Can't get past Maxwell

[Darryl Kenyon]

Following on from my last post this is what Caroline Maxwell said at the inquest - Yes, on Friday morning, from eight to half-past eight. I fix the time by my husband's finishing work. When I came out of the lodging-house she was opposite.
So she sees Mary just as her hubby finishes work, hmmm

Regards Darryl

[Darryl Kenyon]

Caroline Maxwell also said she saw Mary about an half hour later outside The Britannia which obviously means Mary was still alive at that time. But we know that Mc'carthy was after Mary for the rent and we know that Catherine Pickett had been knocking on Mary's door that morning, yet neither of them saw Mary in the half hour she was out and about. Neither did Mary Cox nor Elizabeth Prater or Julia Vanturney and since the Britannia was on the corner of Dorset st I doubt Mary had ventured too far, especially with the horrors of drink upon her. Plus Mary would have to pass up the entrance to Dorset st and come back that way with Jack as well [ important when you think of were Mc'carthy's shop was located ],. But yet again no one saw her apart from Caroline Maxwell in the very least half hour she was on the streets nearby.

Regards Darryl

[MrBarnett]

Following on from my last post this is what Caroline Maxwell said at the inquest - Yes, on Friday morning, from eight to half-past eight. I fix the time by my husband's finishing work. When I came out of the lodging-house she was opposite.
So she sees Mary just as her hubby finishes work, hmmm

Regards Darryl

That’s one version of what she said. Here’s the official transcript:

I took a deal of notice of deceased this evening seeing her standing at the corner of the Court on Friday from 8 to half past. I know the time by taking the plates my husband had to take care of from the house opposite.


Plates? I don’t think any press reports spoke of plates. Perhaps it was a mishearing of ‘place’.

[Joshua Rogan]

That’s one version of what she said. Here’s the official transcript:

I took a deal of notice of deceased this evening seeing her standing at the corner of the Court on Friday from 8 to half past. I know the time by taking the plates my husband had to take care of from the house opposite.


Plates? I don’t think any press reports spoke of plates. Perhaps it was a mishearing of ‘place’.

Evening?

[Wickerman]

The most detailed account outside the inquest I find is that by the Central News, published in the Illustrated Police News, of 17 Nov. 1888.

..."However, it is the latest statement and it is given on the authority of the Central News:--"Mrs. Maxwell, the wife of the deputy of a lodging-house in Dorset-street, situated just opposite the court where Mary Kelly lived, said to a Central News reporter: 'I assist my husband in his duties, but we live next door, at No. 26 Dorset-street. We had to stay up all night, and yesterday morning, as I was going home, carrying my lantern and other things with me, I saw the woman Kelly standing at the entrance of the court. It was then about half-past eight, and as it was unusual for her to be seen about at that hour I said to her, "Hallo, what are you doing up so early?" She said, "Oh, I'm very bad this morning. I have had the horrors. I have been drinking so much lately." I said to her, "Why don't you go and have half a pint of beer? It will put you right." She replied, "I have just had one, but I am so bad I couldn't keep it down." I didn't know then that she had separated from the man she had been living with, and I thought he had been "paying" her. I then went out in the direction of Bishopsgate to do some errands, and on my return I saw Kelly standing outside the public-house talking to a man. That was the last I saw of her. Who he was I don't know. He was a short, stout man, of about fifty years of age. I did not notice what he had on, but I saw that he wore a kind of plaid coat. I then went indoors to go to bed, as I had been "on duty" all night. Mary Jane (I only know her by that name) was a pleasant little woman, rather stout, fair complexion, and rather pale."

There's just a couple of small details in there that have not been chewed over yet.
- She carried a lantern for some reason,and she had slept between seeing 'Kelly' and giving her statement.

[MrBarnett]

Evening?

Yes. But from what she says after it’s clear she means morning.

[MrBarnett]

The most detailed account outside the inquest I find is that by the Central News, published in the Illustrated Police News, of 17 Nov. 1888.

..."However, it is the latest statement and it is given on the authority of the Central News:--"Mrs. Maxwell, the wife of the deputy of a lodging-house in Dorset-street, situated just opposite the court where Mary Kelly lived, said to a Central News reporter: 'I assist my husband in his duties, but we live next door, at No. 26 Dorset-street. We had to stay up all night, and yesterday morning, as I was going home, carrying my lantern and other things with me, I saw the woman Kelly standing at the entrance of the court. It was then about half-past eight, and as it was unusual for her to be seen about at that hour I said to her, "Hallo, what are you doing up so early?" She said, "Oh, I'm very bad this morning. I have had the horrors. I have been drinking so much lately." I said to her, "Why don't you go and have half a pint of beer? It will put you right." She replied, "I have just had one, but I am so bad I couldn't keep it down." I didn't know then that she had separated from the man she had been living with, and I thought he had been "paying" her. I then went out in the direction of Bishopsgate to do some errands, and on my return I saw Kelly standing outside the public-house talking to a man. That was the last I saw of her. Who he was I don't know. He was a short, stout man, of about fifty years of age. I did not notice what he had on, but I saw that he wore a kind of plaid coat. I then went indoors to go to bed, as I had been "on duty" all night. Mary Jane (I only know her by that name) was a pleasant little woman, rather stout, fair complexion, and rather pale."

There's just a couple of small details in there that have not been chewed over yet.
- She carried a lantern for some reason,and she had slept between seeing 'Kelly' and giving her statement.

There are other versions of her inquest testimony where she gauges the time by when her husband finished work, and mentions in the same breath that he had to call someone up at 7.00.

Also the errand to Bishopsgate becomes fetching her husband’s breakfast from Spitalfields market.

Dog’s breakfast is perhaps the best description.

[Joshua Rogan]

Yes. But from what she says after it’s clear she means morning.

From John's post of the Central News interview (also carried by several papers on the 10th), it's clear that both Maxwells worked overnight at the lodging house, so morning would be her evening. And dinner is breakfast, and vice versa. I worked nights in and off for 20 years and it all gets a bit confusing. I rarely knew what day it was. That's why I've always been happy to accept that Maxwell had the wrong day.

Having said that, if the article is correct in that Maxwell actually lived at no.26, it's hard to imagine she got very much sleep before being woken by the police to give a statement...

[Abby Normal]

From John's post of the Central News interview (also carried by several papers on the 10th), it's clear that both Maxwells worked overnight at the lodging house, so morning would be her evening. And dinner is breakfast, and vice versa. I worked nights in and off for 20 years and it all gets a bit confusing. I rarely knew what day it was. That's why I've always been happy to accept that Maxwell had the wrong day.

Having said that, if the article is correct in that Maxwell actually lived at no.26, it's hard to imagine she got very much sleep before being woken by the police to give a statement...

thanks joshua
interesting take on it. maxwell having the wrong day, i assume her interection with mary happened the day before?

[Aethelwulf]

https://forum.casebook.org/forum/rip...trange-is-this

Letter from Maxwell's address.

Just reading through this thread and it seems it was never proven to come from Smith or her family. In fact, there seems to be an opinion that it could be important. One thing I did notice, the letter was sent to the 'Head Constable of Yarmouth, Yarmouth' and threatened to 'do for two Norwich women', which is similar to the language used in the letter sent to the 'highest Ealing Police sergeant' - 'there are two women here I want, they are bastards and I mean to have them'. That postcard was sent just after the double event when the area was flooded with extra police, some from Ealing, in the west end. I do wonder whether the Ealing letter was an attempt to create a diversion and lessen the police presence that was obviously disrupting JTR's little games. Now, as it seems to be the season for silly ideas, were any police, even just one high ranking officer, ever drafted in after the double event from Norfolk? And a potential similar diversion suggested? Rather crazy idea I know, so those I've offended feel free to have a pop back, I can take it.

[Abby Normal]

Just reading through this thread and it seems it was never proven to come from Smith or her family. In fact, there seems to be an opinion that it could be important. One thing I did notice, the letter was sent to the 'Head Constable of Yarmouth, Yarmouth' and threatened to 'do for two Norwich women', which is similar to the language used in the letter sent to the 'highest Ealing Police sergeant' - 'there are two women here I want, they are bastards and I mean to have them'. That postcard was sent just after the double event when the area was flooded with extra police, some from Ealing, in the west end. I do wonder whether the Ealing letter was an attempt to create a diversion and lessen the police presence that was obviously disrupting JTR's little games. Now, as it seems to be the season for silly ideas, were any police, even just one high ranking officer, ever drafted in after the double event from Norfolk? And a potential similar diversion suggested? Rather crazy idea I know, so those I've offended feel free to have a pop back, I can take it.

et tu brute?

[MrBarnett]

From John's post of the Central News interview (also carried by several papers on the 10th), it's clear that both Maxwells worked overnight at the lodging house, so morning would be her evening. And dinner is breakfast, and vice versa. I worked nights in and off for 20 years and it all gets a bit confusing. I rarely knew what day it was. That's why I've always been happy to accept that Maxwell had the wrong day.

Having said that, if the article is correct in that Maxwell actually lived at no.26, it's hard to imagine she got very much sleep before being woken by the police to give a statement...

She says morning elsewhere and doesn’t mention dinner.

I’m more intrigued by the plates. Casebook Wiki mentions them.

She saw Mary at the corner of Miller's Court between 8.00am and 8.30am on the morning of 9th November 1888, saying she was sure of the time as she was taking some plates her husband had borrowed back to the house opposite.

[Abby Normal]

Caroline Maxwell also said she saw Mary about an half hour later outside The Britannia which obviously means Mary was still alive at that time. But we know that Mc'carthy was after Mary for the rent and we know that Catherine Pickett had been knocking on Mary's door that morning, yet neither of them saw Mary in the half hour she was out and about. Neither did Mary Cox nor Elizabeth Prater or Julia Vanturney and since the Britannia was on the corner of Dorset st I doubt Mary had ventured too far, especially with the horrors of drink upon her. Plus Mary would have to pass up the entrance to Dorset st and come back that way with Jack as well [ important when you think of were Mc'carthy's shop was located ],. But yet again no one saw her apart from Caroline Maxwell in the very least half hour she was on the streets nearby.

Regards Darryl

bingo DK
thats a big one for me. only maxwell sees her? on a busy mid morning on that day of the lord mayors show? and marys so ill shes throwing up on the street yet quickly out picking up men for sex? and the tight time frames, large fire and burnt clothes??

i just dont see it. maxwell is a puzzle and hard to dismiss, but i still lean she was mistaken and a night time murder.

[Wickerman]

thanks joshua
interesting take on it. maxwell having the wrong day, i assume her interection with mary happened the day before?

Hey Abby, for the longest time I have argued against this idea that Maxwell could have confused the day, it's preposterous, she saw Kelly the same day as she was interviewed. Yet, to my dismay the very same type of situation unfolded this morning.

Some two or three hours after I got up this morning (about 11:00am) my wife asked how my night had been, I told her just the usual, but because I woke up with a dry throat about 5:45, I got myself a drink of water, and decided to have a shower. I came down about 6:15.
My wife looked at me, and said that she was down here when I came down, about 8:10.
I told her she couldn't have been, she was still upstairs when I came down after my shower.
No, she said, she was on the computer when I came down.

I spent a while thinking about this because I did remember seeing her on the computer, but I had got up about 5:45, so what happened?

Slowly, it came back to me after thinking about it. She was right, I had got up just before 8:00 am, and had a shower, and came down about 8:15, she was on the computer.
It was yesterday when I woke up about 5:45, had a shower & came down - not this morning, but I wouldn't have realized it if she hadn't pressed the point.

Later, it occurred to me that is very similar to this Maxwell thing we've been talking about. I had confused what I did yesterday morning with this morning.
It is possible after all, it just happened to me, and I have always maintained it isn't likely, that it's ridiculous.

I am quite a bit older than Maxwell was, maybe that has something to do with it, but, needless to say I am shocked that I was so convinced I got up at 5:45 this morning, if it had not been for my wife then I'd have thought this all day long.
I had no recollection of getting up about 8:00 am, and that was only about three hours before when we began talking about it.

So,... if your still with me, I suspect Maxwell had this morning ritual, every morning, of bringing the plates back from the lodging-house, she did it every morning. More importantly, she must have done it Thursday morning, the morning she saw Kelly.
On Friday morning she went through the same ritual, but also went for milk to a shop on Bishopsgate (this was verified), and returned.
In this respect, she appears to have 'confused the day', as her seeing Kelly was associated more with the ritual part of her duties than the special trip to the shop for milk?

Again, sorry for the small self-indulgement, but I am still shocked that I could be so mistaken over something that happened merely a few hours previous.

[GBinOz]

The Echo 10 Nov 1888:

Many persons who have been interviewed, state that the unfortunate woman never left her house at Dorset-street after she had entered it on Thursday night, while, on the other hand, numerous persons, who declare that they were companions of the deceased and know her well, state that she came out of her house at eight o'clock on Friday morning for provisions, and furthermore, that they were drinking with her in the Britannia, a local tavern, at ten o'clock on the same morning as her mutilated body was found at eleven.

The circumstances connected with the tragedy are more mysterious than ever. Some persons have reiterated the statement that the unfortunate woman was seen between eight and nine o'clock yesterday morning. One of her companions, more positive than the rest saw Mary Jane Kelly at nine o'clock, and the officers of justice are this afternoon inquiring into the truth or otherwise of the woman's assertion. From the nature of the mutilations and the loss of blood the doctors can only form a very vague idea as to the time when death actually occurred. If, as assured, the crime actually took place in daylight time, the miscreant could only have completed his work - which, it is calculated, could scarcely have been done in less time than an hour - a few minutes before the ghastly discovery was made.