|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Sarah Long
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, November 12, 2003 - 12:03 pm: |       |
Richard,
Not necessarily so. If they had both gone to see McCarthy about a room then surely it would have been under Joe's name not Marys. He was the man and that's how things were back then. That room was Marys and Marys alone. Joe lived with her but I believe she went to see about a room on her own. I still think that Mary called herself McCarthy, for whatever reason, and then later refered to herself as Kelly. McCarthy knowing that she lived with a man probably presumed that was his name. It doesn't say anywhere that Joe gave McCarthy a fake name. |
Richard Brian Nunweek
Inspector
Username: Richardn
Post Number: 406
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, November 12, 2003 - 4:26 pm: | |
Sarah,
I am confused,You say' If they had both gone to see McCarthy, about a room the surely it would have been under Joes name not Marys. and that he was the man , and that is how they were back then.
what you are saying is Mary got the premises, which may been possible, but he still knew the man as kelly, and whats more a coal porter, which is hardly a mistakenable profession.
Regards Richard. |
Alan Sharp
Inspector
Username: Ash
Post Number: 169
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, November 12, 2003 - 5:49 pm: | |
From McCarthy's police statement, taken on 9th November.
I let the room about ten months ago to the deceased and a man named Joe, who I believed to be her husband and then later in the statement I have since heard the man Joe was not her husband and that he had recently left her
That seems pretty clear to me. McCarthy didn't know Joe's surname, but thought he was Kelly's husband and so either he or the Times reporter just assumed that their surname would be the same. |
Richard Brian Nunweek
Inspector
Username: Richardn
Post Number: 408
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, November 13, 2003 - 4:54 am: | |
Hi Alan,
Of course that is entirely possible, yet McCarthy states he knew her as Mary Jane McCarthy, not Kelly although she often posed as the mans wife, as he states that she lived with a man named Kelly,when they first moved in to number 13, I think it is fair to assume that his Mary Jane McCarthy, adopted the name of the man she lived with.therefore he did not assume that her name was kelly.therefore he must have known the man in number 13 was named Kelly...
Richard. |
Sarah Long
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Thursday, November 13, 2003 - 5:00 am: | |
Richard,
I maintain that McCarthy knew her mainly as McCarthy (maybe she used this name to soften him up) and occasionaly heard her using the name Kelly. Anyone would presume that the man was her husband and therefore his surname must be Kelly.
I think it's pretty straight forward.
Please could you point me to where it says he knew Joe as Kelly and where it said that Mary or Joe told him that. |
Richard Brian Nunweek
Inspector
Username: Richardn
Post Number: 409
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, November 13, 2003 - 4:22 pm: | |
Hi Sarah,
I am only going by the Times Nov 10th 88, in which McCarthy states, she moved in with a man called kelly a coal porter, who had left her recently.
You are correct in the assumption, that by Using the name McCarthy, she may have attempted to soften him up, we can only go by assumptions, and this is mine.He knew the victim as Mary Jane, she had mentioned to him the name McCarthy, and as he knew the man living with her was named kelly, he knew she went by that name, it was only after she was killed, and investigations proved that Kelly was infact Barnett, that he realised the truth.
Regards Richard. |
Alan Sharp
Inspector
Username: Ash
Post Number: 172
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, November 13, 2003 - 7:54 pm: | |
Richard
Let's go back to his police statement again, written remember on 9th November, the day that her body was discovered.
I saw the mutilated remains of deceased whom I knew as Mary Jane Kelly.
Again, pretty conclusive, on the day of her murder McCarthy knew that her surname was Kelly. |
Richard Brian Nunweek
Inspector
Username: Richardn
Post Number: 410
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, November 14, 2003 - 3:07 am: | |
Hi Alan,
The fact that he said those words, I dont consider proof , that he knew her as Mary jane kelly for the duration of the period is not in dispute, as he stated 'she lived with a man called Kelly, and she posed as his wife'.
I still maintain , that she had called herself Mary Jane McCarthy originally, but as living with a man calling himself Kelly, she became known to at least McCarthy as mary jane Kelly, the court residents knew her simply as Mary jane.
Richard. |
Sarah Long
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Friday, November 14, 2003 - 7:43 am: | |
Richard,
I realise you are going by what the Time said but it only said what McCarthy believed , I am not disputing the fact that he knew Mary as McCarthy and Joe as Kelly but I am suggesting that he made these assumptions on what he heard not by Mary and Joe telling him this. |
Sarah Long
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Thursday, November 13, 2003 - 10:06 am: | |
Richard,
Just had a thought about McCarthy thinking Barnett was a coal porter. Perhaps Mary had told him once about her husband who had worked in the coal mines, but maybe the way she said it made him think that she was talking about Joe. Just a thought. |
John Savage
Detective Sergeant
Username: Johnsavage
Post Number: 110
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, November 16, 2003 - 9:14 pm: | |
Hello Debra Arif,
Going back to your post of 7th. November, you suggested that Mary Kelly's true name may have been Mary Jane O'Brein. I think that the source for this information comes from the "Abberline Diaries", published in The Ripper and The Royals by Melvyn Fairclough. Alas these diaries originated from Joseph (Gorman) Sickert and are generally thought to be untrue.
John Savage |
Timsta
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, November 19, 2003 - 10:02 pm: | |
Apologies if this has already been noted, researched, and dismissed, but there is an 1872 marriage between John Davies and Mary Kelly in Merthyr Tydfil, Glamorganshire. I know it's a little earlier than we'd like but I have no qualms that MJK may have lied about her age. And it is mining country.
It's in Merthyr T. volume 11a, page 857. (Found on FreeBMD.)
tim
|
Sarah Long
Detective Sergeant
Username: Sarah
Post Number: 59
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Friday, November 21, 2003 - 9:12 am: | |
Hi Timsta,
I also believe that Mary could easily have lied about her age. I don't know if this marriage had been mentioned but at the beginning of this thread(don't know if you've seen it already) there is Mary Jane Davies aged 16 living in Merthyr Tydfil as a widow in 1881. Unfortunately for this to be the same girl, she would have been 7 years old when she was married unless she lied about her age on the 1881 census. But she may have made a habit of lying about her age.
This is a very far fetched idea but here goes:-
What if Mary Jane Kelly wasn't her real name at all. What if she had known a Mary Jane Kelly and had taken on her name when she moved to London. It would explain why no relatives went to her funeral. They weren't aware that their daughter was dead or maybe something had happened to her family and she was the only one left. Maybe she took on Mary Kelly's life story for some reason. It's just an idea, a VERY far fetched one, but an idea. |
Jason Scott Mullins
Sergeant
Username: Crix0r
Post Number: 26
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Friday, November 21, 2003 - 2:31 pm: | |
Sarah -
I think I might agree with you. I had this thought a few weeks ago. I'm not so certain that Mary Jane Kelly was really her name.. It might have been the one she used for many years, but not her own. This isn't so uncommon, especially if one is trying to hide from something. Not that I'm saying she was hiding out or hiding at all. Just that it isn't impossible and could be likely 
crix0r
|
Richard Brian Nunweek
Inspector
Username: Richardn
Post Number: 424
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, November 21, 2003 - 2:55 pm: | |
Hi,
I do not think there is any dispute, that Mary Jane Kelly, was not her real name, no traces of that name could be found in 1888, also 2003, Mary Jane possible, but not the surname, yet her family whoever they were knew her true identity, for they wrote to her care of McCarthy, but in the name of Kelly which she used whilst living with Barnett.
Richard. |
Simon Owen
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Saturday, November 22, 2003 - 7:47 pm: | |
Since Mary's family wrote to her in the name of Kelly , why couldn't her maiden name be Kelly ?
We have a Mary Kelly born to a John Kelly and Anne McCarthy on 19th April 1864 in Castletown , Limerick , Ireland. (LDS records)
This Mary Kelly would be 16 in early 1881 , which would match nicely with Bob Hinton's young widow found in the 1881 Census.
The age of consent for girls in the 1860s was 12 , raised to 13 in 1875 , raised to 15 in 1885. Thus if this is our Mary we are looking for a girl married between April 1878 and April 1881 (at the very latest). |
Suzi Hanney
Sergeant
Username: Suzi
Post Number: 25
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 23, 2003 - 11:44 am: | |
Bob,
God this is all going back a bit isn't it?! O.K. tell us all about the 'Fox and Elm'! Still think the Merthyr M.J.K. thing is a bit too good not to be wrong!!!!!!!!Keep plugging away.. you've got something here mate!!
Cheers
suzi |
Paracelsus
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Thursday, January 01, 2004 - 4:22 pm: | |
Is it possible that Mary Kelly is living in 1881 at Broughton Colliery in Denbigh(Brymbo). A John Davis lived quite close and was of mining stock. Is there any significance in the fact that Mary was said to have lived in France when Mccarthy was, in fact, born there? Is the use of the spelling of CathArine Eddowes significant as there was a CathArine Kelly visiting a Daniel Mccarthy in the census records of 1881? All supposition, but then so much of this ongoing investigation is! |
Sarah Long
Inspector
Username: Sarah
Post Number: 367
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Monday, January 05, 2004 - 4:26 am: | |
Simon,
That record you found of a Mary Kelly could very well be the right one as she also apparently used the name of McCarthy and that would make sense if that was her mother's maiden name.
Sarah |
Richard Brian Nunweek
Chief Inspector
Username: Richardn
Post Number: 551
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 06, 2004 - 2:58 am: | |
Hi Sarah,
I have a hunch, we are going up the right path, the two names McCarthy, and kelly, should be used as a possible clue to her identity, By Barnett adopting the name Kelly, who Landlord McCarthy knew him as, and her obviously refering to herself as McCarthy, which she told him was her name.It would seem logical, that these two Irish names, have significance to her true identity.
Richard. |
Sarah Long
Inspector
Username: Sarah
Post Number: 372
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 06, 2004 - 5:00 am: | |
Richard,
Well, I still see no evidence to suggest Joe adopted the name of Kelly but we shall have to agree to disagree on that. The fact that she used the names Kelly and McCarthy I think do indeed point to her true identity especially since that record Simon mentioned has her mother's maiden name as McCarthy and her father's name as Kelly, if this is indeed our Mary it refers to.
Sarah |
Sarah Long
Chief Inspector
Username: Sarah
Post Number: 611
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 10, 2004 - 6:29 am: | |
This is probably a coincidence but I was searching the 1901 census this morning and I found a Mary Kelly aged 38 who was born in Ireland and living in Merthyr Tydfil at the time of the census. I wanted to look more at this person but unfortunately I have to pay to get the details.
I only mentioned this because there was talk of a Mary Jane Davies in Merthyr Tydfil before and I just thought it must be a coincidence, unless of course Mary wasn't the one killed and she HAD managed to move away but not to Ireland (but that's another thread I think).
Sarah
P.S. I still think the Mary Kelly Simon found is quite a good possibility though. |
Paul Williams
Sergeant
Username: Wehrwulf
Post Number: 15
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, February 29, 2004 - 10:07 am: | |
I searched IGI for a Mary Kelly, born Limerick county between 1863 and 1867 with a father named John and then attempted to cross reference with the 1881 census.
The initial search showed 9 Mary Kellys with father born Limerick between those dates.
1. Born 03/09/1867, mother Mary Quinn
2. Born 13/11/1865, Galbally, mother Mary O'Donnell
3. Born 31/08/1865, St Michaels 0399, mother Bridget Flyn
4. Born 24/04/1866, St Michaeals 0466, mother Ellen Collins
5. Born 05/09/1866, St Michaels 0426, mother Bridget Goulden
6. Born 14/02/1866, Adare, mother Margaret Cumins
7. Born 17/12/1866, Adare, mother Honoria Cagney
8. Born 19/04/1866, Adare, mother Anne McCarthy
9. Born 16/08/1865, Castletown District, mother Mary Collins
Two of the above may appear in the 1881 census in England and Wales. The first is a household at 30 Southowram Bank York, Family History Library Film 1342051, PRO RG11, Folio 4398/9 page 12. This shows the following individuals
Name Status Age Birthplace Occupation
John Kelly M 66 Ireland U/e labourer
Bridget Kelly M 60 Ireland
Michael Kelly U 29 Ireland Labourer
John Kelly U 23 Ireland Labourer
James Kelly U 21 Ireland Masons Lab
Bridget Kelly U 19 Ireland Mill hand flax
Mary Kelly U 15 Ireland Mill hand flax
James Langan 3 Halifax
It is possible that this is the Mary Kelly born 05/09/1866 with a mother Bridget and father John. It is not clear if James Langan is her son or that of the younger Bridget Kelly.
The second record relates to a family at Church Street, Flint, Wales, Family History Library Film 1342323, PRO RG11, Folio 5505/141, page 15.
In the household were
Name Status Age Birthplace Occupation
John Kelly M 43 Ireland General labourer
Ellen Kelly M 40 Ireland
Elizabeth Kelly U 18 Ireland Servant
Mary Ann Kelly 16 Ireland Gen labourer
Patrick Kelly 14 Caernarvon Gen Labourer
John Kelly 11 Flint Scholar
This could be the Mary Kelly born Limerick 24/04/1866 to John Kelly and Ellen Collins. The family would appear to have moved to Caernarvon in the 2 years between Mary's birth and Patrick's.
Also in the census, and apologies if this has been mentioned before, is a 22 year old John Kelly, born Limerick, who was lodging at 65 Augusta Street, Bedwelty, Monmouth, Wales with a family named Regan, FHLF 1342263, PRO RG11, Folio 5247/19, page 32. |
Natalie Severn
Inspector
Username: Severn
Post Number: 344
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, February 29, 2004 - 2:08 pm: | |
Thanks for this Paul.When I next go up to North Wales not far from either Flint or Caenarvon
I"ll go to the local libraries there to try to follow these people up.I tried to find out about local pit disasters a few weeks ago and discovered that written records containing names of the dead miners from the varios accidents that happened ,didnt start until about 1900'I think there was a reason for this because the mining villages have a strong tradition of mourning whenever there were pit disasters.Possibly the mine owners got worried about the adverse
publicity.
However there certainly were coal pits very close to Flint-Point of Air for one in the 19th and twentieth centuries and there will be some information on this available I am sure.
Best Natalie |
Natalie Severn
Inspector
Username: Severn
Post Number: 345
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, February 29, 2004 - 2:13 pm: | |
Paul-in addition to the above-just to clarify why
I am talking about miners etc is because of Mary apparently telling Joe Barnett that she was married to a man named Davies or Davis who had been killed in a mining disaster not long after they were married[when she was 16].
Natalie |
|
Use of these
message boards implies agreement and consent to our Terms of Use.
The views expressed here in no way reflect the views of the owners and
operators of Casebook: Jack the Ripper.
Our old message board content (45,000+ messages) is no longer available online, but a complete archive
is available on the Casebook At Home Edition, for 19.99 (US) plus shipping.
The "At Home" Edition works just like the real web site, but with absolutely no advertisements.
You can browse it anywhere - in the car, on the plane, on your front porch - without ever needing to hook up to
an internet connection. Click here to buy the Casebook At Home Edition.
|
|
|
|
