Archive through May 7, 1999

** 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 May 7, 1999

Casebook Message Boards: Ripper Victims: Specific Victims: Mary Jane Kelly: Was it really Mary Kelly?: Archive through May 7, 1999

Author: Christopher-Michael Friday, 23 April 1999 - 03:13 pm
Laura - May I make a few suggestions while waiting for Mara? If you're looking for a complete account of the circumstances of Mary Jane Kelly's death, you could do no worse than read Philip Sugden's "Complete History of Jack the Ripper," which will tell you what you should know. But what's the purpose of your essay? Simply to retell the events of November 9, or to propose someone as a likely candidate for Kelly's murderer? The latter approach would be much more difficult, and I daresay you'd reach your 5000 word limit just setting things up! Alternatively, you might make a good essay merely trying to discuss some of the mistakes and mysteries that surround Kelly (did she really die, what happened to the key, why was she so far behind in her rent, &c.). It's sure to be interesting, whatever approach you choose, and we will certainly look forward to hearing what you come up with. If I can guide you to any books or provide any help, let me know. As far as an essay title, I've always fancied "The Shadow of Mary Jane Kelly." You can use it if you wish; my writing on that topic has been pushed aside in favour of a different piece of work. Christopher-Michael
Author: Ashling Saturday, 24 April 1999 - 02:26 am
Hi y'all. LAURA: No, I can't possibly sum up Mary's death in a few paragraphs. Have you read about Mary on the main menu here? - Not the discussions section - the dissertions & factual summaries part. That's a good place to start. C-M's questions & suggestions are excellent. In addition to Sudgen, buy or borrow from library any edition of the JtR A-Z by Paul Beggs (who posts here), Martin Fido & Keith Skinner. It's an encylopedia - giving about 1 or 2 pages on every person, place & event of Jack's reign of terror. You can quickly look up unfamiliar names & decide if they need to be researched further or not. Then I suggest you try: 1) While reading Sugden, jot down any big questions that come to mind - set yourself a limit ahead of time - 10 questions, 20 questions or whatever. 2) Go over the list - pick say 5 - the ones Laura really really wants to know the answers to the most. (Your title may be in one of these questions.) 3. Decide if your essay is from the angle of - Mary Jane Kelly who was murdered by JtR or the angle of Jack the Ripper who murdered Mary Jane Kelly. 4. Write an essay that answers (or tries to) your 5 questions. I do the above in a less formal way when I write fiction (I'm not published yet.) Let me know if it works for you or not. When you've narrowed your focus a bit more - we'll be better able to help you, so keep us posted on your progress. Happy Writing, Ashling
Author: Leanne Saturday, 24 April 1999 - 04:42 am
G'day Laura, My idea for your essay title is: "It was only a violet I plucked from my dear mother's grave". This was the title of the last song that Mary Jane Kelly sang, on the night she died!
Author: Laura Saturday, 24 April 1999 - 09:20 am
Hiya Christopher-Michael, Ashling and Leanne!! You guys are the greatest!!! The things you wrote were SO helpful that I noted down what you all had to say. I've borrowed the A-Z from a friend and am currently looking up all the things that I don't know much about. The other book by Philip Sugden that you suggested is proving more difficult to get hold of but I'll keep trying! I've decided to focus my attention on MJK being murdered by JTR rather than the other way round. I'm thinking about an essay title, not sure which one I'll use yet but your suggestions were fab! Thank you all, you derserve medals! Laura
Author: Leanne Monday, 26 April 1999 - 11:13 pm
G'day everyone, I've just picked up the book: 'The Ripper and The Royals'. On page 226, it says how Nora O'Brien, (Kelly's aunt), stated that Kelly's letters to her stopped in early November 1888. We all know what happened on the 9th of November, then she received a Christmas card from her in January 1889. She told Inspector Abberline, that it had been sent from Canada. On page 227, it says that after Kelly's apparent murder, her friend Winifred May Collis, was never heard of again. I'll speed read through this book and slow down at what I feel are the important bits. LEANNE!
Author: Jon Smyth Tuesday, 27 April 1999 - 04:52 pm
Leanne I havn't read 'Ripper & Royals', and didn't really intend to, so as your well into it, and obviously interested in Kelly, do you want to write down any names, dates, places or any other 'gotcha's' that can be traced here in Canada. I'm not one for advocating 'the body wasn't Kelly's' but that wouldn't stop me from leaving no stone unturned to track down anything to support Kelly, or a woman from U.K. in her mid 20's, being here at that time. Though knowing Melvin Fairclough's work, we might be wasting our time. Regards, Jon (Canada)
Author: Leanne Tuesday, 27 April 1999 - 05:51 pm
G'day John, I remember reading somewhere, maybe at the bus-stop coming home from the library, that MJK, changed her name when she got to Canada. That's probably why she can't be easily traced - She made attempts to make sure she could never be traced. I'll read on!
Author: Leanne Wednesday, 28 April 1999 - 12:57 am
G'day John and everyone, On page 231 of the book, it says that 'after she arrived in Canada, Kelly changed her name to CLASTON.' She had a reason for going there, because before she even lived at Millers Court, her son Micheal was sent there by 'The Sisters of Mercy' nuns at the womens refuge in Crispin Street.
Author: Leanne Wednesday, 28 April 1999 - 07:42 am
G'day everyone, In this book, Fairclough reminds the reader that 'witnesses' say they heard a stiffled cry of "OH, MURDER!" It is his opinion that a woman confronted by a man about to kill her, would scream "HELP!". If Kelly had discovered her friend was butchered, she would cry out "OH, MURDER!", with her hand at her mouth to stiffle the urge to vomit. Caroline Maxwell, testified that she saw and spoke to Kelly the next day. Kelly said: "Oh, I do feel bad" and told her she had just thrown-up. It was thought that Mrs Maxwell had mistaken the day. Inspector Abberline's diary if 1896, says that 'Kelly's friend Winifred May Collis, was NEVER HEARD OF AGAIN!' The book is interesting because it includes exact statements, copies of 'private' diary writings, special reports and statements made at inquests. These lines are typed in a smaller font, on nearly every page. This is probably why not many interested people have read it, especially if they weren't 'fans' of the Royal theory. LEANNE!
Author: Jon Smyth Wednesday, 28 April 1999 - 06:44 pm
Hi Leanne Just a point..... You mention Abberline's Diary of 1896, from what I understand those volumes contain errors that would not be expected to have come from Abberline himself. He even gets his initials backwards. And some have pointed out that an artical published recently (1980's) is copied almost word for word including mistakes, in these volumes. On the face of it there are strong indications that these are forgeries. So is there any other verification of this Winifred May Collis, out side of the diaries ? Regards, Jon
Author: Leanne Thursday, 29 April 1999 - 09:08 am
G'day Jon and everyone, 'The Ripper and The Royals' says that Abberline entered Kelly's room, with the intention of retrieving anything that would connect with Prince Eddy. Amoung things he found were papers belonging to Winifred Collis, (lists of household items etc.,with the word 'parlourmaid' at the top. Collis was a parlourmaid in Cleveland Street. Abberlines diary states that Collis went to stay with Kelly, due to an unwanted pregnancy, but he didn't make it clear which one was pregnant, Kelly or Collis. Collis went there to have an abortion herself or to perform one. Rumour at the time, was that Kelly was pregnant, but no evidence was presented that the body in Millers Court was that of a pregnant woman. An abortion could have been performed on either woman, before the murder. This book also says that Barnett identified the body by the hair and eyes. Mary Kelly, had dark red hair. Much of the blood, would have been soaked up into the hair, making it appear red. As Barnett knew what he had to do, he was not likely to have looked very long at the mess. -LEANNE
Author: Savant Thursday, 29 April 1999 - 05:54 pm
There is no other way of putting this other than to say that the 'Abberline Diary' was a total fraud, there was no Royal connection, and no papers belonging to anyone were found by Abberline in the room. There is no evidence of the existence of a Winifred Collis in connection with the murder whatsoever, Kelly was not pregnant, it was her body, and Barnett identified her by the ear and the eyes.
Author: Wolf Friday, 30 April 1999 - 12:27 am
Hello Savant, I agree with your assessment of the whole Abberline diary, royal family fakerie, but although Barnett was supposed to have said that he had identified Mary Kelly by her ear and her eyes, it is now widly believed that what he really meant was hair and eyes. This makes a lot more sense and also makes the case for the body being Mary Kelly's a lot stronger. If the body was that of some other woman then she would have had to have had the same hair colour, eye colour and general body shape as Mary Kelly's. Don't forget that although Barnett identified her body, the police in H division knew what she looked like as well.
Author: Caz Friday, 30 April 1999 - 03:38 am
Another thought here, all. Wouldn't Joe have KNOWN whether it was his Mary on that bed or not, before or after her death, by her eyes and her smell, if nothing else? Therefore it surely follows that: A) IF he murdered her then it was most likely Kelly. Otherwise we have to look for a motive for his killing some other woman. B) IF he had no part in the murder, we then have to work out why he would lie about the dead woman's identity, if it wasn't Mary. It's not as if he finally got it together with the real MJK to start a new life later on when the fuss died down. Or did he? And C) IF he knew the dead woman was NOT Mary, he could have said so if he had any sense, and maybe suspicion would have been directed away from him. So, in conclusion, I'd say there is no good reason for Joe to mess up with the identification. Love, Caz
Author: Christopher-Michael Friday, 30 April 1999 - 08:33 pm
Leanne - Savant has already answered this, of course, but I thought I might as well add my own voice to his (or hers. . .we ought to have some sort of gender identity here). While I don't generally discourage people from reading Ripper books, I should point out that you will not get anything useful from "Ripper and the Royals." While Melvyn Fairclough presents what - at first sight - appears to be a detailed circumstantial case, we must remember that all the details you have been intrigued with - Prince Albert Victor, Winifred May Collis, a pregnant Mary Jane Kelly - spring from the diaries of Inspector Abberline. The diaries, unfortunately, are almost certain forgeries. Joseph Sickert, who owns them, claims he made them available to Stephen Knight for use in his "Final Solution." No-one has ever stepped forward to corroborate this story. No-one has reported seeing them before 1988. And most importantly, there are certain turns of phrase and minor errors in the diaries that are identical to the words and errors in a 1989 (!) Ripper article by the researcher Neal Shelden. There is also no evidence that Winifred Collis ever existed outside the pages of the diaries. As for Kelly's pregnancy, this appears to have derived from confused press reports soon after her murder that confused Kelly with another tenant of Miller's Court who had a small boy. It is often said that Kelly was "known" or "rumoured" to be pregnant, but no-one has yet provided any contemporary evidence for this assertion. And, as a final filip, Mr Fairclough himself no longer believes in the Abberline diaries. It's a rattling good story, Leanne, and I don't fault you for being fascinated with it. It is, however, a beautiful palace built on a soggy foundation of sand. Don't waste your time. As ever, Christopher-Michael
Author: Leanne Saturday, 01 May 1999 - 05:29 am
G'day Chris, The only reason I dug the book out of the library, is because you asked me to on April the 21st 1999. I have never believed that anyone royal or working for royalty, was Jack + Co. If they had to 'silence' anyone, they could have done it cleanly. Why make such a mess? The second half of the book, concentrates on Mary Kelly and the possibility that she escaped the murder. -LEANNE XXX
Author: richie Wednesday, 05 May 1999 - 09:54 pm
from richie, it's been a while since i put anything on this page. the book "the ripper and the royals" was right up my alley, because i'm a staunch believer that more than one person was behind the whitechapel murders. however, fairclough himself is now siding with the "maybrick diary". i read that in a book called 'the mammoth book of jack the ripper'. i'm not sure of that title, but he is in the book stating as much. as for mary kelly, i think she's one of the most intruiging [can't spell] figures. like most, if not all conspiracy fans, i have no solid evidence-just shadows and echoes. HOWEVER, ther is the matter of caroline maxwell, the woman who insisted on seeing kelly hours after kelly was supposed to be dead. correct me if i'm wrong, but i don't think maxwell was called to kelly's inquest. if not, why? one more minor question- did kelly have brown or blonde hair? the same book that fairclough siding with the diary stated that kelly had blonde hair. i welcome all comments. thanks, richie.
Author: Leanne Thursday, 06 May 1999 - 06:46 pm
G'day Rich!, On page 234 of Fairclough's book: 'The Ripper & The Royals', it says 'It is safe to assume that Irish-born Mary Kelly had dark-red hair', 'Florence Posh, Kelly's friend, said that she had 'good hair, dark and bushy'. On page 231, it says that Caroline Maxwell, who claimed she saw and spoke to Kelly, hours after the murder, repeated this when questioned at Kelly's inquest'. LEANNE!
Author: richie Thursday, 06 May 1999 - 10:29 pm
hi leanne. thank you for correcting me on the matter of maxwell and whether or not she was indeed called at the inqest. as for the color of her hair, the picture gets fuzzy. i'm a big fan of fairclough's book, but there's yet another new book that claims kelly's hair was actually blonde. AND FOR THE SECOND DAY IN A ROW, I FORGOT THE DARN TITLE OF THE BOOK. i hope to remember to give you the title the next time i get the time. maybe i should paste a reminder on my forehead. get back to you soon, richie.
Author: Leanne Friday, 07 May 1999 - 04:46 am
G'day Rich, It says right here in 'Casebook', that Mary Jane Kelly had 'blonde hair, blue eyes and a fair complexion.' Faircloughs book says 'The Western Mail reported that she answered to the nickname 'Fair Emma', while 'The Illustrated Police News stated that her nickname was 'Ginger'. 'Fair Emma' may have refered to her comeliness and complexion, while 'Ginger' could have refered to the colour of her hair. -LEANNE