Archive through July 16, 2000

** This is an archived, static copy of the Casebook messages boards dating from 1998 to 2003. These threads cannot be replied to here. If you want to participate in our current forums please go to https://forum.casebook.org **

Archive through July 16, 2000

Casebook Message Boards: Ripper Victims: General Discussion: Mary kelly: Archive through July 16, 2000

Author: Thomas Ind Friday, 14 July 2000 - 03:27 pm
I'll try once more to make it smaller
Author: Diana Friday, 14 July 2000 - 07:29 pm
I hope we all understand the importance of not frightening Kelly off. Last August a new poster who identified herself only as "Esther" left a message and was responded to by one of us in a rather tasteless manner. She was never heard from again. It would be a real pity if this happened with Kelly.
Author: Peter R.A. Birchwood Saturday, 15 July 2000 - 06:10 am
Tom: That's a nice, well produced family tree: I wish I could get mine to look so compact. The last one I did went to 32 pages and one on a Mexican estate had 376 heirs and measured 37 feet! Peter
Author: Simon Owen Saturday, 15 July 2000 - 10:48 am
Since I live in the West Midlands , if it comes to it I am able to easily research any facts of the story relating to this area. In fact I will be in Stoke on Trent tomorrow , I'll have a look to see if I can find the pub. There may be some local information which I can access. Kelly - don't stop posting ! But can you tell us the name of the family Mary worked for in Liverpool in 1891 ? Peter - is there a Kelly Jones in the 1891 Liverpool census that you can find ? Or a Mary Kelly working as a nanny or a governess ? Simon
Author: David M. Radka Saturday, 15 July 2000 - 12:08 pm
With respect to "Esther" posting last year: I did some research on "her" and "she" turned out to be a cynical, cigar-chomping, 60 year-old male dwarf with a taste for worn panties! Just goes to show what some people will believe if they read it on the internet. If the post had been signed "Sam" instead, it'd be treated entirely differently here. David
Author: Matt_G Saturday, 15 July 2000 - 02:22 pm
I've lurked on these boards for more than a year and have found them quite interesting. But I'm amazed at how someone like Kelly is treated when they present information. Granted, no one is sure if her information is correct, but she should at least be heard. Remember, this is a case that has remain unsolved for more than 100 years. Sometimes our experts seem to forget that there is much about JTR to be learned. If we knew it all, there would be no purpose for this board. I don't know Kelly, but I think we shouldn't leap to judgement about her information.
Author: David M. Radka Saturday, 15 July 2000 - 04:38 pm
Matt, If you'd like to maybe get some respect here yourself, try signing your real name to your posts, instead of using "shallremainanon" in your e-mail. Remember, this is a case that has remained unsolved for more than 100 years. David
Author: Roger O'Donnell Saturday, 15 July 2000 - 05:30 pm
Risking aprobrium, Matt does have a point, in a case which has gone unsolved for 112 years, the most likely way forward is through family legend. I would point us all to Conan-Doyle, 'When one has eliminated all other possibilities, what ever is left, however improbable, is the truth'(my emphasis). So lets give it a fair, and preferably sarcasm and personal insult free, hearing. Otherwise, we may as well call it a day. Roger
Author: Leanne Perry Saturday, 15 July 2000 - 05:43 pm
G'day Matt, People have made false claims here before. Please be patient with us on this, and understand. No one is ready to judge whether Kelly is genuine or not. No one wants to scare her away, so that shows that everyone wants to hear her story! Leanne!
Author: Warwick Parminter Saturday, 15 July 2000 - 07:15 pm
TESTING Can I talk about the key to Kelly's room on this board please ? Rick
Author: Michael Lyden Saturday, 15 July 2000 - 07:43 pm
Hello everyone, I make no bones about the fact that I think kelly Jones is a fraud. Kelly has made two very bold claims: 1.she knows the identity of the ripper. 2.she is Mary Jane Kelly's great-great granddaughter. Kelly tells us that she cannot give us the names of various members of her familly because they would"heartily disaprove",but that doesn't stop her disclosing the identity of JtR himself. If kelly is speaking the truth she could so easily shut up people like myself and David Radka but it aint going to 'appen. Mick Lyden.
Author: Jill McDole Saturday, 15 July 2000 - 10:07 pm
I don't know that it would matter much to some if Kelly were a fraud or not. It seems that often once someone's opinion is formed, that rather than look through a fresh eye, one would rather denounce new information or fresh ideas as false or at the least amateurish detective work. I apologize in advance if my first post seems inappropriate; I've been reading this board for awhile now, but have felt a bit intimidated about posting because I didn't feel I knew enough about the case. Now I realize it doesn't matter. Opinions will always differ.
Author: Leanne Perry Sunday, 16 July 2000 - 03:58 am
G'day All, I'm a bit worried about the fact that Kelly claims the body at Millers Court wasn't MJKs. The body was undressed and died where she was found (evidenced by the blood under the bed). If her family tree does show that Mary Kelly is her great-great-grandmother, then that doesn't prove that Mary escaped! Mary's child was born years before the murder. Leanne!
Author: Michael Lyden Sunday, 16 July 2000 - 11:23 am
Hello again Kelly, Elsewhere on this site there is a discussion entitled "is Mary Kelly's letter from Canada fact or fiction?".In a post dated Feb 20 2000,R.J Palmer mentions Mary Kelly's murder but mistakenly refers to the incident as "the Mitre square murder",he does this twice. Now tell me Kelly,given the subject matter and the fact that in your first post you made exactly the same mistake as Mr.Palmer,is this then where your little hoax began? Do you own a coppy of Melvyn Fairclough's "The ripper and the royals"? Mick Lyden.
Author: Thomas Ind Sunday, 16 July 2000 - 12:49 pm
Warwick Yea post. It would be an interesting discussion. I always mix up Miller's Court and Mitre square and often talk of Miller's court when I am thinking of Mitre square pictorially and vice versa. It means nothing. Kelly is clearly posting from work and I doubt we will hear anything until monday. Were previous hoaxs over just a long period? Kelly has had a long time this weekend to collate information. No doubt when she returns to her computer at work on monday she will post a lot of information. Peter, have you been looking in the 1891 Liverpool census for Albert Carter. Has anyone access to this? The problem we currently have is that all the names, Carter, House, Jones & Robinson are all very common.
Author: Peter R.A. Birchwood Sunday, 16 July 2000 - 02:11 pm
Simon and Tom: I don't have the 1891 census. It's not so far surname indexed as the 1881 is. It's possible that there might be a copy in Liverpool archives which to a limited extent is surname indexed but I doubt it. I'll be at Lancashire Archives tomorrow and will take a look. On Tuesday I'll take a look to see if the events mentioned by Kelly (Her parents marriage etc.) actually occurred. If they did, it will, to some extent confirm her information although as Tom says, the names involved are so common that any number of errors could have crept into her family history over the years. Of course if there's no trace that her parents under the names given married around the date she gives, then I would suspect that we could say goodbye to the whole story. Peter.
Author: R.J. Palmer Sunday, 16 July 2000 - 02:40 pm
Michael: About five years ago I was in London and, on a dark drizzly night, I followed a sinister-looking fellow (carrying a black bag!) around the streets of Whitechapel. It turned out not to be the Ripper, but Donald Rumbelow. In the bag were books, not surgical instruments. I bought a copy of The Complete Jack the Ripper and read it with great interest. On the flight home I was foolish enough to invent an anagram from the Goulston Street Graffiti, adressed to F.Abberline, and signed by Montague J. Druitt (all the letters were there) though I was not foolish enough to believe it. I wadded it up in a small ball and threw it away. Four and a half years passed, and I more or less forgot about the Ripper, until seeing a documentary about Tumblety. Shortly thereafter I found this site. (Not unlike Sir Melville Macnaghten) back in February I was working from a memory which proved to be faulty, hence my slip of the pen. That's all at my end, nothing sinister. Whether this flub of mine inspired a hoaxer, I suppose only time will tell. I agree that Kelly's accidental reference to Mitre Square doesn't exactly inspire confidence. By the by, on pg. 207 of Feldman's The Final Chapter is a mention of the alleged letter (supposedly from MJK's aunt, not from MJK) which attempts to link it to Ruthin Castle, and then on to even more dubious links to Edward VII and Lord Randolph Churchill. My misguided thinking at the time was not that such a letter--if it existed--was proof of Kelly surviving Miller's Court, but that the murderer (Tumblety?) might have taken such a letter as a relic, and posted it on his return to Canada. But none of this makes sense, of course, since the letter does not exist. After trying to bring myself up to speed in the last 5 months (reading Begg, Cullen, Evans, Fido, Sugden, Tully, etc.,and studying contemporary sources where possible--wow, I sound obsessed--) I would strongly suggest that Mary Kelly is the body in Miller's Court. The body was positively identified as MJK by Barnett & McCarthy; MJK was seen going in and out of her room by several witnesses; no one came forward with a report of a missing person or any suggestion that the body was not MJKs; the clothes were MJKs; though badly mutilated, the hair the eyes, the arm, the general shape of the body and head were still recognizable; etc. etc. I will download this message and eat my words if proved wrong, but currently have no doubt that MJK--whoever she was--died in (catch this) Miller's Court. Alas, as someone once said, even Homer nods. RJP
Author: Simon Owen Sunday, 16 July 2000 - 03:17 pm
Here follows an account of my on-the-spot investigation in Stoke-on-Trent today ; since I was in Stoke on other business , I didn't have much time to look around and the Port Hill / Wolstanton area is unfamiliar to me. However I will report my findings here. Stoke-on-Trent is a small British city in the Industrial Midlands , between Crewe and Derby ; its main trade is the pottery trade and the production of china , although this industry has been in decline for some time. The suburbs of Port Hill and Wolstanton are to the north-west of the City Centre. Port Hill itself is quite leafy and open , there are Victorian terraces as well as better quality Victorian housing and post-war tin fronted housing. I noticed a pub but it seemed quite modern. Kelly did say that Mary's pub lay towards the Wolstanton Marshes so I headed south down High Street to a village area where the street was lined with little specialist shops. This area was less up-market , a bit run-down , and more like a working class area ; little rows of terraces run off the east side of this street. Here I found three pubs which could have been run by Mary and I will give details below. NB One of the houses in this street had a plaque on it bearing its date of construction : 1809. PUB 1 : This pub was on the corner of Lily Street and High Street , it is no.89 High Street. It is a large , white plaster-fronted building which at present has no name because it is being renovated. The door opens immediately onto the street. PUB 2 : This pub is a very large brick coaching house/pub and is called ' The Plough '. It is on the corner of Ellison Street and High Street set back slightly from the road with a concrete space for tables and carparking in front of it. It is a very imposing old building , although I wasn't sure when in the 19th century it might have been built. PUB 3 : This building looked to be a coaching house/pub but it was boarded up and not in use. It stands in Barker's Square off High Street , at a 90 degree angle to the road. The building is composed of a large house at the left with a lower building at the right , both are in good condition but have their windows boarded up ; the buildings are empty and not in use. A small set of stone steps leads up to the door in the larger building. Both buildings are painted deep red in colour. They could well have been a pub in Victorian times. Interestingly the modern Catholic church and Catholic primary school stand not far away , although these buildings are modern. There is a very old church in the area , St Margarets , and this has many old gravestones in it as well as ones dating to more modern times. There are legible 17th century graveslabs in its churchyard. Heading further down High Street we go through the Wolstanton Marsh area into the May Bank suburb. Here there were two large pubs : on the west side of the road a pub called ' The Marsh Head ' and on the east side a large old hotel called ' The Victoria '. ' The Marsh Head ' was a large brick pub while ' The Victoria ' was a long light grey building. The road changes into the Brampton Road and eventually you arrive in at a roundabout in the nearby town of Newcastle-under-Lyme ; here there was a very old pub called ' The Crossways ' but I think this was too far away from the area to be included. There are certainly several candidates for Mary's pub in the area , but it will require careful research in the local libraries to determine the state of the area around the turn of the century.
Author: Simon Owen Sunday, 16 July 2000 - 03:27 pm
Kelly , does my information inspire any recollections at all ? I intend to return to Stoke next weekend to do further research - is there any further information you can give about the area ? For instance , about when did Mary take charge of the pub and how long did she run it for ? When did she die ? Where is she buried ? Simon
Author: Warwick Parminter Sunday, 16 July 2000 - 09:53 pm
I've been interested in the Ripper mystery for 30yrs now and I've come to the conclusion that it will never be solved 100%. Too much information has been lost or not enough was recorded at the time but with what information is available I've arrived at my own candidate for Jack the Ripper and that is Joseph Barnet. He had the reason, the knowledge of the area, he was'nt afraid to be on the streets--he was part of the scene,he was an expert knife man-- gutter and filleter, and judging from the fact that he craved respectability and the woman he loved and thought would bring him that respectability betrayed his trust his love and generousity, I think he would be capable of the deeds. Tabram, nichols, Chapman and Eddowes to frighten Kelly off the streets and Kelly in revenge for bringing to the gutter and spitting in his face when he was wanting. I think the key to the mystery is the key to the room. The key went missing after their worst row, very likely lack of money, Kelly threw something at Barnet, missed and broke the window. Barnet sensing worse could come pocketed the key to prevent Kelly from locking him out sometime in the future. It did'nt matter about leaving the door unlocked when they were not there, they had nothing of value in the room. After a while they discovered they could reach through the window and slip a bolt or turn a piece of wood screwed or nailed to the door frame across the leading edge of the door. I believe this was Barnet's method of entry on the morning of the 9th. On the evening of the 8th Barnet had visited Kelly expecting her to welcome him back after living apart for a week, she did'nt, she told him she never really wanted him , only his money, he was useless to her now with no job or money . It's impossible to say how Barnet would have felt but he must have crossed the thin line from love to hate in that instant.He went back to that room between 3:30 and 4:00am and let himself in and killed her. She was asleep but woke having only time to scream "oh murder" before pulling the sheet over her head and Barnet cutting her throat through the sheet. He locked the door on leaving with the "lost key" hoping it would delay the body being discovered. The lock being a mortise type lock required the door to be forced open with a pickaxe. I think only Barnet could have had that key.