Let there be light!

[Abby Normal]

Hi,
It appears we are left with just two alternatives,
Mrs Maxwell saw Mary Kelly as she stated, no mistake, and she was killed around 9am.
Mrs Maxwell lied , for motives unknown.
Regards Richard.

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

[richardnunweek]

Hi,
It appears we are left with just two alternatives,
Mrs Maxwell saw Mary Kelly as she stated, no mistake, and she was killed around 9am.
Mrs Maxwell lied , for motives unknown.
Regards Richard.

[David Orsam]

Not one single shred of evidence has been offered that Caroline Maxwells remarks are validated, there is no secondary source that we can be sure knew Mary at all either, therefore, it is heresay evidence only ...and hardly a foundation to launch credibility attacks at the PM physicians abilities to determine a rough cause of death....based upon numerous factors including environmental, state of rigor, and partially digested food. Which stopped being processed when Mary was killed.

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.

[David Orsam]

Just thought that a reality grounding might be prudent....there is no evidence at all....none....that Caroline Maxwell knew who Mary Kelly was, what she looked like, or where Mary was on the Friday morning. Just as there is no evidence that George Hutchison knew Mary Kelly of Millers Court.

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.

[David Orsam]

Yes, agreed, which from our point of view means he should have called Dr. Phillips to provide more medical evidence, yet he did not.

I was alluding to what you wrote in the first line:
"...that it could potentially have brought the medical profession, and indeed the inquest itself, into disrepute by having a respectable witness testify that she saw Kelly alive at 8:00am followed by a doctor giving his opinion that Kelly was dead at 2:00am."

I meant that Macdonald may have intended to hear all the testimony, both medical & civil, regardless of what the outcome would be. Dr. Phillips had already been the center of controversy over the ToD in the Chapman murder.

It's a thought that I have never considered before, but becomes relevant in the Kelly case because it suggests to me Macdonald just might have made his mind up in advance of the inquest that the medical evidence was not a significant contributing factor other than proof that this was a case of murder.
A fact that hardly needed the support of medical evidence.

So, either Macdonald may not have been aware of Dr. Bond's estimated ToD, or if he was, he did not agree with it.

I'm sure that Macdonald was not aware of Dr Bond's report but would only have known what was said in Dr Phillips' report which is lost to us.

The problem was that Dr Phillips could only provide an estimate and, if his estimate was the same as Bond's, it wasn't going to be very helpful to the jury for the doctor to say 1-2am in the context of the evidence that there was a scream at 3:45am and a witness who had spoken to the deceased at 8:00am!

So what I am really suggesting is that, with the express or tacit agreement of the Coroner, the time estimate (if he had one) was abandoned by Phillips or at least he did not have sufficient confidence in his estimate to be able to put it forward in open court in conflict with witness testimony.

As for the more general point about medical evidence, there is no doubt that it was not all given at the inquest. Hence from the Times of 13 November: "The CORONER said he proposed at that stage to take, briefly, the evidence of the doctor. They could not go into all the particulars at that stage...... The CORONER said it would not be necessary for the doctor to go into any further particulars then. If it was necessary they could recall him at a subsequent period."

[Michael W Richards]

Just thought that a reality grounding might be prudent....there is no evidence at all....none....that Caroline Maxwell knew who Mary Kelly was, what she looked like, or where Mary was on the Friday morning. Just as there is no evidence that George Hutchison knew Mary Kelly of Millers Court.

Although they are often cited as valuable witnesses in this case, in fact the opposite is the truth unless or until someone provides at the very least a secondary corroborative source. And no, Sarah saw a Wideawake Hatted man, not someone she identified as George Hutchinson.

Not one single shred of evidence has been offered that Caroline Maxwells remarks are validated, there is no secondary source that we can be sure knew Mary at all either, therefore, it is heresay evidence only ...and hardly a foundation to launch credibility attacks at the PM physicians abilities to determine a rough cause of death....based upon numerous factors including environmental, state of rigor, and partially digested food. Which stopped being processed when Mary was killed.

[Abby Normal]

I'm suggesting that the only way to answer your question is to speak to people who are now dead.

Or do you have some other suggestions?

Haha. My mom claims to have talked to my long dead father. Maybe I'll ask her.

[Wickerman]

I'm not sure I understand what you mean about the Coroner letting the chips fall where they may. His legal obligation was "to examine on oath touching the deaths all persons who tender their evidence respecting the facts and all persons having knowledge of the facts whom he thinks it expedient to examine".

Yes, agreed, which from our point of view means he should have called Dr. Phillips to provide more medical evidence, yet he did not.

I was alluding to what you wrote in the first line:
"...that it could potentially have brought the medical profession, and indeed the inquest itself, into disrepute by having a respectable witness testify that she saw Kelly alive at 8:00am followed by a doctor giving his opinion that Kelly was dead at 2:00am."

I meant that Macdonald may have intended to hear all the testimony, both medical & civil, regardless of what the outcome would be. Dr. Phillips had already been the center of controversy over the ToD in the Chapman murder.

Yes, I feel sure that Dr Phillips' autopsy report would have been seen by the Coroner prior to the inquest.

It's a thought that I have never considered before, but becomes relevant in the Kelly case because it suggests to me Macdonald just might have made his mind up in advance of the inquest that the medical evidence was not a significant contributing factor other than proof that this was a case of murder.
A fact that hardly needed the support of medical evidence.

So, either Macdonald may not have been aware of Dr. Bond's estimated ToD, or if he was, he did not agree with it.

[David Orsam]

Thankyou for that David.
I'm suspicious though that Macdonald may have foreseen this contention because, after all, he is the one who selected the witnesses. He intentionally selected Cox, perhaps because of her Blotchy character; and Lewis, maybe due to her Loiterer; and Maxwell, who's evidence placed the murder after 9:00 am. So he knew in advance that there was a high degree of contention to overcome in order to establish a time of death, or even identify the murderer.

As for the medical evidence, with Macdonald being a surgeon himself and the fact he joined the other surgeons at Millers Court, I feel sure he knew considerably more about the medical evidence than the average Coroner would.

We do read in the inquest coverage that he intended to preside over a second sitting at this inquest where Dr. Phillips could present his evidence.
So it would appear this scenario that you envisage above, was about to unfold, and would have if Macdonald had not changed his mind.
If that is the case, then Macdonald seemed quite prepared to let the chips fall where they may.

Here's a question for you David.
Given that the Coroner (or his office) is the one who reads and then selects the best witnesses to comply with the intent of the inquest, would this advance knowledge extend to the autopsy report?
It's my understanding that the surgeon/physician who is to conduct an autopsy does so under the direction of the Coroner. Does this imply the autopsy report is the property of the Coroner's Office, and as such would be delivered to his office on completion?

In this case that would mean the Coroner also reads the autopsy report prior to the inquest.

I'm not sure I understand what you mean about the Coroner letting the chips fall where they may. His legal obligation was "to examine on oath touching the deaths all persons who tender their evidence respecting the facts and all persons having knowledge of the facts whom he thinks it expedient to examine".

Yes, I feel sure that Dr Phillips' autopsy report would have been seen by the Coroner prior to the inquest.

[David Orsam]

no comprende

I'm suggesting that the only way to answer your question is to speak to people who are now dead.

Or do you have some other suggestions?

[Wickerman]

It goes back to my point that it could potentially have brought the medical profession, and indeed the inquest itself, into disrepute by having a respectable witness testify that she saw Kelly alive at 8:00am followed by a doctor giving his opinion that Kelly was dead at 2:00am. And I would go further by saying that, regardless of what Dr Phillips might have written in his report, I very much doubt he would have wanted to express such an opinion in open court in view of Maxwell's evidence. I'm not saying that the doctor and the Coroner both necessarily thought Maxwell was correct but it would have been a huge risk to take. And if Maxwell was wrong but Prater/Lewis heard Kelly screaming as she was being murdered then it was still a problem (if Phillips agreed with Bond) because the scream was some two or three after Bond's estimated time of death.

Thankyou for that David.
I'm suspicious though that Macdonald may have foreseen this contention because, after all, he is the one who selected the witnesses. He intentionally selected Cox, perhaps because of her Blotchy character; and Lewis, maybe due to her Loiterer; and Maxwell, who's evidence placed the murder after 9:00 am. So he knew in advance that there was a high degree of contention to overcome in order to establish a time of death, or even identify the murderer.

As for the medical evidence, with Macdonald being a surgeon himself and the fact he joined the other surgeons at Millers Court, I feel sure he knew considerably more about the medical evidence than the average Coroner would.

We do read in the inquest coverage that he intended to preside over a second sitting at this inquest where Dr. Phillips could present his evidence.
So it would appear this scenario that you envisage above, was about to unfold, and would have if Macdonald had not changed his mind.
If that is the case, then Macdonald seemed quite prepared to let the chips fall where they may.

Here's a question for you David.
Given that the Coroner (or his office) is the one who reads and then selects the best witnesses to comply with the intent of the inquest, would this advance knowledge extend to the autopsy report?
It's my understanding that the surgeon/physician who is to conduct an autopsy does so under the direction of the Coroner. Does this imply the autopsy report is the property of the Coroner's Office, and as such would be delivered to his office on completion?

In this case that would mean the Coroner also reads the autopsy report prior to the inquest.

[Pierre]

How then do you explain her saying she knew the deceased as Mary Jane?

And how do you explain her evidence that she said "why Mary what brings you up so early" and she replied "I do feel so bad!".

Interestingly, according a set of newspapers from 12 November, Lizzie Albrook was visiting Kelly on the night before the murder, at about eight o´clock. Joe Barnett was there and he was still there when Albrook left.

Wasn´t Maria Harvey also visiting Kelly that night and before Joe Barnett arrived?

Kelly seems to have had a lot of visitors.

Regards, Pierre

[Abby Normal]

Do you mean superior psychic skills?

no comprende

[David Orsam]

Hi David and Rich
as ive mentioned before, I'm intrigued by the possibility of (b). especially since Maxwell said she had seen her about the lodging house and lizzie worked there.

David (or Richard)
would you be interested in using your superior research skills to check this possibility out?

Do you mean superior psychic skills?

[Abby Normal]

I can't help feeling we can rule out (b) bearing in mind that she said she called the woman Mary and the woman answered to that name.

As for (c) we can say the same about every single witness. They might have been lying. But why Mrs Maxwell more than anyone else?

Hi David and Rich
as ive mentioned before, I'm intrigued by the possibility of (b). especially since Maxwell said she had seen her about the lodging house and lizzie worked there.

David (or Richard)
would you be interested in using your superior research skills to check this possibility out? It might just help clear up the confusion.