Albrook and Harvey - can't both be true

[Fleetwood Mac]

He did not mean anything else, because the other woman left as he arrived.

I for one see your interpretation as unlikely.

Barnett was specifically asked was there anyone else there. Barnett stated a woman.

Had Barnett seen Harvey, reasonably he would have stated two women (and elaborated upon that) given he was asked was there anyone else there (on Thursday evening).

[Wickerman]

It's also worth noting, more for other discussions than this, that in the official record Barnett says he saw her between 7:30 - 7:45, yet we then read, "I was with her about one hour".

Yet in the press we have the correct words - "I was there for about a quarter of an hour".

The official version is not always the correct version.

[MrBarnett]

The only interpretation from the statements that may tie everything up nicely is this: Barnett visited twice, both times there was only one woman in the room.

The coroner/Barnett exchange was this:

Was there any one else there on the Thursday evening ? - Yes, a woman who lives in the court. She left first, and I followed shortly afterwards.

Barnett may have associated "Thursday evening" with later in the day and so when asked about Thursday evening he responds with the later of his two visits in mind.

Bear in mind that there is no agreed upon exact time when evening begins.

Bear in mind also that when both women supposedly visited, it will have been dark, i.e. night time (on the 8th November it was dusk by 5pm). Yet, we have the coroner and Barnett talking of 7pm to 8pm as evening.

Clearly, interpretation of "evening" is subjective, and they didn't necessarily see it as we see it today. When asked about the "evening", in Barnett's mind/association with time that may have meant the later time of the two occasions he called.

How would you interpret evening? 7.30 is in the evening as far as I’m concerned. Harvey said she was with Kelly all afternoon, didn’t she? So she had probably have left before Barnett arrived.

[MrBarnett]

So, we have choices between; 2 Dorset St., 20 Dorset St. & 2 Millers Court, though if Harvey moved in with Kelly with one young boy it at least might offer justification for the confused press report of Kelly having a boy staying with her.

Or 2 New Court, I suppose.

[Wickerman]

A 6-year-old boy named John Harvey was injured in a traffic accident in Commercial Street in June, 1888. He was taken to the London Hospital where his address was recorded as 2, Dorset Court, Commercial Street. There doesn’t appear to have been a Dorset Court in Spitalfields, but that was the name given to Millers Court by some newspapers in the aftermath of the Kelly murder.

So, we have choices between; 2 Dorset St., 20 Dorset St. & 2 Millers Court, though if Harvey moved in with Kelly with one young boy it at least might offer justification for the confused press report of Kelly having a boy staying with her.

[Kattrup]

I would say your interpretation is unlikely. This is Joseph Barnett's exchange with the coroner:

Was there any one else there on the Thursday evening ? - Yes, a woman who lives in the court. She left first, and I followed shortly afterwards.

It is almost inconceivable that Barnett meant anything other than he saw one woman.

He did not mean anything else, because the other woman left as he arrived.

[Fleetwood Mac]

it suggests Lizzie Albrook was most likely the woman with Joe and Mary

The only interpretation from the statements that may tie everything up nicely is this: Barnett visited twice, both times there was only one woman in the room.

The coroner/Barnett exchange was this:

Was there any one else there on the Thursday evening ? - Yes, a woman who lives in the court. She left first, and I followed shortly afterwards.

Barnett may have associated "Thursday evening" with later in the day and so when asked about Thursday evening he responds with the later of his two visits in mind.

Bear in mind that there is no agreed upon exact time when evening begins.

Bear in mind also that when both women supposedly visited, it will have been dark, i.e. night time (on the 8th November it was dusk by 5pm). Yet, we have the coroner and Barnett talking of 7pm to 8pm as evening.

Clearly, interpretation of "evening" is subjective, and they didn't necessarily see it as we see it today. When asked about the "evening", in Barnett's mind/association with time that may have meant the later time of the two occasions he called.

[Fleetwood Mac]

In my opinion, the testimony is consistent and unproblematic.
What might be causing difficulty is the fact that the women do not refer to one another. To some, that makes it appear as if only one woman was present.

However, the testimony about both women mesh perfectly. Both were present with MJK, one left at 18.55, the other shortly before 20.

https://www.jtrforums.com/forum/crit...144#post513144

I would say your interpretation is unlikely. This is Joseph Barnett's exchange with the coroner:

Was there any one else there on the Thursday evening ? - Yes, a woman who lives in the court. She left first, and I followed shortly afterwards.

It is almost inconceivable that Barnett meant anything other than he saw one woman.

[Kattrup]

In my opinion, the testimony is consistent and unproblematic.
What might be causing difficulty is the fact that the women do not refer to one another. To some, that makes it appear as if only one woman was present.

However, the testimony about both women mesh perfectly. Both were present with MJK, one left at 18.55, the other shortly before 20.

https://www.jtrforums.com/forum/crit...144#post513144

[GBinOz]

Even though she is quoted in the press and Walter Dew refers to her in later years, there is doubt about whether Lizzie Albrook was a real person. She has an age and address quoted and her story more closely matches Barnett's account than Harvey's. Also Barnett does not refer to the female visitor by name, which I would expect if Maria Harvey was the visitor.

If she was a journalist invention, then mystery solved, but presumably the journalist would have to have known the Barnett story. Given the input of the statement, it would seem a pointless invention, though some argue it was simply to make MJK a more tragic figure. Although widely reported, it seems to be a syndicated story.

Does anyone know if there is there any record of Lizzie Albrook after 9 Nov 1888?

Cheers, George

[MrBarnett]

Agreed.



I have looked in the past to see if Harvey says where she lived before she moved in with Kelly.

If it had been another room Millers court then that would justify Barnett saying the female visitor "lived in the court", as he would have moved out (on 30th) before Harvey must have moved out of her room, and into Kelly's.
Meaning, Barnett wouldn't have known Harvey now lived in New Court.

Was Harvey ejected from another room in Millers Court?

I couldn't find any mention of a previous address for Harvey.

Just trying to allow for all options.

A 6-year-old boy named John Harvey was injured in a traffic accident in Commercial Street in June, 1888. He was taken to the London Hospital where his address was recorded as 2, Dorset Court, Commercial Street. There doesn’t appear to have been a Dorset Court in Spitalfields, but that was the name given to Millers Court by some newspapers in the aftermath of the Kelly murder.

In addition, Debra Arif found an 1887 (I think) workhouse admission for a laundress/washerwoman named Maria Harvey who had two sons, one a John of the same age as the boy involved in accident. The address this Maria Harvey gave was 12, Station Place - a very interesting address.

[Fleetwood Mac]

Agreed.



I have looked in the past to see if Harvey says where she lived before she moved in with Kelly.

If it had been another room Millers court then that would justify Barnett saying the female visitor "lived in the court", as he would have moved out (on 30th) before Harvey must have moved out of her room, and into Kelly's.
Meaning, Barnett wouldn't have known Harvey now lived in New Court.

Was Harvey ejected from another room in Millers Court?

I couldn't find any mention of a previous address for Harvey.

Just trying to allow for all options.

'Lots of possibilities, Jon.

Press reports stated that Lizzie Albrook lived in the court, so certainly a point in her favour.

[etenguy]

There are some interesting ideas in this thread already. Some things we do know
- Maria Harvey and Lizzie Albrook were both real people who knew Mary.

Even though she is quoted in the press and Walter Dew refers to her in later years, there is doubt about whether Lizzie Albrook was a real person. She has an age and address quoted and her story more closely matches Barnett's account than Harvey's. Also Barnett does not refer to the female visitor by name, which I would expect if Maria Harvey was the visitor.

If she was a journalist invention, then mystery solved, but presumably the journalist would have to have known the Barnett story. Given the input of the statement, it would seem a pointless invention, though some argue it was simply to make MJK a more tragic figure. Although widely reported, it seems to be a syndicated story.

[etenguy]

Agreed.



I have looked in the past to see if Harvey says where she lived before she moved in with Kelly.

If it had been another room Millers court then that would justify Barnett saying the female visitor "lived in the court", as he would have moved out (on 30th) before Harvey must have moved out of her room, and into Kelly's.
Meaning, Barnett wouldn't have known Harvey now lived in New Court.

Was Harvey ejected from another room in Millers Court?

I couldn't find any mention of a previous address for Harvey.

Just trying to allow for all options.

I agree with both you and Fleetwood, which would leave the question - what was happening with Maria Harvey. Was she lying? Or did Barnett visit twice and he was lying. Why were either of them lying?

[Wickerman]

The reasonable interpretation is that it wasn't Maria Harvey, given Barnett stated the woman lived in the court.

In truth, the likelihood is that "near neighbour" in this scenario means someone living in the court. 'Just wanted to make the point, keep options open sort of thing, I don't think Lizzie Albrook directly claimed to live in the court, a near neighbour were her words.

Agreed.

'Interesting that Barnett doesn't mention the woman by name given he lived in the court for a good while.

I have looked in the past to see if Harvey says where she lived before she moved in with Kelly.

If it had been another room Millers court then that would justify Barnett saying the female visitor "lived in the court", as he would have moved out (on 30th) before Harvey must have moved out of her room, and into Kelly's.
Meaning, Barnett wouldn't have known Harvey now lived in New Court.

Was Harvey ejected from another room in Millers Court?

I couldn't find any mention of a previous address for Harvey.

Just trying to allow for all options.