Morris Lewis and the reporting of his story

[David Orsam]

How very true, David. However, they illustrate the conundrum: a number of witnesses during the 1888 police investigations appear to be unreliable, at least from a modern perspective, without there being any absolute proof that they lied or, Indeed, were mistaken.

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?

[John G]

Fine, but neither of those said they saw MJK being murdered before 9am!

How very true, David. However, they illustrate the conundrum: a number of witnesses during the 1888 police investigations appear to be unreliable, at least from a modern perspective, without there being any absolute proof that they lied or, Indeed, were mistaken.

[David Orsam]

Yes, of course, and the same could be said of George Hutchinson, Matthew Packer et al.

Fine, but neither of those said they saw MJK being murdered before 9am!

[John G]

A witness who is "possibly unreliable" is also, by definition, possibly reliable.

I rest my case.

Yes, of course, and the same could be said of George Hutchinson, Matthew Packer et al.

[David Orsam]

So, you're obviously correct, although I would conclude 1-0 to the possibly unreliable witness!

A witness who is "possibly unreliable" is also, by definition, possibly reliable.

I rest my case.

[David Orsam]

Well, I'm assuming that the only witness who could effectively testify to Kelly being killed before 9:00am would be her killer, but unfortunately he didn't make an appearance at the inquest either...mind you, on second thoughts, maybe he did!

As a matter of simple fact that's wrong. Someone could have seen the murder occurring through the window. Someone could have seen the murderer leaving the room with bloody knife in hand. Someone could even have heard the murder taking place (and perhaps some would say they did!).

[packers stem]

Hello David,

Yes, it's a bit remiss of Paul, especially when one considers his deserved status in the Ripperology community, and the statement he makes is clearly of some importance. Maybe you could drop him an email and request clarification- I would do it myself, but I don't have his address, as were obviously not acquainted!

As far as I'm aware there is no surviving official report from the landlady .
We have Maurice lewis' name ,it's abundantly clear that he knew who Kelly was with the mentioning of Dan .
The landlady ,as she remains unidentified ,could just as easily be a barmaid and holds about the same weight as the unidentified young woman ,who's name was known ,who also saw Kelly between 8.30 and 8.45 according to the times on the 12th .Had the reporter been a little more inquisitive we could well have had 3 independent sightings

[John G]

Right thank you, so now we are down to the nitty gritty.

Number of witnesses at inquest testifying that Kelly was killed before 9:00am: NONE

Number of witnesses at inquest testifying that Kelly was alive at 9:00am: ONE

It's 1-0 to alive!

Well, I'm assuming that the only witness who could effectively testify to Kelly being killed before 9:00am would be her killer, but unfortunately he didn't make an appearance at the inquest either...mind you, on second thoughts, maybe he did!

So, you're obviously correct, although I would conclude 1-0 to the possibly unreliable witness!

[David Orsam]

Finally, is there any evidence that Kelly was killed before 9:00am? No, there isn't.

Right thank you, so now we are down to the nitty gritty.

Number of witnesses at inquest testifying that Kelly was killed before 9:00am: NONE

Number of witnesses at inquest testifying that Kelly was alive at 9:00am: ONE

It's 1-0 to alive!

[John G]

That's not very good. Without coming over all "Pierre", how are supposed to accept that without some kind of source reference?

Hello David,

Yes, it's a bit remiss of Paul, especially when one considers his deserved status in the Ripperology community, and the statement he makes is clearly of some importance. Maybe you could drop him an email and request clarification- I would do it myself, but I don't have his address, as were obviously not acquainted!

[David Orsam]

The reason I refer to a "conspiracy" is that both Maxwell and Lewis mention seeing Kelly long after she was presumed to be dead.

What does it matter when she was "presumed" to be dead? Yes, there was a conspiracy of some sort if they saw Kelly after the woman in 13 Millers Court was, in fact, dead but that's the thing we haven't established.

Moreover, in versions of Lewis' accounts it is at least intimated that he saw her with Barnett which, if true, would surely elevate him to the status of main suspect. Therefore, I consider it virtually inconceivable that no other witness would have reported these later sightings-Particularly as Lewis Mentions seeing her with other people- unless they were part of a cover up, probably involving Barnett.

Well John, answer me the question. Where was Kelly between 8pm and 11.45pm on the night of her death. You don't find it "inconceivable" that no-one saw her anywhere?

[David Orsam]

Regarding the Britannia sightings. Maxwell claimed to have seen Kelly outside the pub as 9:00am, whereas in one of Lewis' accounts he sees her inside the pub after 10:00am. Therefore the accounts don't really correspond at all. However, of even greatest importance is the fact that Lewis is reported as having gone to the Britannia, where he allegedly saw Kelly, after playing a game of pitch and toss. However, in an earlier version, he refers to the game but doesn't mention going to the pub. It's therefore possible that his Britannia story was thrown into the mix after he became aware of other accounts, i.e. Maxwell's.

I am fortified in this conclusion by the reference he also makes to seeing Kelly return with some milk. Now, of course, Maxwell also mentions going to the milk shop, so I wonder if he has once again incorporated elements of Maxwell's statement into his own account, but got the facts confused, i.e. because he was relying on rumours of what Maxwell was supposed to have said.

Hi John,

I've already dealt with the 9am v 10am point. The early reports said Lewis was playing pitch and toss at 9am. Why can't Lewis or the LWN reporter have got confused about timings later that evening or the next day?

You say that Lewis refers to seeing Kelly return with some milk. Actually he never said that. He told a P.A. reporter that the woman then believed to have been murdered returned with some milk. The suggestion in my OP was that, at the time this newspaper report was written, the identity of the murdered woman was unconfirmed and Lewis was thinking of someone else.

[David Orsam]

Ah, I thought you would ask that! Unfortunately, he doesn't give a reference, he simply refers to the fact that there were enquiries made by the police at the Britannia and other pubs, and no evidence could be found of Kellie being served with beer on the morning of her death. He then adds, "Indeed the landlady of the Britannia said that the pub hadn't been busy that morning and she was therefore certain that Kelly hadn't been there." (Begg, 2004, p286).

That's not very good. Without coming over all "Pierre", how are supposed to accept that without some kind of source reference?

[packers stem]

Hi John

Ah yes, the old romancer Matthew Packer, the man who sold rabbits to Jack the Ripper's cousin and who blatantly lied about not being spoken to by the police.

Is there a suggestion that Packer did not make a mortuary visit? Irrespective of rabbits....
The importance of my post surrounds why Maxwell was not taken to view the body if Abberline was in any doubt at all about her identification
Same goes for Maurice Lewis

[John G]

But where does he get it from?

Ah, I thought you would ask that! Unfortunately, he doesn't give a reference, he simply refers to the fact that there were enquiries made by the police at the Britannia and other pubs, and no evidence could be found of Kellie being served with beer on the morning of her death. He then adds, "Indeed the landlady of the Britannia said that the pub hadn't been busy that morning and she was therefore certain that Kelly hadn't been there." (Begg, 2004, p286).