Top notch show JM - am already looking forward to next week's 2nd part.
I wanted to ask, as quite a bit of Joe Barnett's testimony was also covered in the show; I remember on a previous podcast (perhaps Stan Russo's one on one) where he mentioned that there was a "4 hour interview between Abberline and Barnett which was unrecorded in any form", after which lead Barnett to the West End.
Do the panel have any views on that at all?
Also next week, will you also be covering any of the other perhaps "less maintream" theories that seem to float up quite often regarding the MJK murder, for example the so called "FM" on the wall, and the Fairclough theory of the victim being Winnifred Collis?
I'll have to go back and re-listen to the Russo show and jog my memory about Barnett. But I'll look into it and bring it up this Sunday.
As far as other theories on MJK, yes we'll be discussing them. If there is anything specific other than what you posted above, or a certain points you want us to be sure to discuss, please PM or email me.
Yes, top notch. I'm always interested in new developments. Debunking the Liverpool Mary who married a baker named Wilson by finding her alive in 1891 is one. It was Chris Scott, wasn't it? Here are the details:
1881, Penrhyn St. 7 CT 19, Liverpool
Mary Wilson 26
Robert Wilson 27, baker
Christina Wilson 10
Robert Wilson 7
John Kelly 51, visitor
1891, 16 Amos St., Everton, Liverpool
Mary Wilson 32, wife
Robert Wilson 39, baker, son-in-law
John Matthews 66, driver, head
Mary Matthews 58, wife
Someone is disputing this, saying that the Mary Kelly Chris referred to (and whose details you listed second above) was born Mary Agnes Matthews and married a Robert Wilson, baker. In 1891, they are living in Mary's parents house and Robert Wilson is listed as a son-in-law. Married in Liverpool in 1876 and their births are recorded on the FreeBMD which match the ages on the 1891 census.
My correspondant says that this is not the Mary Jane Kelly, four years older, who married Robert Wilson, baker, who has not been found in the 1891 nor 1901 census.
I know that this episode is well past, but I felt compelled to mention that as someone who is still becoming familiar with the myriad number of facts/issues/dates/names etc. of the Whitechapel murders, the format and presentation of this episode were excellent. Having some exposition at the beginning of the episode was particularly helpful for those of us who don't have the command of the facts that the commentators do- and was appreciated. Good work, and thanks for continuing to share your knowledge and insight.
Thank you very much for your compliment. I also thank those who choose to participate in these episodes and am glad that this free project is providing listeners with a better understanding of the events that comprise the Whitechapel murders.
Nearly a month on from the last comment and many months since originally released, but just this last evening I was listening again to the two-parter devoted to Mary Kelly, and like the last gentleman I think the level of conversation and presentation were excellent.
Really, I can't say what a dream it is to be able to listen to so many experts literally thousands of miles apart all discussing the subject and contributing to the general knowledge.
As I'm reading as many of the seminal Whitechapel books now it's also a treat to be able to hear Martin Fido, Paul Begg, Chris Scott et al speaking extemporaneously on so many of the podcasts.
It's got to be quite a substantial outlay of time and effort, particularly for Jonathan Menges, and you all deserve a big thank you.