time to realise mistaken identity.
The police believed her, they called her to attend the inquest even though her statement went against their own police doctors.
She swore under oath, despite the coroners remarks she should be careful.
She was reported to have been a level headed woman, of good character.
She was obviously convinced she saw the deceased some 4 hours after she was presumed dead.
Was she genuine,was she covering for someone.that is the question?
Regards Richard.

Hi Richard.
I would not say the police believed her, they took her statement and it becomes part of the case. Their belief, official or unofficial does not come into it. It was her statement and they accept it as true by default.

What I found strange, to me at least is, that Maxwell claimed Mary did not associate with people, keeping herself to herself. There are a range of versions of what Maxwell said in different press accounts, but I find this a little contrary to her seemingly popularity in the neighbourhood.

I'm more in favor of her being mistaken, I think the suggestion she really saw Lizzie Albrook is quite reasonable.

[Michael W Richards]

As a matter of fact you are wrong about this because Mrs Maxwell's testimony is evidence in the case. In her statement (as repeated in her oral testimony) she said:

"I have known deceased during the past 4 months, she was known as Mary Jane and that since Joe Barnett left her she has obtained her living as an unfortunate".

Barnett provided confirmation at the inquest that he had left her and that she was a prostitute.

By the time she stepped onto the stand the news was common knowledge, information about her was rife in the papers on the weekend. Proves nothing. Proves only that she reads the paper on occasion, as it would appear Georgie also did. Its odd how often you find controversial witness testimony in these cases, Mary Malcolm comes immediately to mind. Wishing for a slice of the spotlight, storytelling rights at the local pubs..something more sinister, perhaps intentionally but secretively indulged by the authorities... who knows why some people do this.

[richardnunweek]

Hi,
I believe we have never got the time of Mary Kelly's death correctly.the police believed she was killed in daylight,but because of the reported cry, and the visitors the dead woman had in her room that night, and the medical opinion, it was assumed that the death was around 4.am
If Maxwell indeed saw Kelly after 8 am and gave that statement under oath some three days later, we should suggest she had ample time to realise mistaken identity.
The police believed her, they called her to attend the inquest even though her statement went against their own police doctors.
She swore under oath, despite the coroners remarks she should be careful.
She was reported to have been a level headed woman, of good character.
She was obviously convinced she saw the deceased some 4 hours after she was presumed dead.
Was she genuine,was she covering for someone.that is the question?
Regards Richard.

[Robert St Devil]

what happened to identity mix up? you know-Lizzie etc.?

That could have left us with a record of Mrs Maxwell recanting her story after she sees "Mary Jane Kelly" walking around Dorset St on the 12th, 13th, 14th, or... and realizes that she didn,t really see Mary Jane Kelly outside Miller,s Court the morning of the 9th.