Maxwell

[richardnunweek]

Hello Bridewell,
In absolute agreement with you, I have argued for years regarding the T.O.D, and modern day medical knowledge is vastly different then 1888, Rigor Mortis is not a science today, it certainly was no more then guesswork then, anal temperatures were not taken for example.
Mrs Maxwell certainly saw someone she absolutely believed to have been the victim, her time-line that morning was checked and verified, and clothing described was found in Kelly's room.
She swore on oath, despite being reminded that her account was not the same as medical opinion, and although not recorded, I would be surprised if she was not taking to view the body, as her sighting was so disputed, the police would have given her every chance to realise a mistake.
I have mentioned before on Casebook, that around 1973 I read the following from a source I cannot recall unfortunately.
It appeared to have been part of Mrs Maxwell's statement which I have never seen since and the following words were featured ,allegedly spoken by Maxwell.''Her eyes looked queer as if in a heavy cold''.
If that was indeed the impression that she got, when addressing Kelly at 815am on the morning of the 9th, then I would suggest that the ''Oh I have lost my hanker-chief'' that Hutchinson stated he heard Kelly utter at 215am , might indeed suggest that Mary Kelly had a cold.
The significance there is, if medical opinion was correct, and the time of death was around 3am-4am, then how could Maxwell know of Kelly's possible ailment.
She saw her the previous day...
But she was interviewed on the 9th just a few hours after the sighting.
She was returning plates when she spoke to Mary,,which was confirmed, returned that very day, she went to fetch milk, which was confirmed by the shop keeper, as clear as a bell, as he had not seen her for a long time.
That Maxwell reference and its whereabouts has always puzzled me, the only similar account comes from Mc'Cormack's publication ie''All muffled up like with a cold'', so it was not from that source, although clearly he also had seen an account, which apparently is no more.
Anyway a fascinating sighting that needs more discussion.
Regards Richard.

[Bridewell]

No Third Option?

Hi Claire and Rubyretro
There really has to be a question about the identity of the body.
In the words of John McCarthy-"The woman's nose had been cut off ,and her face gashed and mutilated so that it was quite beyond recognition"

Surely Barnett would have given no more than a fleeting glance (and probably shown no more than her face under a corner of a blanket) he would have been unlikely to have paid any attention to hands,forehead ,calf or anything else suggested.

There are two possibilities only

1.Maxwell and Lewis were truthful and Mary Kelly was not the victim

2.Maxwell and Lewis(Twice) were mistaken.

There is no third option.The idea that Kelly was the victim and she was seen by maxwell and lewis is a physical impossibility due to the times involved.

Keep an open mind about the victims identity and the pieces may fall together.

There is indeed a third option, namely that the good Dr Bond was mistaken. Kelly's body was discovered at 10.45am. By the time that Bond got to examine the body it was 2pm. I quote direct from a letter sent, by him, in response to one from the Home Office:

"In the Dorset Street case the body was lying on the bed at the time of my visit, 2 o'clock, quite naked (n.b. he got that wrong too!) and mutilated as in the annexed report-
Rigor mortis had set in, but increased during the progress of the examination. From this it is difficult to say, with any degree of certainty the exact time that had elapsed since death as the period varies from 6 to 12 hours before rigidity sets in"

This is wrong. Rigor mortis usually commences after about three hours, not the six to which Bond refers. Keep an open mind about the victim's identity? Okay fine, but keep an open mind about the time of death also. Count back three hours from 2pm and you reach 11am. We know Kelly was dead before 10.45am, but not how long before.

Keep an open mind too about Maxwell & Lewis. A time of death of, say, 10.20am does not conflict with their accounts and would be 3 hours & 40 minutes before Bond noted that rigor mortis had commenced. We're told that the mutilations to Kelly "must have" taken at least 2 hours, but what evidence is there to support that without duplicating the injuries with the same weapon(s) and we don't know what weapons the killer had at his disposal.

Walter Dew had this to say, in his memoirs, about Caroline Maxwell:

"If Mrs Maxwell had been a sensation seeker - one of those women who live for the limelight - it would have been easy to discredit her story. She was not. She seemed a sane and sensible woman, and her reputation was excellent. In one way at least her version fitted into the facts as known. We knew that Marie had been drinking the previous night, and, as this was not a habit of hers, illness the next morning was just what might have been expected.

As for the possibility that the body is not Kelly's: Why not? There was facial mutilation, but not necessarily for the purpose of disguise. It has been argued that Kelly, because she was heavily in debt, caused someone else to be killed so that she could move away and start a new life. She could have moved away and started a new life without resorting to, or arranging, the murder of a substitute. She could simply have left and changed her name (again?).

I prefer to believe that witnesses, with no reason to lie, are telling the truth and to draw my conclusions based upon their evidence. Dr Bond's understanding of rigor mortis conflicts with the modern view of that phenomenon. He was in error. Maxwell & Lewis, in my view, were not.

[richardnunweek]

Hello Wickerman.
I agree partly, except I do not believe she got the 'wrong person', or the 'wrong day',we have the sworn statement of a level headed woman Mrs Maxwell , who not only new MJK, but also Barnett.
Albeit, she may have only spoke to Mary once or twice, but appears to have been a person who took notice around her, the term ''Nosey Parker '' springs to mind.
So what are the alternatives?
1]Kelly was killed after 9am
2] Someone else was the victim, which would indicate a planned, premeditated, killing , that belongs in the annuals of fiction.
As for Maurice Lewis.
To admit that he was playing a illegal game at 9am , until someone shouted ''Copper'' would be foolhardy would it not? if this was accurate timing then was a policeman approaching the court?
Oh dear ...Hello Hello Hello what have we here, clear off I want to murder someone in that room..
Ha ha.
Regards Richard.

[Wickerman]

I beleive maxwell had the right day but the wrong "Mary Kelly" also.

Agreed. At least, thats the most rational explanation I can think of.

The common argument some like to promote that Maxwell confused the day is hard to apply in practical terms.

Because Maxwell lived & worked right there in Dorset St. then we know that by 11:30-12:00 on that Friday morning the police had taken possession of Millers Court and Kelly's murder was common knowledge.

Maxwell was not reflecting on possibly seeing Mary Kelly two or three days previous, she claimed to have seen Kelly just 3 hours ago. Three hours before she learned that Kelly had been murdered.
Putting ourselves in her shoes, what has just happened to 'you' (anyone) only three hours ago that 'you' could possibly confuse with a day or two ago?

Suggesting Maxwell confused the day when she was speaking at the inquest on the 12th is completely missing the point that Maxwell knew that Kelly had been murdered just three hours after she claimed to have seen her alive in the street.
I don't know what the solution is, but Maxwell's statement deserves to be explained.


On the other hand you cannot take Maxwell's testimony in isolation.
Maurice Lewis was playing pitch & toss in Millers Court when he claimed to see Mary leave to go out about 8:00 am Friday morning, and saw her later in the Britannia.

We ignore these statements because they do not fit with the testimony of others, and tend to conflict with the medical testimony.

Reasonably then, we must ask if these sighting were not Kelly, but someone dressed like her, and look like her? (red hair and all), then who was it?

Is there something more to Kelly's murder that we have been completely oblivious to all these years - and I'm not talking of conspiracies.

Regards, Jon S.

[The Good Michael]

The fact that Maxwell went to the funeral does not prove she knew Kelly.

It proves that she was taken seriously as a witness and that it was believed that she knew Kelly. I don't think there can be real doubt in that regard.

Mike

[miss marple]

The fact that Maxwell went to the funeral does not prove she knew Kelly. All the women who gave evidence at the inquest went to the funeral.It was a big event with hundreds of onlookers. The witnesses had their 15 minutes of fame.
Maxwell had known a woman for four months had she had said hello too maybe twice. The woman was short, and dark and a prostitute, a woman who was not living with anyone as she 'never associated with anyone' who was an' active' prostitute in the time Maxwell knew her. Mary Kelly had only gone back on the streets a few days before she was murdered, Maxwell would not have known that, she appeared not to know that Mary had been living with Joe.
Whether you believe Maxwell was talking to Kelly or not. The woman lying dead in the bed could not have been her. So anyone who believes Maxwell must think someone else was in the bed which begs the question who was it? and why was Mary Kelly never seen again.
The Britannia pub people did see Mary Kelly the morning Maxwell spoke to the woman, in spite of her standing outside and possibily going in with the strange man
Miss Marple

[The Good Michael]

Maxwell rode in one of the hearses to Kelly's funeral (if I'm not mistaken). That might mean that she knew Kelly, mightn't it?

Mike

[richardnunweek]

Hi,
In Maxwell, we have a witness that was adamant, not only to the police , but also at the inquest, also the press.. that she saw , and spoke to the victim
Most of her information was recorded on the 9th, [ excluding the inquest], the theory that she either was mistaken on the date, or the millers court victim, is unlikely if one takes the time-line .
I would suggest that he middle aged man that Maxwell saw kelly with, would be a prime suspect for her killer, but that leads us still baffled , as who knows?
Regards Richard.

[Abby Normal]

At the inquest Maxwell seems to be describing a different woman from Mary Kelly.
She says'' She believed she was an unfortunate who never associated with anyone''
Now in the four months Maxwell ''knew her'' Kelly was living with Joe and not working as an 'unfortunate' She had also had Maria Harvey to stay with her. She did not return to the streets until a few days before she died. She was not a loner who never associated with anyone but was living with a man and had her female friends and was a regular in the pubs. The clothes she descibes Mary wearing are not the same as the clothes descibed by Mary Ann Cox.
There are too many anomilies.
Miss Marple

Hi Miss Marple
I beleive maxwell had the right day but the wrong "Mary Kelly" also.

Also, as i have stated previously, that the burnt clothes in her fire place in which there was a large (and presumably long burning) fire indicates the murder must have taken place long before 9:00 am (not to mention the drs TOD).

Another point that struck me. If Maxwell saw the right MK who had "Horrors of drink upon her" and just vomited on the side walk would she really be in any mood/capacity to have sex, i.e be solicitating and bringing a client to her room so soon after? I think not.

I also think the eviscerated state she was discovered in was done over a long period of time (at least a couple of hours which would correspond to a large, hot, long burning fire)-longer than the time between Maxwell's sighting and the discovery of the body by Boyer.

[miss marple]

At the inquest Maxwell seems to be describing a different woman from Mary Kelly.
She says'' She believed she was an unfortunate who never associated with anyone''
Now in the four months Maxwell ''knew her'' Kelly was living with Joe and not working as an 'unfortunate' She had also had Maria Harvey to stay with her. She did not return to the streets until a few days before she died. She was not a loner who never associated with anyone but was living with a man and had her female friends and was a regular in the pubs. The clothes she descibes Mary wearing are not the same as the clothes descibed by Mary Ann Cox.
There are too many anomilies.
Miss Marple

[Phil Carter]

Hello Jon,

Yes, Pre 06.00a.m. is "night/early hours of the morning"as opposed to afternoon and daytime.


best wishes

Phil

[Jon Guy]

Hi Phil

I was referring to the canonical five grouping that JTR is alledgedly most likely responsible for.

Annie Chapman ?

[waterloo]

getting back to Maxwell. I think she made up the story of seeing MJK. She has had to come up with some smoke screen very fast. Perhaps she was trying to protect somebody by cnfusing the times. In other words give someone an alibi. I dont know exacly how that would fir into things but that is the only reason I can see for Maxwell making the story up. Yes it could be many of the other combinations but perhaps we should look more carefully at Maxwell and her relationships to bottom this out. Just a thought. I still remain new to all of this.
Regards

[Phil Carter]

Hello Sally,

I was referring to the canonical five grouping that JTR is alledgedly most likely responsible for.

best wishes

Phil

[Sally]

the "nightstalking murderer" who killed Kelly in the small hours always pop up in the "fact" column.

Annie Millwood was apparently attacked in the afternoon, as she was admitted to Whitechapel Infirmary at 5pm, I think. Perhaps the time of day or night mattered less than the opportuinity. Most prostitutes are out at night. But not all.