Mary Ann Cox.

[Suzan]

I've been thinking about Mary Ann Cox, and I find her behaviour on the night of Kelly's death interesting.

She comes back to Miller's Court at 11.45, and is out again 15 minutes later.

At 1.00 she returns to 'warm her hands', because it was raining. She only spends a minute doing this, and then she is off out again.

At 3.00 she returns because it is raining hard. She is upset and she does not sleep.

All this taken from her inquest testimony.

This caught my eye because she is in an out all night, and because her reason for returning at 1.00 does not seem to make much sense.

First of all I wonder how warm her room was. Did she leave the fire burning? Was it banked up? Did she have to light it?
In my experience it takes more than a minute to get warm, even if the fire is blazing.

So this made me wonder if perhaps something else was going on.

To me, the obvious conclusion is that she was bringing clients back to her room, servicing them, and then going back out.

If this is true (and of course it's just speculation) then at 11.45 she was not alone when she say Kelly with the blotchy faced man. She was bringing a man back for a 15 minute fumble, and he would have seen Kelly and the blotchy faced man, too.

Her reasons for concealing this from the police would be obvious. She probably didn't like or trust the police, she didn't want to answer questions about a man she didn't know, or she didn't want to name a man she did know.

From my experience of people living on the edge of criminality, I am well aware of their propensity to conceal, obfuscate, and to avoid naming name, particularly when asked by anyone official. Even when there is no real benefit to be gained.

This, whether it is true or not, does nothing to extend our knowledge of the crime, but reading through these forums I was surprised to find that no one else has found the description of her behaviour strange.

[caz]

Hi Suzan,

That's a very interesting observation you make there. Clearly, neither Kelly nor Blotchy would be in the best position to tell tales on Cox, and any clients she had that night were hardly likely to come forward as witnesses either.

It has generally been presumed that Cox serviced clients on the streets, and some have used this to argue against Kelly using her own room for this purpose. Obviously it could have caused problems for Cox to admit doing so herself, so I do find it plausible that she was bringing men back for quickies, especially as it was a rather unpleasant November night.

Love,

Caz
X

[Suzan]

Hi Caz.

Thanks for replying.

I can't know for sure where these women serviced their clients, so of course everything I'm saying is speculation. But it would seem to me that they would do it where ever it was convenient, and where ever it would get them the most money. If they could provide an actual bed, then perhaps they could charge more than 'down an alley in the rain'.

I just find Cox's movements on that night very odd. She comes back for very short periods of time, even assuming that 'a minute' is a general and unspecified time period (like a 'mo').
It seems that the clock struck the quarters, and that this was the main form of time keeping for these women. Therefore their time is divided into 15 minute chunks. So 'a minute' would probably be a period of time that was substantially less than 15 minutes.
This is still a very short time to warm up and it makes me think that she was going back home for a more definite purpose than she stated.

Of course, if she did have a client she is unlikely to volunteer the knowledge freely. At no point during the inquest was she asked if she was alone, so if she wasn't it could merely be seen as a lie of omission, rather than commission.

Is the presumption that Cox serviced all her clients on the street based on any textural evidence? Or is it just an assumption?
The set up at Miller's Court seems to be ideal for women bringing their clients home, unlike the women who lived in the doss houses, where it would seem to be a lot more difficult. This would seem especially true for regulars and locals, with whom they may have had a more extensive relationship, rather than just that of woman and client.

Anyway, it's all just speculation. One of the many things about this case that fascinates me is the light it throws upon these women, not just the victims, but all the women who lived like that. The disposessed and unrepresented who we usually only see through the eyes of outsiders, the moralists who wanted to save or punish them.
It's as though in this case we get a tiny slice through their lives, and a chance to see them through their own eyes.

[richardnunweek]

Hi,
According to Mrs Cox's niece [ which many consider hearsay] on the night in question she was awaiting the return of her husband[ not long married common law?] from the pub, and it would appear that she was out attempting to find him, which to no avail, she gave up the hunt around 3am rather upset.
Please note some of the above is my speculation, but would fit the events.
She stated to the police that she followed Kelly and blotchy into the court, yet the niece's version has her standing at her door awaiting her drunkard of a husband to arrive home[ roller pin type].
Regards Richard,

[Suzan]

Hi Richard.

I find the information given by the niece to be fascinating. An example of oral history passing down through a family.

It demonstrably conflicts with the official story, particularly in the discovery of the body.
The niece has it that a Mrs Storey found the body, and she told Cox and they both went into the room, using a 'bit of string' to open the door.

It seems impossible to harmonise this with the official version. To do so we would have to assume that Storey and Cox just kept quiet about what they had seen, leaving the official discovery to be made by Boyer. I think that is unlikely. Even women with a natural aversion to the police would just say nothing.
However, we can have a go at harmonisation. For example, we could postulate that Storey was in the Court when Boyer made his discovery, and that after he had gone, she and Cox entered the room using some method they knew about, and that they kept quiet about this to the police because they didn't want to get in trouble. Perhaps we can imagine that they even took something from the room, perhaps the snuff that is mentioned, or possibly to retrieve something that belonged to them.

The other discrepancies in the accounts can be solved quite easily. For instance, at the inquest Cox is described as a widow, but by the niece she is newly married. This would be a simple case of a common law husband replacing a dead legal one.
The screaming reported by the niece could have happened, but she lied about hearing it because she was embarrassed that she hadn't done anything, and felt she may be blamed in some way.
Although these are, of course, just speculation on my part, attempts to iron out the contradictions between Cox's inquest statement and the story passed down by her niece.

But in the end we are left with a number of possibilities.
1. Cox lied to the police (either by omission or commission) but told the truth to her niece.
2. She told some or all of the truth to the police, but over the years she and/or her niece elaborated it into a better story.
3. A bit of both.

In the end, we can't know. But I'll tell you this. I lived in a shared house where a body was found. No one told the police any more than they had to, some people actively lied, and one person vanished as soon as they could.
The police didn't care about one dead junkie, the inquest said OD, and that was that.

But I'm damn sure there was more going on at Miller's court than the police ever knew. Most of it wouldn't have anything to do with Kelly's death, some of it might, but a lot of people there would have lied, concealed or vanished, all for reasons we will never know.

[Bridewell]

I'm sure that there was a great deal going on in Millers Court. It was situated on Dorset Street, one of the worst streets in all London and one which, supposedly, police officers were reluctant to enter alone. There is also the dubious landlord McCarthy to consider. It is likely that many, if not all, the occupants of Millers Court were prostitutes & many people think that McCarthy himself was a pimp. he claimed that Kelly owed him an enormous sum in overdue rent but, as rents were payable daily in advance, I suspect that McCarthy was just trying to attract public sympathy and to distract from his own activities.

I'm less certain that there was "more going on at Miller's court than the police ever knew". Prostitutes, especially those of the street-walker type, have always been a good source of information for the police. Standing on street corners for long periods, as they do, they see and hear a great deal. One or more of the Millers Court residents may well have been a "snout" (paid informant), so it's just possible (I admit to speculating here) that Mrs Cox's nocturnal walks fulfilled a dual purpose.

[Malcolm X]

also if M.COX was out and about so much, and BLOTCHY FACE wasn't JTR, why wasn't M.COX killed by JTR instead of MJK, especially if she was out prostituting herself, at the very same time as JTR was outside too...answer this!

this is very interesting, maybe her niece is right, because it doesn't look like M.COX was searching for clients, simply because GH was standing right outside and she didn't go up to him and say ``fancy a quickie``.....RIPPER OR NOT.... no she totally ignored him, just saw him that's all

uuum this is a very good thread, finally why wasn't the Kennedy woman targeted by JTR that night too, or that niece etc etc, because of these 3 women and probably a few others too, MJK is the only one that is inside from 1am onwards, unless she went out again at 3am..... but you can forget the crap from GH at 2am.

do you understand me, basically there were other women around outside whilst she was safe indoors, so if GH is indeed JTR then there was something about this woman that caused him to ignore all the others, the only thing he knew about her was her singing voice, but is this and the broken window enough!

no it isn't, it's not worth the wait, maybe LA DE DA got the girl that JTR was after at 2am, maybe he butted in or MJK prefered him instead and thus JTR followed and waited, waited for him to leave.

maybe GH is totally correct, maybe JTR didn't have the money and she walked off and met another client, then as he said, JTR refused to give up and decided to kill her... this points to blotchy leaving at 1.50am and her going out again exactly as JTR describes.

.

[Malcolm X]

sorry out of time, maybe JTR didn't speak to her and was watching from range at 2am, when he saw MJK pick up some guy before he could leap in; or another woman was around preventing him from jumping in, simply because this other woman would have seen him too well

she took him in and thus he decided to wait for his turn outside in Dorset st.... she thus came out again at 3am and invited GH in next !

the important point is, JTR was after a heart so his next victim had to be killed inside, so he may have realised that Millers court was an area where prostitutes invited men in...VOILA, we have a motive and a reason.

this 4am murder might have been because when she came out earlier on, he was too slow/ cautious to pick her up, or she was chatting to another woman when the other client jumped in.

because if GH is JTR then expect a massive amount of his story to be true, simply because he wont fall apart under questioning, thus LA DE DA is a shabby genteel guy that got in quick before JTR could, thus he waited for him to leave, but the times are spot on and this is important, plus he was seen too, which is what he needed so that his lie would hold firm.

MJK would not have invited him in if she knew that GH didn't have the 6 pence from earlier on, so expect this to be a lie, it's far more likely ``damn it, he's jumped in, you were too slow, you cant watch and wait like you did with Stride``.

but i dont know if i believe this anymore, GH i mean, i'm just saying that this could be a possibility

[Wickerman]

I'm sure that there was a great deal going on in Millers Court. It was situated on Dorset Street, one of the worst streets in all London and one which, supposedly, police officers were reluctant to enter alone.

Certainly that appears to be the tradition, but was it true?

If you recall at the inquest Cox heard footsteps in the Court:
"..At a quarter- past six I heard a man go down the court. That was too late for the market..."

The Coroner then asked:
"It might have been a policeman ?"

Cox replied:
"It might have been."

-Why would Cox accept that she may have heard the policeman on his beat, if tradition was that they did not normally patrol the Court?

Considering some policemans beats take as little as 15 mins while others as long as 30 mins, and that the goings-on around Millers Court between midnight and 3:00 am must have encompassed anywhere between 6 to 12 seperate 'beat' patrols, why was the policeman who was responsible to patrol Dorset St. not called to the inquest?
Over 3 hours he must have been able to contribute something.

Regards, Jon S.

[Malcolm X]

Certainly that appears to be the tradition, but was it true?

If you recall at the inquest Cox heard footsteps in the Court:
"..At a quarter- past six I heard a man go down the court. That was too late for the market..."

The Coroner then asked:
"It might have been a policeman ?"

Cox replied:
"It might have been."

-Why would Cox accept that she may have heard the policeman on his beat, if tradition was that they did not normally patrol the Court?

Considering some policemans beats take as little as 15 mins while others as long as 30 mins, and that the goings-on around Millers Court between midnight and 3:00 am must have encompassed anywhere between 6 to 12 seperate 'beat' patrols, why was the policeman who was responsible to patrol Dorset St. not called to the inquest?
Over 3 hours he must have been able to contribute something.

Regards, Jon S.

what you have to understand is this lot aren't very smart, and definitely not the police either, why do you think that not one of these murders was solved!

if it wasn't for DNA/ CCTV/ fingerprints etc, none of these killers would be be caught today either.

[Wickerman]

Nothing but Liars & Fools eh Malcolm? Witnesses were liars and Police were fools, thanks Malcolm, you've saved some of us alot of time.

[lynn cates]

investigation

Hello Malcolm.

"what you have to understand is this lot aren't very smart, and definitely not the police either, why do you think that not one of these murders was solved!"

Sometimes I begin to head down this path but I always pull up short. And I'll give you the reason.

If you read some of the newspaper accounts, the Met was conducting a really thorough investigation--they followed up every lead. For example, when they got the story of Blotchy, they checked each local pub to see if anyone had been in answering to that description. Then they checked all the "pot boys" to see if any had picked one up at Miller's court.

Lads like Abberline did a remarkable job conducting an on ground investigation. But I doubt if any intricate theories occurred to them as they were doing a well prescribed routine.

Cheers.
LC

[Bridewell]

Absolutely

Hello Malcolm.

"what you have to understand is this lot aren't very smart, and definitely not the police either, why do you think that not one of these murders was solved!"

Sometimes I begin to head down this path but I always pull up short. And I'll give you the reason.

If you read some of the newspaper accounts, the Met was conducting a really thorough investigation--they followed up every lead. For example, when they got the story of Blotchy, they checked each local pub to see if anyone had been in answering to that description. Then they checked all the "pot boys" to see if any had picked one up at Miller's court.

Lads like Abberline did a remarkable job conducting an on ground investigation. But I doubt if any intricate theories occurred to them as they were doing a well prescribed routine.

Cheers.
LC

Lynn, I agree. There is no reason that I can think of why any witness (unless involved in the murders) would come forward to lie. They could just have kept quiet. There was nothing in it for them, except a load of hassle from journalists looking for copy.

The police investigation too seems to have been as thorough as was possible. It was not their fault that the forensic techniques available to the modern investigator had yet to be discovered. The serial killer attacks identified targets pretty much at random, and the motives probably defied comprehension. The one major error, in my view, was the hasty obliteration of the GSG by Arnold (& with Warren's approval). I'm not sure that it would have made a great deal of difference, but it was thoroughly unprofessional in my view.

[Malcolm X]

. The serial killer attacks identified targets pretty much at random, and the motives probably defied comprehension. The one major error, in my view, was the hasty obliteration of the GSG by Arnold (& with Warren's approval). I'm not sure that it would have made a great deal of difference, but it was thoroughly unprofessional in my view.

not that random at all, not according to my theory anyway, because i think he targeted Dutfields on purpose, but failed to lure STRIDE away; either to mutilate her up the road, or to get her to leave the area instead.

this failure is why he targeted Eddowes later on/ left the graffiti, this leads us to the 3rd murder and yet again more anti-semetism.

but this final mutilation/GH is full of problems, almost too many and it's too complicated to talk about as well, because i can not tell which side of the fence that i'm on, and thus my posts are a bit of a mess right now.

i.e i was thinking earlier on, that i might have waited outside Millers Court as well, but then i keep thinking why did Abberline reject what GH said later on, but due to the Cox woman, it looks like GH was there; plus a few other things.

so you can see all the contradictions, it's increadible, i've never known anything like this before and to be honest i'm getting fed up with it.

i can understand everything else and quite easily too, but this last murder is a bitch...... it is 100% full of contradictions.

[lynn cates]

Gsg

Hello Bridewell. Totally agree about the GSG. Protocol seems to demand some veiling until at least a quick photograph were taken. Then you may expunge it.

Cheers.
LC