Morris Lewis and the reporting of his story

[Wickerman]

In terms of Maxwell's testimony being unreliable:

I understand that Bond's estimated time of death is of limited value, but I place a good deal of value in JTR being a night time killer. 10am in the morning certainly wouldn't fit with his pattern of behaviour.

Hi F.M.

As the physicians involved in the case are all working on behalf of the authorities, then their findings are equally part of the police investigation.
When food is found in the stomach it was known then by police and physicians as it is now that this is a means of indicating time of death. The digestion process was understood in the 19th century, as approximate as it was, to be a contributing factor in estimating time of death.

Dr. Bond's estimate need only be based on a comparison between fish & potatoes in their solid form as opposed to partially digested fish & potatoes.
Not necessarily the time the meal was eaten.
The assumption being that the digestion process like most bodily functions takes an average time.

Even though the physicians conclusion is guesswork, it is educated guesswork, not to be compared with our guesswork.

[David Orsam]

Top quality insight from David in the initial post on this thread, particularly the observation that Lewis didn't know the identity of the victim when he gave his initial statement (the milk episode).

I rather wish you hadn't said that because on reflection, and having found some new information (or rather some old information I'd forgotten about), I think I might have been mistaken.

I'll post a new thread about this in due course.

[David Orsam]

Hi John, thanks for your response but I still don't feel I understand your thinking. Mrs Maxwell said she and Kelly spoke to each other by name so, if she was telling the truth, there was no question of misidentification was there? What I'm really asking is why do you think she wasn't telling the truth?

As for whether it was oddly coincidental that Maxwell spoke to Kelly on the day of her death, that was really the point of the conversation, hence "What brings you so early?".

So I'm still not sure where you are coming from. Perhaps, as Fleetwood Mac said, it's that he normally killed in hours of darkness????

[packers stem]

Hi John
Why would she be expected to have taken any interest in the man talking to Kelly.
Had she known that within the hour a body was going to be discovered then I'm sure she would have paid more attention. Fact is a lack of psychic vision does not an unreliable witness make...
The whole point here is that the sightings were corroborated by Lewis and the times' unidentified woman to a degree, far more corroboration than any other witness.

[John G]

Are you going to have a crack at answering this John?

Hi David,

Sorry about the late reply! I would refer you to the Times November 12 1888:

"During the whole of yesterday Sergeant Thicke, with other officers, was busily engaged in writing down the names, statements and full-particulars of persons staying at the various lodging houses in Dorset Street. That this was no easy task will be imagined when it is known that it one house alone there were upwards of 260 persons, and that several houses accommodate over 200."

Now doesn't this perfectly illustrate the difficulty of approaching a nineteenth century problem from a twenty-first century perspective? For instance, when we think of who we would classify as a neighbour today, we might have regard to a relatively small number of individuals. However, in Maxwell's case, there would have been hundreds, if not thousands, of people who could legitimately fulfil that criteria, such was the immense level of overcrowding in the locality.

And, in those days, many people lead itinerant lifestyles, so there would be residents coming and going all the time, to say nothing of temporary residents, i.e. those looking for a place to doss down for a few days, or people visiting friends or relatives.

So we have to consider Maxwell's subjective opinion, that she was certain of her identification of Kelly, objectively. Thus, it can be inferred from her own testimony that Kelly, or the person she believed to be Kelly, was only a very casual acquaintance, i .e. based on the fact that she had only briefly conversed with her twice in four months. And, over that period, Maxwell may presumably have had literally hundreds of such encounters with different women. And don't you find it a little coincidental, and somewhat convenient, that the third time she supposedly talks to Kelly is on the morning of her death? Particularly as she claimed she hadn't previously seen the woman for three weeks.

And, let's not forget, that the important second alleged sighting on the morning of Kelly's murder, outside the Britannia, was from a distance of some twenty-five yards (see Inspector Abberline's testimony at the inquest.) In fact, this was so problematic that Maxwell couldn't even describe the man Kelly was supposedly with:

Coroner: "What description can you give of this man."
Maxwell: "I could not give you any, as they were at some distance."

In summary, what we are clearly left with is the uncorroborated testimony of a witness who, by any objective criteria, cannot be be assumed to be reliable, unless she happened to have a photographic memory, because the risks of misidentification in such a densely overcrowded neighbourhood have to be regarded as being extremely high.

[packers stem]

In terms of Maxwell's testimony being unreliable:

I understand that Bond's estimated time of death is of limited value, but I place a good deal of value in JTR being a night time killer. 10am in the morning certainly wouldn't fit with his pattern of behaviour.

Hi Fleetwood Mac
Do you suspect Chapman was killed much earlier than most believe?
I'm with you, I doubt daylight killings
That alone is not a good reason for anyone to claim Maxwell is unreliable

[Fleetwood Mac]

In terms of Maxwell's testimony being unreliable:

I understand that Bond's estimated time of death is of limited value, but I place a good deal of value in JTR being a night time killer. 10am in the morning certainly wouldn't fit with his pattern of behaviour.

[Fleetwood Mac]

Top quality insight from David in the initial post on this thread, particularly the observation that Lewis didn't know the identity of the victim when he gave his initial statement (the milk episode).

I think the report stating: "there is good reason to think the murderer spent the night in the room" could do with some meat on the bones.

I wonder if this was due to finding something in the room which indicated the murderer had stayed a good length of time?

[David Orsam]

But tell me this John. WHY do you think Mrs Maxwell appears to be unreliable?

Surely you must agree that most people think this - and did at the time - (a) because what she was saying conflicted with the time of death estimated by the medical men and (b) because of the cry of murder in the night.

But if you remove those two factors from the equation, what is there to indicate that anything Mrs Maxwell said was untrue?

Are you going to have a crack at answering this John?

[David Orsam]

You're on par with rudeness with the best of them here David, and I have 11 years of observations here to base that on. You post on a members board, you get responses from members. You dont want to have contrary opinion, then keep your own to yourself.

The fact that you seem to be defending the Maxwell statement suggests you are oblivious to or unaffected by contemporary opinion of her statement. Or the physical and circumstantial evidence aside from the rigor onset. Like what that cry out near 4am might indicate about Mary Kellys status.

Like I said Michael, your post was irrelevant because my post to which you were responding was directed specifically at John.

If you want to discuss time of death with me fine but I seem to recall that, in another thread, all you posted in support of your claim that modern medical opinion would support Dr Bond was reference to a book, the abstract of which didn't even to support what you were saying.

And "contemporary opinion" about Mrs Maxwell's statement is worthless if it was based either on the medical opinion about time of death or the cry of murder. That's what I'm trying to point out. I'm not here to defend Maxwell, and have no interest in doing so, simply to challenge the reasons why she is thought to be unreliable. That was the purpose of my question to John.

[packers stem]

Hi Michael
On the subject of contemporary opinion is it not likely that Abberline must have been convinced that Maxwell did know who Kelly was otherwise he would surely have taken her to view the body as had happened with earlier witnesses?
Clothing description possibly,the woolen crossover?
Maybe it's more of a recent opinion than contemporary other than the coroner who I suspect was swayed by the medical opinion at the inquest

[Michael W Richards]

Michael - my post was directed at John who, like me, understands that it was impossible for Dr Bond to have accurately estimated a time of death. He knows that 2am was no more than a guess and, therefore, I am asking HIM why he thinks Mrs Maxwell's evidence was unreliable.

What you think about the matter isn't relevant because I wasn't asking you the question.

You're on par with rudeness with the best of them here David, and I have 11 years of observations here to base that on. You post on a members board, you get responses from members. You dont want to have contrary opinion, then keep your own to yourself.

The fact that you seem to be defending the Maxwell statement suggests you are oblivious to or unaffected by contemporary opinion of her statement. Or the physical and circumstantial evidence aside from the rigor onset. Like what that cry out near 4am might indicate about Mary Kellys status.

[David Orsam]

You give Bond no cred when it comes to his ability to set an approximate time of death so you thinks thats a potential throw away, and you dont see the potential relevance of that call out on the physical state of Mary Kelly at that time of night, so I can see why you would want to back Maxwell.

Too bad not one contemporary professional opinion agrees with your take on the matter.

Michael - my post was directed at John who, like me, understands that it was impossible for Dr Bond to have accurately estimated a time of death. He knows that 2am was no more than a guess and, therefore, I am asking HIM why he thinks Mrs Maxwell's evidence was unreliable.

What you think about the matter isn't relevant because I wasn't asking you the question.

[Michael W Richards]

But tell me this John. WHY do you think Mrs Maxwell appears to be unreliable?

Surely you must agree that most people think this - and did at the time - (a) because what she was saying conflicted with the time of death estimated by the medical men and (b) because of the cry of murder in the night.

But if you remove those two factors from the equation, what is there to indicate that anything Mrs Maxwell said was untrue?

You give Bond no cred when it comes to his ability to set an approximate time of death so you thinks thats a potential throw away, and you dont see the potential relevance of that call out on the physical state of Mary Kelly at that time of night, so I can see why you would want to back Maxwell.

Too bad not one contemporary professional opinion agrees with your take on the matter.

[packers stem]

Doubting Maxwell is 'theory driven' David.
I am fairly certain had the body been discovered some hours later there'd be few,if any doubters and people would point to her with Lewis' corroboration as solid.