Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Caroline Maxwell Alibi ?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Caroline Maxwell Alibi ?

    This is just a theory but I am wondering if Caroline Maxwell was covering up for her husband in some way. She says in her statement that she had been helping her husband all night. Is it too much of a stretch of the imagination to suggest he was, or she was paid a shilling say, by John Mcarthy to keep an eye out on the court, [one possible explanation is he could have been worried about Mary doing a moonlight flit with the money she owed knowing he would be asking for it next day]. We know that he worked at Crossingham's across the road that night as the deputy lodging keeper. We also know that Sarah Lewis saw someone standing outside the lodging house looking up the court. Could this have been Henry keeping an eye out whilst he had a chance? And in her statement it says, crossed out, talking to a female, could this have been Caroline with Henry? If he failed in his duty to keep an eye out on the court as such and didn't want the wrath of Mcarthy, maybe they rented the property off him where they lived? Perhaps Caroline felt obliged to give Henry, or herself some form of Alibi by inventing the later sighting?
    Last edited by Darryl Kenyon; 06-12-2018, 11:47 AM.

  • #2
    But Maxwell was not alone in her claim.
    Regards, Jon S.

    Comment


    • #3
      As far as I am aware I thought there was just Maurice Lewis and an unnamed woman in The Times, who perhaps was Caroline Maxwell who thought they saw MJK early morning? Certainly, there was only Caroline at the inquest who left herself open to being cross-examined. An important point in my opinion.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Darryl Kenyon View Post
        As far as I am aware I thought there was just Maurice Lewis and an unnamed woman in The Times, who perhaps was Caroline Maxwell who thought they saw MJK early morning? Certainly, there was only Caroline at the inquest who left herself open to being cross-examined. An important point in my opinion.
        Well , that's three .How many said that they saw her the night before when there was no argument she was alive ?
        Just two .... and one of them was Maurice Lewis himself
        We don't know why only Maxwell was called for sure but the smart money would be on the fact that had there been more than one at the inquest saying they saw her the next morning then TOD would have been fixed at after 9 and created a chaotic situation in the shortest of short inquest .

        There are no grounds whatsoever for disbelieving Maxwell or Lewis
        You can lead a horse to water.....

        Comment


        • #5
          Hi,
          Whilst we are at it.
          The letter penned from Maxwell's address to the Yarmouth police, claiming another murder would happen one week from then.
          What are the odds that a letter claiming another Ripper murder, would take place, would have been sent from the witness Maxwell's address, which happens to be exactly opposite the murder scene.?
          A witness that gave information , which had a bearing on the investigation, surely the word coincidence cannot apply?
          Regards Richard.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by richardnunweek View Post
            Hi,
            Whilst we are at it.
            The letter penned from Maxwell's address to the Yarmouth police, claiming another murder would happen one week from then.
            What are the odds that a letter claiming another Ripper murder, would take place, would have been sent from the witness Maxwell's address, which happens to be exactly opposite the murder scene.?
            A witness that gave information , which had a bearing on the investigation, surely the word coincidence cannot apply?
            Regards Richard.
            What was the date and the address on the letter please Richard ?
            You can lead a horse to water.....

            Comment


            • #7
              What is worth bearing in mind is that nobody writing a JTR letter would give their real address .
              If putting any address down at all it would be gleaned from newspapers almost certainly
              You can lead a horse to water.....

              Comment


              • #8
                Entirely subjective, but I can't see the Ripper killing that late in the morning. While you could argue that he replaced the cover of night with the inside of Miller's Court, it was riskier to kill at a time when there was an increased chance of someone comin' a knockin' for MJK.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Hi,
                  Post 4 Thread 'Was Millers court being watched by the police.'
                  Just suppose the London police had knowledge of the 14, Dorset street letter sent to the Yarmouth police a week previous.
                  It could then be conceivable that the address it was sent from , being directly opposite Millers court , might trigger alarm bells , especially if they had figured out the killers pattern of dates.
                  Regards Richard.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Harry D View Post
                    Entirely subjective, but I can't see the Ripper killing that late in the morning. While you could argue that he replaced the cover of night with the inside of Miller's Court, it was riskier to kill at a time when there was an increased chance of someone comin' a knockin' for MJK.
                    agree. the ripper was a night stalker.

                    Plus times too tight for Maxwell and m. Lewis to have been correct IMHO.

                    Then there is the question of the large fire and burnt clothes and kettle, undoubtedly stoked up by the killer at night.
                    "Is all that we see or seem
                    but a dream within a dream?"

                    -Edgar Allan Poe


                    "...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
                    quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

                    -Frederick G. Abberline

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      I found this article quite interesting regarding the time of Mary's death
                      Rigor mortis has been reported to commence, under average conditions, within three to four hours after death, and will disappear at 36-48 hours after death; however, the exact period and duration is highly variable. The onset of rigor mortis does not follow a constant or symmetrical order; however, it will typically develop in smaller muscles first - in the eyelids, face, lower jaw and neck, before moving on to the trunk and limbs. There is no measurable shortening of muscles unless the muscles have been subjected to tension prior to onset. When rigor mortis is fully developed, the joints of the body become fixed, and repositioning of the limbs is only possible by brute force - once broken, the rigor will not return, provided it is fully developed. It is traditionally accepted that rigor mortis passes off in the same sequence it developed, to secondary muscle flaccidity.The period of development is influenced by factors such as:Temperature of the environment - High temperatures both accelerates the onset of rigor mortis and shortens its duration; if the temperature is below 10C, development of rigor mortis is considered rare.Muscular activity prior to death - It has been observed that rigor mortis develops and passes quickly in an individual who died after prolonged muscular activity.Disease and unnatural death - Septicaemia and wasting diseases hasten the onset of rigor mortis; death by asphyxia tends to delay it. Similarly, death that is preceded by severe haemorrhaging causes rigor mortis to develop late
                      All three of the factors mentioned delaying the onset of Rigor Mortis probably happened with MJK. So the likelihood that it was delayed from its usual onset of three to four hours is highly likely.
                      Ps Also read this in the same article - The greater the surface area exposed, the more quickly the body will cool Think it is fair to say with MJK
                      Last edited by Darryl Kenyon; 06-14-2018, 08:58 AM.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Do you have a link for that article?
                        I tend to collect pdf's concerning Time of Death, and causes.
                        There is a good one that describes what 19th century doctors used to help determine ToD - Algor mortis, Livor mortis, Rigor mortis, Decomposition, etc., plus Niderkorn's tables which were the standard for the time.
                        http://www.dumpio.fr/_media/time-of-death.pdf

                        What I have not been able to locate is a 19th century source which explains how Rigor mortise develops. I'm sure they were not aware it was due to chemical reaction.
                        I would like to know if they thought it was the result of temperature, but I just don't know.
                        Regards, Jon S.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Here it is Wick
                          https://www.quora.com/How-long-does-...o-the-shoulder

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Wickerman View Post
                            Do you have a link for that article?
                            I tend to collect pdf's concerning Time of Death, and causes.
                            There is a good one that describes what 19th century doctors used to help determine ToD - Algor mortis, Livor mortis, Rigor mortis, Decomposition, etc., plus Niderkorn's tables which were the standard for the time.
                            http://www.dumpio.fr/_media/time-of-death.pdf

                            What I have not been able to locate is a 19th century source which explains how Rigor mortise develops. I'm sure they were not aware it was due to chemical reaction.
                            I would like to know if they thought it was the result of temperature, but I just don't know.
                            C 1881, Kuhne suggested Rigor was caused by a chemical act involving myosin. I'm not sure if he had it exactly, but was he along the right lines?
                            ,,`,, Debs ,,`,,

                            I am not DJA. He's called Dave.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by packers stem View Post
                              What was the date and the address on the letter?
                              29/10/1888 from 14 Dorset Street Spitalfields.
                              My name is Dave. You cannot reach me through Debs email account

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X