Kennedy and Lewis

[Sam Flynn]

I find that contradictory position pretty compelling evidence that unless they both went to the same room in the courtyard that night, then one isn't telling the truth.

I'd agree, and the possibility that others (Paumier and Roney among them, Hutchinson too perhaps) had been bitten by the "chatty mysterious man with a bag" meme would only add weight to the idea that some folk were jumping on the bandwagon.

[Michael W Richards]

Didn't mean to subvert the thread Sam for more than a mo, for me its just a matter of consistency and continuity. When I see a post that contains something that is being mentioned as fact and I know its not,...well......

I mentioned the fact that in the 2 statements the relationship with the Keylers is quite different, one claims its her parents she is staying with, the other says it was at The Keylers. I find that contradictory position pretty compelling evidence that unless they both went to the same room in the courtyard that night, then one isn't telling the truth.

[Sam Flynn]

Getting back to the OP, what light (if any) do Sarah Roney and Mrs Paumier shed on the matter, given that their accounts seem to have appeared in the press at around the same time as Mrs Kennedy, and all three stories share certain key elements?

[Michael W Richards]

The other Jew was Kozebrodski, and he was not asked to appear at the inquest, but he told the press he accompanied Diemschitz..

"A member of the club named Kozebrodski returned with Diemsschütz into the court, and the former struck a match while the latter lifted the body up....... Both men ran off without delay to find a policeman."

Why didn't Kozebrodski appear at the Stride inquest? - because he told a similar story as Diemschitz. Much the same as why Kennedy didn't appear at the Kelly inquest, she told much the same story as Lewis.

Diemschitz made no mention of Kozebrodski, like Lewis made no mention of Kennedy. Nothing suspicious about it at all. It's just the way the inquest procedure works.

In fact there is a press account that Isaac Kozebroski stated he arrived back at the club around half past 12 and about 10 minutes later he was alerted to a commotion outside. He went to the passageway, saw the woman and Louis, and then Louis sent him out alone. There are also several witnesses that state they were in that passageway around 12:45, coincidentally when Israel sees his altercation and Brown, the couple in quiet talk. And Eagle is in the passageway.

Spooners timing in his statement suggests much the same thing. A much earlier discovery than is stated by Louis and Eagle. Both on the club payroll.

People seem to hate the idea that a group of people can agree to modify the truth in order to save their livelihood, or even to support a friend. Truth is that happens all the time, every day, the nature of people and the steps they will take in self preservation or loyalty are all well documented.

I believe Isaac doesn't show at the Inquest because he, and members like Gillen and Heschberg, conflict with the official line of discover at 1am, "saw nothing heard nothing". We see the pushback on any alternative suggestion in the Inquest, when Spooners time suggests an earlier time than Louis has said. The problem with Spooner... for the club.... is that they would likely have wished to have his statement suppressed, but his on the scene testimony is something that could not be omitted. Its interesting though, when reviewing the statements made about the time something transpired, there are no less than 4 accounts that suggest a discovery time at around 12:45. And we have a plethora of activities at around 12:45, don't we?

[Sam Flynn]

It is significant that the first woman was merely described as "a woman she (Kennedy) did not know". As opposed to - 'two women she did not know'. The implication being that Kennedy did know the second woman

It might simply indicate that the journalist concerned only asked a follow-up question as to whether Kennedy recognised the more interesting of the two women, i.e. the one seen speaking and interacting with the mysterious man.

[Wickerman]

Much of what we read is uncertain in this case.

It was the Press Association article which was published widely that only described the second woman as, "poorly clad, without any headgear".

The Evening News also published this same P.A. article, yet provided their own coverage where they identified the woman as the "deceased" in one paragraph, and as "Kelly" in another.

While the generic "poorly clad, without any headgear" could be any female in her class, it also describes Kelly.

It is significant that the first woman was merely described as "a woman she (Kennedy) did not know". As opposed to - 'two women she did not know'. The implication being that Kennedy did know the second woman, but it was the P.A. who chose not to identify her.

[Kattrup]

Exactly, Wickerman. Came here to post just that.

Also, it’s entirely uncertain that Kennedy saw MJK.

Although one or two papers say it was MJK, the news story circulated was that she saw a man and two women, both unidentified.

[Wickerman]

When a witness says "about", we normally allow that the time is an estimate.

"...She (Kennedy) states that about three o'clock on Friday morning she entered Dorset street on her way to her parents' house,..."

The majority of press reports concerning Kennedy use "about" when referring to the time.
Kennedy does not say the clock struck three, so she was estimating.

By now I would assume most of us know that times given by witnesses are only estimates. It seems that theorists who are intent on pushing a theory, or alternately criticizing a theory, typically try to argue the times given are suddenly precise.
Amazing that.

2:50, 2:55, 3:05 or 3:10 are all "about" three o'clock. We don't know the precise time Kennedy passed the Britannia. Clearly then, if the clock struck three o'clock as Hutchinson left Dorset St., both Kelly & Astrachan could have left within minutes of Hutch, and as the Britannia is only a 120+ feet away Kelly could have been there around 3:05-3:10. Which is "about" three o'clock.

[Simon Wood]

Passing the Britannia, commonly known as Ringer's, at the top of Dorset street, at three o'clock on the Friday morning, Mrs Kennedy saw the deceased [Kelly] talking to a respectably dressed man, whom she identified as having accosted her a night or two before. She passed them without taking any notice, and went home to bed.

How can this account be true when, according to George Hutchinson, who remained outside Millers Court until "the [Spitalfields] clock struck 3 o'clock," Kelly had been in Room 13 with Mister Astrakhan since around 2.15 am?

Or, if Mrs Kennedy was correct, how could George Hutchinson have seen what he allegedly saw?

It's all BS, my friends.

[Wickerman]

You still miss the point.
Two witnesses reporting the same details do not appear in court.
Both Lewis & Kennedy saw a strange man outside the Britannia, both heard the cry of murder, only Lewis saw a loiterer near the scene of the crime.
Lewis gets to testify.

Alternately, Kennedy could have been slated to appear at the next hearing, but the coroner cut the inquest short.

[packers stem]

Not remotely similar
With diemschutz you're talking about the same point in time .
If you were correct in that Kennedy and Lewis both existed and gave statements then they are separated by at least 30 mins and saw different things and Kennedy was the last person to have possibly have seen something of importance prior to Maxwell .
No excuse whatsoever for not calling her

[Wickerman]

A witness at an inquest or a trial is conditioned before hand to only answer questions with respect to what they did, what they saw & what they heard.

You'll be familiar with the testimony of Diemschitz at the Stride inquest, he says he ran for a policeman, but doesn't mention who ran with him. By Diemschitz account he was by himself.
Yet, the man who came back with him, Spooner, said that two Jews came running towards him.
The other Jew was Kozebrodski, and he was not asked to appear at the inquest, but he told the press he accompanied Diemschitz..

"A member of the club named Kozebrodski returned with Diemsschütz into the court, and the former struck a match while the latter lifted the body up....... Both men ran off without delay to find a policeman."

Why didn't Kozebrodski appear at the Stride inquest? - because he told a similar story as Diemschitz. Much the same as why Kennedy didn't appear at the Kelly inquest, she told much the same story as Lewis.

Diemschitz made no mention of Kozebrodski, like Lewis made no mention of Kennedy. Nothing suspicious about it at all. It's just the way the inquest procedure works.

[packers stem]

It's not mentioned because it is not important to the inquest. Besides, Lewis says she sat up in a chair, she couldn't sleep. She just dozed.
It isn't a case of failing to mention anyone. If that was the case then she also failed to mention Mr Keyler & Mrs Keyler, so perhaps you think the room was empty?

A little different as they were most likely asleep , not wandering in as Lewis was dozing and when they heard 'oh murder', together .... "did you hear that sis? "
So she didn't say her sister could corroborate the cry ? Inconvenient that
Abberline , after separately interviewing Kennedy, decided against bringing the last person to have seen anything prior to Maxwell to the inquest , not only that but to 'lose' her official statement ?
More inconvenience for us , we ripperologists are dogged by so much misfortune lol

[Wickerman]

...
If not you would have to query how neither woke either if they both arrived separately at the Keylers ,and failed to mention each other ......

It's not mentioned because it is not important to the inquest. Besides, Lewis says she sat up in a chair, she couldn't sleep. She just dozed.
It isn't a case of failing to mention anyone. If that was the case then she also failed to mention Mr Keyler & Mrs Keyler, so perhaps you think the room was empty?

[packers stem]

My feeling is that the early , original Kennedy story was accurate , being fresh in her mind , interviewed ,presumably , on the 9th due to its appearance in the Star and evening news of the 10th ( though they were both evening papers so the possibility remains that she was interviewed that morning of the 10th) .
During the police interview she was 'led' and the story altered .
By the inquest she'd had a major memory boost , remembering the time by the church clock ( how was this possibly unknown at interview time ?? )
Nor the short and shout , or the black wideawake hat ...... stunning really .
Something stinks and it's not the fish and potatoes