Maxwell

[Simon Wood]

Hi Packer,

No need to duck.

Hutchinson and his story were pure fiction.

Have you yet noted the marked similarities between Elizabeth Long and Sarah Lewis?

Regards,

Simon

[lynn cates]

thoughts

Hello Packer. You have many interesting ideas and I am not about to dismiss things.

Regarding the Prince, I think you are not pushing him, so that, I think, is good.

So, let's look around. I agree that MJ was nervous about something and I don't think it was a killer who had not struck for about 6 weeks. (I am always puzzled by the story of the neighbour and her barricade Why barricade the door?) But whom? What had she been about?

Her Irish background and Irish connections suggest some possible link to the Fenians/clan na gael/Land Leaguers.

In consequence, a fruitful avenue of research may be the possibility that MJ was passing information.

But whatever route one goes with MJ, whoever killed her was not normal, no matter for whom he was working or IF he was working for someone.

Cheers.
LC

[caz]

...whoever killed her was not normal...

Well it's a start.

Tell me Lynn, what do you think it was about Whitechapel in the second half of 1888 that blighted it with such an abnormal number of lady killers who were a thimble short of a sewing basket?

Love,

Caz
X

[Fleetwood Mac]

Maxwell's an interesting one......

She'd only spoken with Mary twice? Now that doesn't suggest she didn't know exactly who Mary was......plenty of people I don't speak with but I know them by sight and name.....

I don't really go with the Lord Mayor's Show being a distraction that JTR used to his advantage.....I doubt he was doing much more than trawling pubs and streets looking for a victim......

On balance.....I'd go with her murder being around 2-5am....although I wouldn't discount 9 in the morning altogether....for the very good reason that there is no evidence to suggest it couldn't have happened at 9 in the morning.

[lynn cates]

answer

Hello Caz. Well, from all the newspaper accounts I've read and the books I've perused, it was not just Whitechapel nor just 1888. And I think that, once we've passed that notion, we can get down to business.

First, there are horror stories from all about London concerning domestic altercations replete with violence and murder.

Second, there was violence and murder both before and after 1888.

Third, there are many murderers (of ladies and otherwise) who are blameless of the deed because they have lacked opportunity.

Nor was it merely lady killers. To take a random example, I believe it was Fishman in his "East End, 1888" who relates the story of a gang of boys who torture a cat to death--cut or gouge out an eye, lame it, and watch it die in agony.

Not (I should hope) normal behaviour; or, better, not the behaviour of well adjusted people. So, perhaps another way of expressing my former observation would be to remark concerning MJ's slayer, "Not a well adjusted person."

Of course, a salient question is, And who among us is entirely well adjusted?

Cheers.
LC

[caz]

Caz -I'm not suprised that Wolf Vanderlinden cast doubt on Kelly's T.O.D...

...I didn't mention it, because he doesn't expand on it in this dissertation, and so I have no idea what he said -please send me the link if you have it. I think that I've become a 'fan' of his, so I'd love to read it...

...Whilst not casting doubt on any of the witnesses 'good faith' -I don't trust any of them over the Doctors.
(Hi Caz !)

Hi Rubyretro,

I'm sorry, I can't recall if Wolf has written a piece specifically dealing with Kelly's T.O.D. He may well have done, but I was just going by his posts over the years. He made it clear that it wasn't just his opinion, but that of several medical professionals he had consulted.

The problem is how to 'trust' the docs of the day to come equipped with the necessary expertise and experience to establish an accurate T.O.D for Kelly, who is the elephant in the room. How many similar cases could any of them have seen for comparison purposes? It would be difficult enough today, but back then their task was nigh on impossible. There was nothing 'normal' about this example, nothing remotely routine or familiar. We can trust that they did their best, but how do we judge what that best was?

Love,

Caz
X

[caz]

With respect Lynn, this is not about gangs of boys torturing cats.

If this is your idea of evidence that several seriously screwed up adult men, independently slaughtering unfortunates on and off the streets of Whitechapel over a period of three months in 1888, was business as usual for the LVP and the country as a whole, and nothing for the people, the police and the press of the day to get so worked up about, it's not mine.

Now, Maxwell anyone? I'm more of a tea person myself.

Love,

Caz
X

[Fleetwood Mac]

With respect Lynn, this is not about gangs of boys torturing cats.

If this is your idea of evidence that several seriously screwed up adult men, independently slaughtering unfortunates on and off the streets of Whitechapel over a period of three months in 1888, was business as usual for the LVP and the country as a whole, and nothing for the people, the police and the press of the day to get so worked up about, it's not mine.

Now, Maxwell anyone? I'm more of a tea person myself.

Love,

Caz
X

Hello Caz......no person really knows themselves until having gone through extreme circumstances.....human beings are capable of pretty much anything given certain circumstances. So it's not so much that JTR wasn't normal....he was.....more likely his background wasn't 'normal'. More than semantics I think....the idea that serial killers aren't normal is a comforting conclusion/notion for the rest of society.

[packers stem]

Hi Simon
Thank you for pointing me in that direction.
It suggests to me that in he case of Darrell she told the paper that she could not identify the woman but later with a little 'persuasion' was able to positively identify her complete with name change!
Appears that 'someone' wanted a time of death later than that given by Phillips!Richardson also embellished his statement from just looking from the top step to sitting on the steps cutting leather with a rusty knife.
What Cadosch heard holds no weight at all ,no killing could be that quiet.
Does this then mean that Kennedy's press statement was the more accurate one?
As for Wolf Vanderlinden's dissertation on TOD I think it's the one for Chapman.
He shows that her meal of potatoes would likely take between 1 and 3 hours to digest.
Did the Millers court victim not have a partly digested meal of fish and potatoes in her stomach.Potatoes should have digested within 3 hours so unless she had fish and potatoes for breakfast....
If we presume she had food after closing time,which we still do today only it tends to be KFC,the indian or the kebab house,then we can safely assume the originally suspected time of death of aound 4.00 am to be correct,if not earlier.

[caz]

Hello Caz......no person really knows themselves until having gone through extreme circumstances.....human beings are capable of pretty much anything given certain circumstances. So it's not so much that JTR wasn't normal....he was.....more likely his background wasn't 'normal'. More than semantics I think....the idea that serial killers aren't normal is a comforting conclusion/notion for the rest of society.

Ok, FM, firstly it was Lynn who described MJK's killer as 'not normal', so I ran with it to make a point. Lynn then backtracked to 'not a well adjusted person', which of course would apply to all murderers and a lot more besides, making the original 'not normal' comment somewhat redundant.

I'm not convinced that the ripper's background was what screwed him up and made him do what he did, however abnormal it could have been compared with the vast majority of backgrounds that went to form Whitechapel's wanderers. But if you change 'not normal' to 'not the norm', you may see more clearly what I was actually getting at.

It was 'not the norm' for women to be found murdered in the way Tabram, Nichols, Chapman, Stride or Eddowes were, never mind Kelly. It was not the norm for England in the LVP, nor for Whitechapel in the 1880s.

Anyone who tries to tell us it was absolutely the norm will need to come up with evidence a wee bit weightier than boys being cruel to cats. Until then, I consider Carrie Maxwell to have more credibility in her little finger.

Love,

Caz
X

[richardnunweek]

Hi,
According to many, Mary Kelly had a distinctive look, her hair, her stature,her presence was noticeable, eg, Dews account.
Fiona Kendalls account, of her grandfather recalling her as 'good looking' he was only 14 years at the time. buxom mayby?
She was alleged to have a very pleasant personality [ at least when sober] and may have talked with some impediment.
Yet dispite this many of us dispute Maxwell as a credible witness.
She alleged to have talked with her
Described her clothing.
She knew of Barnett.
she gave her evidence clearly and precisely, even though she had the whole weekend to realize any errors, and admit a mistake.
She was aware that the police doctors contridicted her sighting, yet still maintained that she saw this rather distinctive woman , on the morning of the 9th, the date when she gave the statement , and returned the plates[ confirmed] and fetched milk[ confirmed].
Did Maxwell make up this story?
Did she get the wrong day/wrong woman?
What do the facts say?
I am not talking about the doctors findings, just the integreity of this witness.
Regards Richard.

[Abby Normal]

I have a question.

Would someone who had the horrors of drink on them and vomiting in the street be in any mood to pick someone up and have sex?

IMHO if maxwell was correct, then it would seem MK's murderer was someone who was not a customer.

[c.d.]

Hi Richard,

No one has ever questioned Maxwell's honesty or integrity but that does not mean that her story is accurate. Honesty and integrity have nothing to do with it if she was simply mistaken.

c.d.

[Rubyretro]

I agree with C.D.

[c.d.]

As Mae West famously stated "goodness had nothing to do with it."

c.d.