Who did Sarah See?

[Ben]

Would you say, "never hear again" just like Cox, like Harvey, like Prater?

No, not like them, Jon, because we do hear from them later at the inquest, unlike Mrs. Kennedy who we stop hearing from a day or two in advance of the inquest, presumably because she was dismissed as a copier of Lewis' account as outlined in the Star. As for Kennedy not chasing the press any further, she may well have done, but once it had been established what her game was, there was no longer any reason for the press to report any more of her offerings.

Without any indication to the contrary we might reasonably conclude that there is no good reason, beyond happenstance, to suggest they may have known each other, just because No.2 was opposite No.13.

It is very unlikely, in my opinion, that Mrs. Kennedy had anything do with room #2. In all probability, this was yet another detail she Chinese-whispered from Lewis' account. The room in question was home to the Keylers, with Lewis staying there on the night in question.

At this late date we are in no position to determine whether the "direct statement" was accurate, but it exists.

Well, we are.

We're in a perfect position to observe that "Mrs. Kennedy" was featured in one of the very earliest reports on the Kelly murder, which were notorious for misinformation and outright invention, and that since it was never suggested at the inquest that anyone saw Kelly in Dorset Street at 3.00am, the account is probably incorrect. What further bolsters this explanation is the knowledge that certain women were parroting an "oh murder" account, with Kennedy fitting the bill perfectly as one of the parroters in question.

All the best,
Ben

[Ben]

The press did not drop Kennedy's story after the inquest. That's simply not true

Indeed, Marlowe. Her account was apparently dropped before the inquest. Are you sure that Lewis and Kennedy were mentioned in the same article? I'm not doubting you for a moment, but I'm aware than Lewis, unlike Kennedy, never communicated with the press. This in itself is revealing, as it leads one to suspect that certain unscrupulous women (the ones referred to in the Star article) sought to take advantage of the police's request to Lewis not to divulge her information to the press. Lewis evidently discussed her experience with other women who then approached the press themselves under the pretense of being an original witness.

Sims was very probably working from memory, and relying on the very press accounts we're discussing now.

All the best,
Ben

[Wickerman]

.... unlike Mrs. Kennedy who we stop hearing from a day or two in advance of the inquest, presumably because she was dismissed as a copier of Lewis' account as outlined in the Star.

Ben.
Thats not truely what the Star article says though, is it.

We both know the three people who are named as hearing the cry of "murder", Lewis, Prater & Kennedy.

Your source, the Star (10th), makes no mention of Sarah Lewis.
In fact apart from her telling the police in her pre-inquest statement that she did hear the cry, Lewis spoke to no-one from the press about it.
Therefore, in so far as the Star was concerned Lewis was not involved in this issue.
That only leaves Prater & Kennedy.

Mrs Prater is mentioned in the Star article, but Prater like Lewis made no mention to any pressmen about hearing anything that night. She told the Daily Telegraph, "I heard nothing through the night".

The Star writes:
"One woman (as reported below) who lives in the court stated that at about two o'clock she heard a cry of "Murder."

Although both Prater & Kennedy are mentioned in subsequent paragraphs we know they are not referring to Prater, "she heard nothing".

This only leaves Mrs Kennedy, and what does that intro line also say?

"One woman (as reported below) who lives in the court stated that at about two o'clock she heard a cry of "Murder." This story soon became popular, until at last half a dozen women were retailing it as their own personal experience. Each story contradicted the others with respect to the time at which the cry was heard...."

It says that the "woman" (Kennedy) is the source of the story, not, a repeater of the story. The article tells us that half a dozen women subsequently repeated the story being told by Kennedy.

So when you claim that your argument (of Kennedy as a repeater) is supported by the Star article, or outlined in the Star article, this is not true.

You choose to see Kennedy as a 'parroter', but that is not what your source tells us.

Either Kennedy & Lewis are the same woman, or, Lewis kept silent and Kennedy was the only original source known by the Star.
Either way, the Star are not identifying Kennedy as a parroter of someone else's story.

Regards, Jon S.

[Malcolm X]

i've just had another quick look, i still doubt that S.Lewis saw MJK and LA DE DA enter the court, and i'm not happy with this Kennedy woman later on either.

but i cant be sure either way because there's simply too much information online and right now it's a total confusion, i need one of those conference display boards and to list everything with coloured pens, like they do on one of those tv cop shows

but right now it looks like all this additional stuff is a load of tittle tattle bullshit and gossip, that's based on a group of women in Millers court who have got their stories wrong and this has been be printed by the tabloids, and thus twisted around even more...... because much of this stuff you quote is from the 10th november onwards.... i think !

but some of this MUST BE TRUE, but which is, i have no idea yet, i would be very careful of what you do and dont believe, because this lot needs to be written down on a display board and studied carefully.

as far as the ``old story `` goes and this still might be true.

1..... only S.Lewis/ Prater heard a scream of ``oh murder``, but both were unable to source the scream...... but all of the rest seems like rubbish right now.

2.....Millers court was quiet at 3am when M.Cox returned and no light on at MJK, this means that this later sighting and the Kennedy woman needs to be studied carefully.

we need to know
1.....did MJK go out again
2......was MJK/LA DE DA seen going up the court by any of these women
3..... are these women gossiping and copying each others statements to the police/ press.

the most unlikely of this confusing mess, is that JTR would be stupid enough to kill MJK in the morning, in very busy Millers court, this is such a load of twaddle that i'm not even going to bother studying this, ( i know many women that are up and about at 6am, and definitely by 8am) now then, the woman who mentioned seeing MJK in the morning, can not be trusted in what she said about seeing her last night either....... now who is this i wonder !!!!!!

[lynn cates]

map and time line

Hello Malcolm.

"I need one of those conference display boards and to list everything with coloured pens"

That's an astonishingly good idea. You might also append a possible timeline for events.

Cheers.
LC

[Malcolm X]

about MJK...

1..... She was a weekend binge drinker, she was evicted from quite a few homes along with Joe Barnett for acting like this, plus rowing too, after all that's how her window got broken
2..... She was a thief and it looks like a liar too, i dont believe that she went to France or had French connections either, just a load of twaddle
3.....she could not read or write, Joe Barnett read the paper to her

so although she was probably street wise, even with regards to this, she wasn't that smart was she, because if LA DE DA was true, by God what the hell was she doing inviting someone like that back to her room, realising how creepy he looked, OH MY GOD so something is definitely not right here at all.

she needed the money ? no this is a very weak explanation from a few here, try instead ``clear off you give me the creeps``, because it was said that she was aware and scared of JTR, so she would have been very wary of this guy too, especially considering what he was carrying.

this to me is a crucial, i do not think that MJK would have gone with this guy, this description of LA DE DA is miles more unrealistic than even Kelly being killed in the morning, it's the biggest load of crap with regards to these few days, it is linked to this Kennedy woman and this definitely looks like rubbish too.

we need to do loads more research, all of us, because the members here that do indeed know all about the press and inquests etc are still wrong about what they say here.

i would be very careful of the residents of Millers court, they're a bunch of gossiping hags.... at best and that's putting it mildly.

[lynn cates]

ah, I know this bloke

Hello Malcolm.

"if LA DE DA was true, by God what the hell was she doing inviting someone like that back to her room?"

I believe they had met and even worked together before. And even if I am mistaken about the identity of A-man, his conversation with MJ--as reported by GH--smacks of familiarity.

Cheers.
LC

[DVV]

this description of LA DE DA is miles more unrealistic than even Kelly being killed in the morning

Yep, my friend.

[Malcolm X]

Hello Malcolm.

"I need one of those conference display boards and to list everything with coloured pens"

That's an astonishingly good idea. You might also append a possible timeline for events.

Cheers.
LC

yes, i need to list everything that's been said, in regards to when similar has been said by other witnesses too, and by the press as well, so that i can see who is copying who and thus who is likely to be lieing, it looks like others are simply jumping on the bandwaggon, and the papers are simply printing their rubbish

[Malcolm X]

Hello Malcolm.

"if LA DE DA was true, by God what the hell was she doing inviting someone like that back to her room?"

I believe they had met and even worked together before. And even if I am mistaken about the identity of A-man, his conversation with MJ--as reported by GH--smacks of familiarity.

Cheers.
LC

yes she does seem to accept him into her comfort zone a wee bit too quickly, this seems strange probably because GH made it all up.

it's not just his dress, it's the way he's shot towards her like a missile and been accepted by her straight away, finally, GH has described him way too well, especially considering how poor the street lighting was back then.

he's not said ``i cant remember, i'm not sure, it was dark etc``, he's described him as if he's seen him during the day and only ten minutes ago, sorry no, it's definitely a fact that he's lieing

in fact, the lie is so bad that it's obvious that GH is trying to tell you someting else ! but i need to study this far more before i can reveal what

[lynn cates]

story

Hello Malcolm.

"yes she does seem to accept him into her comfort zone a wee bit too quickly, this seems strange probably because GH made it all up."

But if GH made it all up, which such a glaring lacuna? Why not have her approach with trepidation? It's as if they are old friends.

Cheers.
LC

[Ben]

Hi John,

A simple process of elimination enables us to identify Lewis as the original source of a genuine account, and Kennedy as one of the women who attempted to pass it off as her own experience. That Lewis is the original source is beyond question. The police interviewed her and ascertained that she had definitely stayed at Miller's Court on the night of the murder (a determination made possible by the police's refusal to prevent any egress from Miller's Court in the morning). The Star made no mention of Lewis simply because she didn't blab to the press, presumably in accordance with a police request to observe a strict silence. Even if the Star didn't correctly identify the original source, courtesy of Lewis' silence on the matter, they clearly observed the phenomenon; that this particular story was doing the rounds and being parroted. And in support of this observation, we have a 10th November account that was suspiciously similar to Lewis', and which failed (along with its author) to appear at the inquest.

There is no press account that runs along the same lines to that of Prater, safely ruling her out as having any connection to the story that "soon became popular".

In short, the near-identical nature of the Lewis and Kennedy accounts ties in precisely with the Star's observation that an "oh murder" account was being copied by other women. We know that Kennedy cannot have been the original source, as that would make Lewis the copycat, and yet it was Lewis who was called to attend the inquest, Lewis who without question stayed in the court that night, and Lewis who was interviewed by the police.

All the best,
Ben

[Rubyretro]

Yes !

[Wickerman]

... We know that Kennedy cannot have been the original source, as that would make Lewis the copycat, and yet it was Lewis who was called to attend the inquest, Lewis who without question stayed in the court that night, and Lewis who was interviewed by the police.

Ben, once again I need to point out to you that the Star article is not written from our point of view, it is written from the point of view of not knowing about Sarah Lewis.

We know about Sarah Lewis, but on the 10th the Star did not. Therefore Lewis needs to be dropped from your equation.

Kennedy is the Star's 'original' source, that is what they say, and half-a-dozen women are parroting Kennedy.

That is what the article tell's us.

Regards, Jon S.

[Rubyretro]

I will leave it to Ben & Jon to argue the important bit of this thread, however
Malcolm and Lynn are driving me mad....

1..... She was a weekend binge drinker, she was evicted from quite a few homes along with Joe Barnett for acting like this, plus rowing too, after all that's how her window got broken

off the top of my head I'm thinking of Burton and Taylor, Norman Mailer, Dylan Thomas, Scott and Zelda etc etc. All busy binge drinking, rowing, and smashing up the furniture and all very 'smart'

2..... She was a thief and it looks like a liar too, i dont believe that she went to France or had French connections either, just a load of twaddle

"I don't believe" is the important part because we have no way of knowing.
We can say that over the time that Mary lived with Joe in one tiny room, with no telly, radio, books, board games or other entertainment, they must surely have spent hours and hours talking to each other. It is inconceivable that even if Mary did embroider her past to appear more glamourous that she could have kept up acting an entirely fictitious persona the whole time. Therefore there must be some truth in her story. Knowing what is truth and what is fiction
is very difficult from our point of view, and you can't just chuck out bits without at least considering that they may be true

3.....she could not read or write, Joe Barnett read the paper to her

I believe that she was said to have some education, and people read together for entertainment. It would have been very rude of Joe to turn his back and get lost in the newspaper leaving Mary staring at the ceiling, wouldn't it ! It is a polite and companiable thing to read aloud.

So none of the things that you have stated have any bearing on whether Mary was smart or not.

As to all this business 'inviting A Man into her comfort zone too quickly'
despite his sinister appearance.....soliciting generally means actively trying to drag a man into your comfort zone as quickly as possible. Ostentatious wealth would probably over ride a sinister appearance in the circumstances.

As for greeting A Man like an old friend -some people are simply warm and
open to strangers. It seems like the sort of attribute that a sucessful
prostitute would cultivate..like shopkeepers or sales reps....and a trait seemingly shared by at least Liz Stride and Catherine Eddowes.

i would be very careful of the residents of Millers court, they're a bunch of gossiping hags.... at best and that's putting it mildly

.[/QUOTE]
a bunch of women, you mean ?