Let there be light!

[David Orsam]

Hi David,
That is true, if you accept that she was not mistaken, but on my second point of telling lies for a possible motive not so.
We have three alternatives,
a] Maxwell was being truthful. and Kelly therefore was killed after 9.am.?
b] She saw Lizzie, and believed her name to have been Mary?
c Maxwell lied to protect someone, and gave someone a night alibi.by suggesting the victim was alive in daylight?
Regards Richard.[ One of those is right]

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?

[richardnunweek]

Hi David,
That is true, if you accept that she was not mistaken, but on my second point of telling lies for a possible motive not so.
We have three alternatives,
a] Maxwell was being truthful. and Kelly therefore was killed after 9.am.?
b] She saw Lizzie, and believed her name to have been Mary?
c Maxwell lied to protect someone, and gave someone a night alibi.by suggesting the victim was alive in daylight?
Regards Richard.[ One of those is right]

[David Orsam]

or she mistook Kelly for Lizzie Albrook

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!".

[richardnunweek]

Hi,
As I previously have mentioned, I am convince Mrs Maxwell either had a reason for telling a deliberate lie. or she mistook Kelly for Lizzie Albrook, who worked in a Dorset street lodging house, and lived in the court.
Maxwell said at the inquest..''I have seen her about in the lodging house.'', which could give support for that assumption.
The letter sent to the police from 14, Dorset street a week earlier [ Mrs Maxwell's home address], albeit to the Norfolk police may have some significance in her statement.
Regards Richard.

[David Orsam]

Hi David,

This discussion actually led to something!

I think I know now how I can find out if we have any reason to think that Kelly was alive at 8.30 in the morning.

I will try this hypothesis (it is just an hypothesis) as soon as I can.

Thanks for a good discussion, David. You are contributing to the case.

Thank you for not being in any way patronising in your response Pierre.

And I'm glad that you feel that my repetition of a point I have made numerous times on this forum has assisted you in some vague way.

I'm bound to point out, however, that we clearly do have some reason to think that Kelly was alive at 8.30 in the morning due to the evidence of Mrs Maxwell but the issue at hand is whether we accept that evidence or not.

Nevertheless, I look forward to reading the results of your contemplation and, indeed, to finding out if there will be any new "tendencies" for us to consider.

[David Orsam]

So much storytelling for nothing.

If I knew what that meant I'd respond to it but it seems to be a dumb comment made purely for the sake of saying something negative about one of my posts.

[Columbo]

Hi Columbo.
I appreciate your opinion, one of the drawbacks here is we can only use the Coroner's Act that was prevalent at the time of the murders.
I think we have to accept the Coroner's Act has evolved from 1888 to something more encompassing today.

Absolutely. I will concede to that.

Columbo

[Fisherman]

Congratulations David! The great Pierre certifies that you are contributing to the case!

But can we invest in that...?

[Henry Flower]

Congratulations David! The great Pierre certifies that you are contributing to the case!

[Pierre]

I know what a hypothesis is Pierre and when you asked me your question I answered it by saying "No, that is not my hypothesis Pierre."

On this forum, as in the part of my post that you have quoted, I have repeatedly made the point that there is no real evidence in existence (and certainly no evidence given at the inquest) which contradicts Mrs Maxwell's evidence that she saw MJK alive at 8:00am.

I'm sorry to trouble you again with logic but that does not necessarily mean that I believe that MJK was alive at 8:00am.

Hi David,

This discussion actually led to something!

I think I know now how I can find out if we have any reason to think that Kelly was alive at 8.30 in the morning.

I will try this hypothesis (it is just an hypothesis) as soon as I can.

Thanks for a good discussion, David. You are contributing to the case.

Regards, Pierre

[Pierre]

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.

So much storytelling for nothing.

Regards, Pierre

[David Orsam]

David Orsam, why are you wasting your time?

I don't know. I see a post (by anyone) and respond to it if I have something to say. I guess I must like wasting time.

Am enjoying your posts though. Do keep it up.

[David Orsam]

I'm glad you voiced that opinion David, because this is precisely what I believe happened with Dr. Bond's report, Anderson would, I think, have passed that detail down to Swanson and his team.

Quite likely and Phillips was the local divisional surgeon so probably would have told Abberline what time he though Kelly was murdered. Whether that affected the direction of the police investigation, however, I really have no view.

[Wickerman]

It's not a matter of thinking about it, it's the policy of the Coroner's Office. He must be able to establish a time of death as accurately as possible. That falls under the "When and Where". I'm sorry but thems the rules.

Columbo

Hi Columbo.
I appreciate your opinion, one of the drawbacks here is we can only use the Coroner's Act that was prevalent at the time of the murders.
I think we have to accept the Coroner's Act has evolved from 1888 to something more encompassing today.

[David Orsam]

In the case of Mary Kelly, it appears Dr. Bond was able to provide an estimate, so the question for me is why did Macdonald not let Dr. Phillips provide his opinion on the matter.

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.