Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Alice McKenzie - some details not seen before

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post
    That’s of course if people agree with all of your “similarities” and a single killer

    Take Jackson and Kelly out of the equation and where does it leave you.?

    www.trevormarriott.co.uk
    I don't think it's as simple as that, Trevor. I don't agree with Christer, but the argument, concerning Chapman, Kelly and Jackson, is not easy to break [and Dr Biggs, for instance, doesn't even consider it]. It really isn't.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post
      History is there to be challenged not readily accepted without question, especially where the ripper murders are concerned.www.trevormarriott.co.ukk
      Indeed! And I actually challenge it - the suggestion that the Ripper and the Torso killer are one and the same is a prime example of that.

      Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post
      If Jackson was not a murder victim and Kelly’s heart was not taken away and the organs not taken away from Eddowes and chapman it opens up a whole new ball game does it not, and we do have evidence in support of the above.

      Even if you don’t agree with all it still weakens your similarities and you cannot compare with any certainty
      www.trevormarriott.co.ukk
      Sorry, but no. I am not speaking about these matters at all. I am speaking about how there are very clear similarities. Proven similarities. Factually and historically recorded similarities.

      You are doing something totally different - you are asking "what if" about a number of things that have nothing at all to do with my reasoning.

      "What if" you are wrong, Trevor? "What if" your kind of reasoning has no place in this discussion?

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Fisherman View Post
        Indeed! And I actually challenge it - the suggestion that the Ripper and the Torso killer are one and the same is a prime example of that.



        Sorry, but no. I am not speaking about these matters at all. I am speaking about how there are very clear similarities. Proven similarities. Factually and historically recorded similarities.

        You are doing something totally different - you are asking "what if" about a number of things that have nothing at all to do with my reasoning.

        "What if" you are wrong, Trevor? "What if" your kind of reasoning has no place in this discussion?
        The same could be said for your illogical reasoning suggesting that the torsos and the WM were committed by the same person and I will leave it there.

        This topic has been done to death over the past few years

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post
          The same could be said for your illogical reasoning suggesting that the torsos and the WM were committed by the same person and I will leave it there.

          This topic has been done to death over the past few years

          www.trevormarriott.co.uk
          I fear you are wrong on all counts, Trevor.

          There is nothing illogical in suggesting that people who sustain the same kind of damage, damage that is furthermore extremly rare, are in all probability victims of the same killer. It is claiming that these similarities are of no importance at all that lacks logic.

          Furthermore, the topic has not been done to death by any means. Just wait and see.
          You may of course say "no" and put your head in the sand, but to be quite frank that is of no consequence at all.

          Comment


          • From now on, I suggest that any prolonged discussion of the Ripper/Torso issue is carried over to the thread "Same motive = same killer". This thread belongs to the new findings about Alice MacKenzie.

            Comment


            • This was posted a few months back on JTRForums. It was certainly new to me and contains some interesting little nuggets of info:




              On the 13th August, 1889, the Peterborough Express carried this report, which provides some interesting new (to me) information about the Pitts family:


              “THE RECENT WHITECHAPEL MURDER

              THE VICTIM A PETERBOROUGH WOMAN AFTER ALL

              “ALICE MACKENZIE” IDENTIFIED

              It will be remembered that at the time of the latest Whitechapel murder, some four weeks since, the minds of Peterborough people were much exercised as to the identity of the victim Alice Mackenzie, it having been elicited at the inquest that she described herself as coming from Peterborough and being the daughter of a postman. The Peterborough postmaster was appealed to, but could find no record of any postman of that name; neither could the police throw any light on the matter. The local papers had their own theories as to the woman’s identity, one being of opinion that she was a tramp who had passed through the city early in the year and was brought before the borough bench on a charge of begging. It now appears that Mackenzie was not the woman’s maiden name, and not the name by which she was known in the city.

              It is confidently stated on good authority that Alice Mackenzie was none other than Alice Pitts, whose father was a rural postman journeying between Peterborough, Castor and Ailesworth, also holding the position of night watchman in the Minster-yard. This was perhaps 35 years or so ago, and when the watchmen were superseded by the constabulary Mr Pitts, who was widely respected, was employed in sweeping the Minster-yard, being also in receipt of a pension from the Post Office. For many years the family lived in a little house close to the Minster-yard, and even after Pitts’ death his wife, who died two years ago, continued to live there until the house was required for other purposes. Mrs Pitts, it is stated, used to earn her living by fur trimming, at which she was an adept. The family were well-known in the city. A brother was apprenticed to a watchmaker and Alice herself, the youngest of three daughters, went into domestic service, at one time being with Mrs Strickland, who kept a little refreshment house near the parish church. It was not so very long since that Alice left Peterborough to marry Mackenzie, who was supposed to be a grocer. After that, until her sad end by the knife of the mysterious and fiendish murderer, known as “Jack the Ripper”, she was lost sight of.

              It may be remembered that Alice appeared as a witness in an important case at the Sessions, her evidence breaking down the prosecution, and establishing the innocence of a young fellow accused of a serious offence. She is described as having had in her early days auburn hair, good complexion and a rather pretty face. Pitts the father was a well-known figure in his postman days. He used to drive a black donkey, which brayed with no uncertain sound, and “Old Pitts’ donkey blowing its horn” was a standing joke among the post office officials when the equipage was driven up to the office doors.”

              Comment


              • The reference to Alice’s appearance at the Sessions is particularly intriguing. I’ve looked long and hard for info about the case she was involved in, but to no avail.

                Comment


                • Gary, did you see this in the Peterborough Express - Tuesday 20 August 1889



                  Click image for larger version  Name:	Peterborough Express - Tuesday 20 August 1889.png Views:	0 Size:	36.0 KB ID:	777831
                  Last edited by drstrange169; 01-11-2022, 05:17 AM.
                  dustymiller
                  aka drstrange

                  Comment


                  • Hi Dusty,

                    Yes, I did, but thank you.

                    This is also from JTRForums:



                    The Peterborough Express stuff is really quite useful, I’m not sure why we didn’t find it when we were looking into Alice’s background a few years back. Perhaps it’s only recently been digitised?

                    The headline in the Express’s Second Edition column of 18th July, 1889 read:


                    “ANOTHER WHITECHAPEL MURDER

                    A PETERBOROUGH WOMAN THE UNFORTUNATE VICTIM”


                    The word ‘unfortunate’ can’t have been chosen without consideration of its usage as a euphemism for ‘prostitute’. After a paragraph describing the discovery of the body, the victim’s wounds and her circumstances, a second paragraph followed:


                    “THE INQUEST

                    The inquest was held last evening, when John McCormack with whom deceased had been living, identified Alice Mackenzie, who a few years ago resided at Peterborough and who will probably be known to some of the residents of Boongate and it’s vicinity. The victim is about 44 years of age, and is 5ft 4ins in height. She is of fair complexion, with dark brown hair. One of her teeth had evidently been knocked out lately, and she was very shabbily dressed. She has lost the top part of her thumb. The inquest was adjourned.”


                    Boongate was a street/area to the northeast of Peterborough cathedral with something of a disreputable reputation*, the location of common lodging houses and the haunt of prostitutes and their customers. So a day into Alice’s inquest, and the Express had not only latched onto where Wynne Baxter was heading - to the conclusion that Alice was operating as an ‘unfortunate’ when she was attacked - but they also assumed that she had been an ‘unfortunate’ while living in her native Peterborough. Little wonder, then, that the Pitts family refused to accept the identification of the Whitechapel victim as their missing sister.

                    *The cutting below is from the Express of 17th September, 1889.

                    And the red herring (as it most likely was) of the much younger, apparently Scottish, tramp named Alice McKenzie who had appeared before the local bench a few months previously must have further muddied the waters. It doesn’t surprise me that the Pitts refused to accept that Castle Alley Alice was theirs. In December, 1884, Alice’s 74-year-old mother, Martha, was one of 20 ‘poor persons’ awarded a prize under the terms of Bishop White’s Charity for ‘exactly and distinctly repeat[ing] the Lord’s Prayer, the Apostles’ Creed and the Ten Commandments without missing or changing one word’. The prize amounted to 10 shillings for each successful candidate, the equivalent of several weeks’ ‘doss’ in a Spitalfields lodging house. The Pitts family were resident in the Peterborough Minster Precincts for over 4 decades - presumably under Diocesan patronage. Their perceived ‘respectability’ would have been of enormous value to them - a flimsy barrier between the family and extreme poverty of the type that their errant (?) daughter experienced in the East End abyss. By 1889, both of Alice’s parents were deceased, but two of her siblings were still living in Peterborough: her brother, John, aged 51, a watch jobber; and her sister, Martha, by then Mrs Varney, the wife of Eli, a carpenter. Martha’s and Eli’s social position is indicated by the fact that they had a 16-year-old domestic servant in their household in 1891. John’s is a little less certain, he was boarding at an inn when the census was taken.

                    All three of the main Peterborough papers in existence in 1889 carried denials by the Pitts family of any connection to Alice McKenzie.


                    Advertiser:

                    ‘A connection of the Pitts family, still residing in Peterborough, wishes us to state that the murdered woman had no connection with the family of the Peterborough postman of that name, but our readers can form their own conclusions upon the facts above related.’

                    17th August, 1889


                    Standard:

                    ‘Nothing has been heard of her [Alice Pitts] for some time, but a relative informs us that he believes she died seven or eight years ago. At any rate he distinctly denies that there is any resemblance between her and Alice Mackenzie.’

                    17th August, 1889


                    Express:

                    ‘A near relative of Alice Pitts has called at our office and made a statement contradicting the rumour that she is identical with Alice McKenzie, as reported in our issue of Tuesday last. The rumour has caused the family much pain, and is, he says, quite without foundation and due to vindictive feeling. We are, of course, willing to insert this statement and give it publicity in our columns on his behalf.’

                    20th August, 1889


                    As far as I can see, the Standard is the only one of the three that mentions Leicester, saying that Alice ‘left Peterborough some years ago to marry someone in Leicester.’

                    There weren’t too many Alices born in Peterborough in the mid-1840s. Fewer still (just one I would hazard a guess) whose father was a postman, and there was nothing in the vague physical description of Alice McKenzie that was at odds with what little we know of Alice Pitts. And the Pitts sister had gone missing, so her family had no idea where she ended up. The suggestion that she had died ‘seven or eight years ago’ is interesting. What the Pitts didn’t have access to are prison and workhouse records that plot the name change from Kensey to McKenzie and provide evidence that Alice ‘McKenzie’s’ husband was a deceased carpenter named Joseph. Perhaps they were unaware who the ‘someone’ she had married in Leicester was.


                    The tramp being supposedly Scottish and in her twenties, and the suggestion that AM had been a frequenter of Boongate were perhaps discrepancies the Pitts clung onto to support their denials. In their heart of hearts, though, they couldn’t have been sure the victim wasn’t their sister. Indeed, they may have believed she was but refused to acknowledge it publicly.


                    Attached Files
                    Last edited by MrBarnett; 01-11-2022, 06:46 AM.

                    Comment


                    • I tend to add any new McKenzie stuff to the ‘Alice McKenzie Relatives’ thread on JTRForums. But in light of Aethelwulf’s recent thread suggesting there should be more research on victims etc, I thought I should update this thread for the benefit of those who don’t frequent the ‘other place’.

                      Comment


                      • Good to see her being discussed again. I'd love to see a book like "Carroty Nell" on her.
                        dustymiller
                        aka drstrange

                        Comment


                        • There’s a fairly comprehensive Pitts family tree on Ancestry which shows the birth/death dates for all of Alice’s siblings but only shows her birth. Unfortunately the owner of the tree doesn’t accept messages. I’ve also tried approaching the local Peterborough press about her, but they seem uninterested.

                          Poor Alice, it seems that it’s only Ripperologists who are determined to keep her memory alive.



                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by MrBarnett View Post
                            Hi Dusty,

                            Yes, I did, but thank you.

                            This is also from JTRForums:



                            The Peterborough Express stuff is really quite useful, I’m not sure why we didn’t find it when we were looking into Alice’s background a few years back. Perhaps it’s only recently been digitised?
                            That's definitely the case, Gary. The Peterborough Express was digitized "and first made available on the British Newspaper Archive in Nov 9, 2021. The latest issues were added in Dec 22, 2021 " [BNL site information]
                            Other Peterborough Newspapers were made available in 2020 at the earliest.
                            As we are all mainly amateur historians with no research budget and in all corners of the world, getting to the BNL was not a possibility for most of us.
                            Up to this point, the nearest we had come to Alice was finding her in the Whitechapel Infirmary being picked up by police (and taken out of the workhouse again by them) for being drunk and disorderly in places like Dorset Street and the fact that she was married to a man named Joseph.

                            The workhouse entries for Alice also recently sparked a discussion about whether or not women in custody were kept overnight in the workhouse, as Alice apparently was and also Elizabeth Stride in Bromley House workhouse in 1881. Research in to the victims seems constant to me!

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Debra A View Post

                              That's definitely the case, Gary. The Peterborough Express was digitized "and first made available on the British Newspaper Archive in Nov 9, 2021. The latest issues were added in Dec 22, 2021 " [BNL site information]
                              Other Peterborough Newspapers were made available in 2020 at the earliest.
                              As we are all mainly amateur historians with no research budget and in all corners of the world, getting to the BNL was not a possibility for most of us.
                              Up to this point, the nearest we had come to Alice was finding her in the Whitechapel Infirmary being picked up by police (and taken out of the workhouse again by them) for being drunk and disorderly in places like Dorset Street and the fact that she was married to a man named Joseph.

                              The workhouse entries for Alice also recently sparked a discussion about whether or not women in custody were kept overnight in the workhouse, as Alice apparently was and also Elizabeth Stride in Bromley House workhouse in 1881. Research in to the victims seems constant to me!
                              Thanks Debs. I picked up the Express stuff in mid-November, so it hadn’t been digitised for very long when I came across it. That’s encouraging, I thought I may have somehow overlooked it for a couple of years.

                              I was referring to the period when we were researching via the Alice McKenzie relatives thread - 2018/19. For several months I was regularly searching for every combination of Alice/Pitts/Peterborough/Kinsey etc I could think of. A lot of info was pieced together then, including some stuff from local newspapers, but not the Peterborough Express.

                              Yes, research into the victims and the wider context of the case is constant. Mine tends to end up mainly on JTRForums, and so can be overlooked by those who are mainly CB based.





                              Comment


                              • As early as July 19th, two days after her murder, it was reported that the Peterborough police were denying that the Castle Alley victim was a native of their city. I think they may have got her confused with the, apparently Scottish, tramp of that name who had been arrested early in 1889.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X