Can't get past Maxwell

[DJA]

Can someone help me with the following 2 questions please?

Q1. Did Hutch say for how long she knew Kelly and if so, for how long?

Q2. Does anyone know where (or can suggest how I can find out) where George William Topping Hutchinson was at that time?

Just following up a long shot.

Three years.

Topping was not George Hutchinson.Hutch was a sailor.

[etenguy]

Cox said red pelerine and shabby skirt.
Maxwell said velvet body maroon shawl and dark skirt Red pelerine and velvet body are different.

Not so different depending on shade of maroon - some look red especially at night. Also both said she was not wearing a hat. a velvet garment was found in MJK's room, part of the burnt clothes. I think adding all this together, it would be an unusually happy coincidence for all these things to tie up.

Cox said MJK was intoxicated but that was 11:45 pm.When Maxwell met MJK ,MJK said she came from Ringers and had a drink.
The police most likely checked Ringers if somebody resembling MJK drunk there at around 8 am..The maroon shawl and velvet body,maybe not as there was a fire.

Exactly - Cox said MJK was three sheets to the wind the night before the murder. Maxwell said that MJK told her she had been drinking heavily Thursday night and had gone out for the hair of the dog Friday morning. This all ties up.

[mpriestnall]

Can someone help me with the following 2 questions please?

Q1. Did Hutch say for how long she knew Kelly and if so, for how long?

Q2. Does anyone know where (or can suggest how I can find out) where George William Topping Hutchinson was at that time?

Just following up a long shot.

[mpriestnall]

Spitalfields was under Macdonald.MJK and Chapman was both under him.Thd difference was Chapman was killed outside,like in a street,the body can't be left there,so the police sent the body to Old Montague mortuary which then fell under Baxter.

MJK was one day of inquest,too late for Hutch.Maybe it was intentional on Hutch's part,he did not have to face the court and get fined for lying.

Lewis said he had known MJK for 5 Years,She came to London 4 yrs previously and to Spitalfields barely 2 years.

The case for for the jurisdiction has been discussed many times by more knowledgeable case students than me. It's ironic, at least, that
Macdonald himself claimed jurisdiction due to where body lay and so it could be said he was arguing against himself!!!???

Hutch claimed to have spoke to a policemen and presumably subsequently ignored. Maybe the higher up police didn't want Hutch to appear at the inquest so that AM's identity wouldn't be placed on record and subsequently publicized.

I don't believe the Barnett supplied backstory for MJK and that I believe she was born in London and died outside the capital. Therefore I don't see a problem with Lewis claiming he knew MJK for 5 years.

[richardnunweek]

According to Mrs Prater ,she met Kelly around 9 pm the 8th Nov,, at the bottom of the passage, when they were about to go out to try their luck. Kelly was wearing a jacket and bonnet, Mrs Cox less then three hours later, saw Kelly allegedly not dressed in that attire, Either she lied, or Kelly had come back to her room to change down. I believe that Mary may have been wearing her jacket and bonnet when killed , and the killer burnt that clothing in the fire, Hence the Velvet remains of a jacket , and remains of a bonnet were found by the police, Who had at least believed initially that the killer burnt these because they were blood stained [The times Nov 12th] What a odd belief ? Was the killer seen with Kelly whilst she was wearing those garments , and the police would believe the person she was with would be the killer if they were blood soaked intact in the room.? Regards Richard.

[mpriestnall]

As mentioned above I don't think we can entirely rely on the photo that we have. Do we know if the doctors stitched her face back together as in the case of Eddows or was this impossible because parts/strips? of the face had been actually removed?

Good question to which I don't know the answer. Perhaps someone else has thoughts on this?

[Abby Normal]

Cox said red pelerine and shabby skirt.
Maxwell said velvet body maroon shawl and dark skirt Red pelerine and velvet body are different.

Cox said MJK was intoxicated but that was 11:45 pm.When Maxwell met MJK ,MJK said she came from Ringers and had a drink.
The police most likely checked Ringers if somebody resembling MJK drunk there at around 8 am..The maroon shawl and velvet body,maybe not as there was a fire.

hi varq
i believe its the red pelerine and maroon shawl that are the same no?

[Varqm]

Hi Varqm

Caroline Maxwell's account is consistent with:

a) Mary Ann Cox who (in line with Maxwell's account of the MJK conversation) stated at the inquest:


b) Mary Ann Cox who, while giving a lesser description, was nevertheless consistent with Maxwell's description - especially the no hat and no mention of an apron.


Also, I believe the description matches the clothes found in MJK's room - but I cannot remember or find the reference for that.

Cox said red pelerine and shabby skirt.
Maxwell said velvet body maroon shawl and dark skirt Red pelerine and velvet body are different.

Cox said MJK was intoxicated but that was 11:45 pm.When Maxwell met MJK ,MJK said she came from Ringers and had a drink.
The police most likely checked Ringers if somebody resembling MJK drunk there at around 8 am..The maroon shawl and velvet body,maybe not as there was a fire.

[Varqm]

yes, remember now having looked at it again. Doesn't sound like blotchy was heard talking to Kelly, although could assume that if they were walking together. I guess the issue is for blotch to be the killer is that you need to assume Hutch is lying, and I just don't see any reason for that. Whoever the police are referring to in that statement, bloth, Aman or some other lost witness account, opinion was Bury looked very like him. I wasn't trying to drag this off into a discussion about Bury, just thought it would be useful to know there is an account of police thinking that suggests an earlier (night) rather than later (morning after 8.30) T.O.D. As I said, the Maxwell problem remains.

Dr. Bond also favored around 2 am..

[Varqm]

haven't seen a ref to blothcy to be fair, only quiet walking I've seen mentioned is that by Hutch referring to Aman.

As for the time, are saying that midnight is night and 2-4am isn't? I think in this context night is probably just the hours of darkness night, not 12.01 suddenly becoming morning.

I think night referred to the 11:45 pm sighting of Cox.

[etenguy]

Just as an aside - I am fascinated by the occupations listed in the last couple of posts - some of which I had never heard of. Some are more obvious than others:

a saw dust
a shoeblack
a smacksman

This site is nothing if not educational.

[GBinOz]

Research by Debra Arif:

1891 listing for 14 Dorset St

108 IRONS, William Head Widower M 32 1859 Carman
Hoxton, London
108 MUMFORD, Annie Servant Single F 23 1868 General Servant
Spitalfield, London
108 MUMFORD, Alice Daughter Single F 0 1891
Spitalfield, London
109 HARN, Samuel Head Married M 45 1846 Shoeblack
Lambeth, London
109 HARN, Charlotte Wife Married F 25 1866 Domestic Servant
Lambeth, London
110 KNIGHT, Henry Head Married M 38 1853 Saw Dust
Bethnal Green, London
110 KNIGHT, Louisa Wife Married F 40 1851
Wiltshire
111 SMITH, James Head Married M 41 1850 Genrl Dealer
St Lukes, London
111 SMITH, Louisa Wife Married F 40 1851
Camberwell, London
112 ANSON, W H Head Married M 23 1868 Docker
Shoreditch, London
112 ANSON, Sarah Wife Married F 19 1872 Laundress
Hoxton, London
113 JOYCE, Mary Anne Single F 12 1879
Guildford, Surrey
113 BROWN, Anne E Single F 35 1856
London, City Road
113 BUTLER, Florence Single F 17 1874
Ireland Dublin
113 SMITH, Helen Single F 24 1867
Yarmouth, Norfolk

There's a thread here:

https://forum.casebook.org/forum/ripper-discussions/witnesses/7086-how-strange-is-this

[GBinOz]

[Aethelwulf]

Hi. Look at this scenario
Mrs Maxwell claims to have seen Mary Kelly alive , in daylight hours, This would tell the police that the victim was killed after the sighting, leaving any one with an alibi at that time not part of the investigation.. If Mrs Maxwell was protecting her husband , it would be because he may not have had that alibi during hours of darkness. and she may have had good reason to suspect. I cannot dismiss how the most discussed witness in the Jack the Ripper crimes , happened to live right opposite Milles court the the very house the letter to the police came from.one week earlier.
Regards Richard

is something that has crossed my mind before. Was her husband a real nasty piece of work and was out that night so she gives him an alibi. The letter - why would you send a fake ripper letter and give your own address?

[Losmandris]

I may be misremembering and can't recall the details of who and where, but I thought there is a documented reference somewhere to this. Also the fact Barnett had to id by the eyes and ears (or hair) would suggest complete facial disfiguration anyway? We have photos
of the victim to judge this by as well.

As mentioned above I don't think we can entirely rely on the photo that we have. Do we know if the doctors stitched her face back together as in the case of Eddows or was this impossible because parts/strips? of the face had been actually removed?