How strange is this

[Wickerman]

I think the meaning was in reference to the testimony of Mrs Prater. She claimed that in climbing the stairs she could see through gaps in the partition. If any light had been in the room it would be seen through the gaps. Especially as this was after 1 o'clock in the morning and presumably the stairway would be pitch black.

[Natasha]

I don't think Kelly was in the habit of wearing a hat. As Dew states he often saw her walking down the street without a hat. I don't believe Prater saw Kelly at 1.00am, so the Star have either embellished that part or Prater did.

The mystery concerning the hat, is why Harvey left it there in the first place, when Kelly never wore one.

In general there is something off with Harvey's testimony. Albrook's account matches Barnett's but Harvey's doesn't.

Could it be that Harvey was somehow involved with Kelly's murder?

[richardnunweek]

Hi.
If we look at what is known,
Mary Kelly was hoping to go to the Lord mayors show on the Friday, Mrs Harvey left a bonnet for her on the Thursday evening, she is seen wearing both a jacket and bonnet at 9pm.by Mrs Prater..
Another resident of the court Mrs Cox claims to have seen Kelly close to midnight, not wearing this clothing.?..
Around 2am Hutchinson claims to have seen Kelly being picked up by a man of smart appearance,including spats[ daytime wear]...they go back to the room...
She appeared to feel at ease with him..
Could the Lord Mayors show , the left bonnet, and the smartly dressed man be connected?
Is it not possible that Mr A, used his appearance , and a previous invite, to escort her to the parade,to gain Kelly's confidence , in a ploy to get into her room..
Was This meeting pre-arranged,?
Regards Richard.

[Natasha]

Hi.
If we look at what is known,
Mary Kelly was hoping to go to the Lord mayors show on the Friday, Mrs Harvey left a bonnet for her on the Thursday evening, she is seen wearing both a jacket and bonnet at 9pm.by Mrs Prater..
Another resident of the court Mrs Cox claims to have seen Kelly close to midnight, not wearing this clothing.?..
Around 2am Hutchinson claims to have seen Kelly being picked up by a man of smart appearance,including spats[ daytime wear]...they go back to the room...
She appeared to feel at ease with him..
Could the Lord Mayors show , the left bonnet, and the smartly dressed man be connected?
Is it not possible that Mr A, used his appearance , and a previous invite, to escort her to the parade,to gain Kelly's confidence , in a ploy to get into her room..
Was This meeting pre-arranged,?
Regards Richard.

Hi Richard,

There are no confirmed sightings of Mary Jane Kelly on Thursday between 8:00 PM and 11:45 PM. there is an unconfirmed story that she is drinking with a woman named Elizabeth Foster at the Ten Bells Public House, according to the victims section on CB, and there is no mention of Prater seeing Kelly at 9pm in the inquest papers.

I suppose it's possible she may have wanted to get dressed up for the Mayor's show, but it doesn't explain why Harvey left two men's dirty shirts, a little boys shirt and a little girls petticoat.

The smartly dressed man may be connected somehow. There was a report that a smartly dressed man was seen with two women, one wearing a hat and the other without.

[Rosella]

Maybe Maria Harvey had a smarter bonnet than anything Mary possessed and so she lent it to her so Mary could look a bit more presentable went she went to look at the procession. Perhaps it was 'payment' for some washing Mary was going to help her with (the men's dirty shirts etc.) Maria might have had a load of dirty washing to do for customers and Mary had been helping her out bit by bit.

[Wickerman]

I suppose it's possible she may have wanted to get dressed up for the Mayor's show, but it doesn't explain why Harvey left two men's dirty shirts, a little boys shirt and a little girls petticoat.

Hi Natasha.
You may remember that Maria Harvey used to live in Millers Court, and she did claim to be a laundress. Just a few days before Harvey had moved to New Court, possibly she was not able to continue to launder her customers clothes at New Court, so she brought them to Mary's place?
Also, you must have noticed that tub underneath Kelly's bed, that may have belonged to Harvey too.

The smartly dressed man may be connected somehow. There was a report that a smartly dressed man was seen with two women, one wearing a hat and the other without.

This same man was alleged to have attempted to entice women into a back yard, so certainly a Person of Interest.

[Natasha]

Hi Natasha.
You may remember that Maria Harvey used to live in Millers Court, and she did claim to be a laundress. Just a few days before Harvey had moved to New Court, possibly she was not able to continue to launder her customers clothes at New Court, so she brought them to Mary's place?
Also, you must have noticed that tub underneath Kelly's bed, that may have belonged to her

Hi Jon,

I have said before that the basin under the bed IMO was a basin, so it's a possibility.

[Mr Stu]

I'm sure someone else has pondered this on here. About the clothes that is. Its all speculation of course - but was not the Eddowes suspect descriptions based , no that's not the right term - the guy talking to her was remembered because he was seen talking to a lady in those clothes - more than noticing the man himself - why that should be i have no clue...but if indeed it was that the case -and he knew that ..if he has been seen walking kelly home, not knowing the person knows her, but knowing he has been seen nonetheless..might burn, or try to destroy anything that could visually link him to her..clothes being one way?

[Batman]

The clothes where likely thrown on the fire pludging the room into total darkness. He then flung her sheet over her head. She put up a quick defense getting knife wounds in her hands as he muffled and killed her.

[Mr Stu]

they likely boody werent. think about it...really....i put out "could this" s and wonderings..thats all we can do....but really, a bloke who has surprised ladies in blink of an eye in the street doing that..he didnt need to in a room! for heavens sake.

[Mr Stu]

total assumed supposition again.. i put things up for ponderings and welcome comments .. ...proper realistic ones...

[Rosella]

The fact that Jack could surprise and overpower women very quickly in the street doesn't mean that he wouldn't try a surprise attack on Mary Kelly in her room, IMO.

All the same I do think that Mary was lying in bed in a drunken snooze with the sheet perhaps partially over her face when she was woken by him coming at her with a knife. There was no time to do anything probably except put her hand up instinctively and shout "Oh, Murder!"

IMO Jack threw the clothing on the fire bit by bit in the faint hope it would provide a little light. After all, there was no other fuel in the room so there wasn't much choice. He was hardly likely to go in search of kindling in the courtyard!

[richardnunweek]

Hi.
To repeat..the police believed that the murder was committed in daylight, and the jacket, and bonnet were burnt because they were bloodstained...
We have been left the legacy of that puzzle.
Regards Richard.

[Natasha]

What about what Cox said, she said she didn't know Kelly was drunk until she said goodnight. Now it occurred to me that the woman Cox saw may have been putting on an accent. I thought perhaps it wasn't Kelly she saw rather someone else. It was raining that night and the woman was wearing a a red shawl, is it possible she covered her head and face with the shawl?

We have a sighting by Maxwell of Kelly wearing a red shawl, skirt, velvet bodice & no hat (pretty similar to Cox's description) could she have actually seen the killer's accomplice?

[Wickerman]

You are quite right Natasha.

Cox's words have been exaggerated to suggest Kelly was blind drunk when she saw her. The truth of the matter is quite different, as you correctly point out.
Cox followed Kelly down the passage and she could not tell by her walk that Kelly was drunk, so she wasn't that far gone.

An interesting comment by Walter Dew, after discussing the evidence of Cox, we read:
"...Always assuming that Mrs. Cox ever had seen her with a man."

Interesting for two reason's.
First, given the controversial statement provided by Hutchinson, it is interesting that Dew did not apply this caveat to Hutchinson with regard to the suspect he saw.
Second, one wonders if questioning the credibility of Cox was Dew's private suspicion, or does it reflect police opinion at the time?