|
 |
 |
|
|
|
** 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 **
Who really was ' Marie Jeanette Kelly ' ?
Casebook Message Boards: Ripper Victims: General Discussion:
Who really was ' Marie Jeanette Kelly ' ?
Author: Simon Owen
Wednesday, 16 January 2002 - 08:23 pm |        | I thought I would create this board to have a convinient place to put any information about the background of Mary Kelly on , and keep it all together. Census information , information about the men Mary lived with before Barnett , speculation on Mary's early life and that sort of thing.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Simon |
Author: Arfa Kidney
Thursday, 17 January 2002 - 08:26 am | | Hello,
Like a few who post to these boards,I am of the opinion that Mary Kelly used a false surname.
This may explain why researchers and genealogists consistently find themselves reaching dead ends and also offers a possible explanation as to why no family members attended Mary's funeral.
My question is: is there any truth in the statement that Mary was related in any way to John McCarthy and has anyone here researched the McCarthy family history in any detail?
I am of course not the first person to state that the entire circumstances surrounding Mary's death are extremely odd.We have a very sketchy picture of Mary's life and many of the details are uncertain anyway.Also, unlike all the other victims, we have a very hazy and ambiguous physical description of the woman.Why?
I don't think that there was any big police cover up or anything of that nature, but a lot of information was certainly suppressed.
I would be interested to read any of the "Ripper letters" following Mjk's murder in order to see just how much information the hoaxers had to play with.
Oh well,I'm off down the road to order a copy of Mr.Evans' new book.
Regards,
Mick |
Author: Neal Shelden
Thursday, 17 January 2002 - 04:42 pm | | Hi,
I think Mary Jane did have a different surname to Kelly. I don't think that I would suggest that Mary Jane was related to John McCarthy at this stage, but I wouldn't rule anything out.
I'm focussing also on the Shadwell and St George's-in-the-East area where I think McCarthy had relatives. This was of course the area where Mary Jane we are told, first came to the East End to stay with a Mrs Buki.
At present I am working on John McCarthy's family. And on another board under his name, I have put details about his will that proves as Andy Aliffe first pointed out, that he was the great grandfather of the actress Kay Kendall.
I am currently looking for John McCarthy's years before his arrival in Spitalfields in about the mid-1870's.
I recently searched for possible candidates for the woman that Kelly was supposed to have come to first in the East End named 'Buki'. The closest on the 1881 census index to the name was a 'Frida Bukie' in Kensington, but she was single. She was working for an Irish family named Boulger, and seems unlikely. There was a family of Joseph and Martha 'Buckie' in Bow, two 'Buke' families and a Miss Harriet 'Bookee' in Kensington again, besides a Mrs Catherine 'Bakie' in Lambeth. There's also a Mrs Ellen Barkey at Salters Alley, Wapping.
I have a strong belief that John McCarthy of Dorset Street, Mrs Carthy (probably called Mary McCarthy) of Breezers Hill, and Elizabeth Phoenix knew more than they let on about MJK's past. Elizabeth Phoenix herself is a mystery. There appears to be no likely candidate for her on the 1881 census index, and little chance that she married a Phoenix from 1881 to 1888 in the marriage registers. I believe that she was only a common-law wife.
There is little proof for anything Mary Jane said about her past, other than the fact that she probably had a brother in the 2nd Battalion Scots Guards. But all this lack of evidence points to the probability that she used a pseudonym?
All the best.
Neal. |
Author: Simon Owen
Thursday, 17 January 2002 - 05:26 pm | | Buki certainly doesn't sound much of an English name , what about the following ?
Buchie , Bukie ( Irish )
Bukier , Bucher ( German )
Buchet , Bouquiet , Bouqiet , Bouquet , Buqiet , Bukee , Beauquiet , Beauqiet ( French ) |
Author: Simon Owen
Thursday, 17 January 2002 - 05:29 pm | | Does Elizabeth Phoenix appear on the 1891 Census ?
And does Joseph Barnett appear on the 1901 census ? |
Author: Arfa Kidney
Thursday, 17 January 2002 - 06:32 pm | | Hello Neal,
It's great to hear that you're researching into McCarthy's family and especially interesting to here that he was Kay Kendall's great grandfather.
Genevieve will never seem the same again!
Keep up the good work,
Mick |
Author: Rosemary O'Ryan
Thursday, 17 January 2002 - 06:57 pm | | Dear Arfa,
If only there was a photograph of her! Someone would have recognised her.
Rosey :-) |
Author: Neal Shelden
Friday, 18 January 2002 - 02:50 pm | | Simon, Frida Bukie on the census is from Hanover, Germany, so I think there is a definite possibilty that the real Mrs Buki could have been non-English in someway. And of course, we don't have much evidence that proves that she was definately a 'Mrs' at all.
I doubt if the newspaper reporter asked (Mc)Carthy or Phoenix to spell the name, so I think he spelt what he heard. It probably sounded to him like Bew-kee, Buck-ee, or less likely Book-ee.
I haven't found Elizabeth Phoenix on the 1891 census yet. I may try 1901 in time. In 1888, she was living at 157 Bow Common Lane, and as Paul Daniel pointed out on this web site, on the 1891 census there is a Eugene McCarthy and his wife living at the address, but no Phoenix.
There appears to be some conflicting information as to whether the so-called Mrs (Mc)Carthy was the sister or sister-in-law of Elizabeth Phoenix? I think the latter, so Eugene could be a relative?
On Joseph Barnett, I haven't got round to him yet for 1901.
All the best.
Neal. |
Author: stephen miller
Saturday, 19 January 2002 - 03:53 am | | Hi All do we know the Christian name of the man Mary reputedly married circa 1879 and has any research been carried out regarding his death?
from steve
 |
Author: Simon Owen
Saturday, 19 January 2002 - 03:10 pm | | We don't know anything about the man Mary married except that he was called Davis or Davies , he was a collier and he was killed in a mining disaster at some point.
I have a list of all the men called Davies or Davis killed in mining accidents between 1879 and 1883 ( taken from the Bishopsgate institute in London ) which I will try to put up here when I have time. I still haven't managed to put that piece about Liz Stride up yet !
Simon  |
Author: stephen miller
Sunday, 20 January 2002 - 04:04 am | | Hi Simon thank you for your reply have you tried
www.cmhrc.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk
they have a list of all fatalities due to mining disasters and list them in groups of years
I was thinking the obvious that a death certificate may have a next of kin on it
Though I suspect the number of Davies/ Davis would be large
from steve
 |
Author: Arfa Kidney
Sunday, 20 January 2002 - 08:52 am | | Hello all,
For those of us who suspect that Mary Kelly was using a false surname,maybe a clue can be gleaned from the fact that Mary's brother Henry serving in the 2nd Battn'Scots Guards,was nic-named
"Johnto".
It has been suggested that this nic-name meant John too as that was the name of their father.
But maybe it's possible that the nickname "Johnto" was derived from the surname rather than the forename and the real surname was something like Johnson or Johnston.I have known a couple of people called Johnson who have been given the nic-name "Johnno"
Was there a Henry Johnson or Johnston serving in the 2nd Battn'Scots Guards in 1888?
Maybe Neal Shelden can help us out here.
Regards,
Mick |
Author: Neal Shelden
Sunday, 20 January 2002 - 11:00 am | | Mick,
I intend to make a search of the 2nd Scots records again in order to see what names are listed. I think I made a search of the records about 12 years ago but like everyone else I only looked for those named Kelly. I haven't got records of what I found back then, but obviously there wasn't anything significant.
I've always believed that Barnett meant 'John too' when he referred to her brother, rather than 'Johnto'.
And I can't really see how it could be a nickname taken from the surname. I think that your friends are a good example of the fact that someone with the surname of Johnston or Johnathon etc are more likely to be called 'Johnno'.
All the best.
Neal. |
Author: Jack Traisson
Sunday, 20 January 2002 - 05:29 pm | | Hi Neal, Mick,
Mark King back in 1996 reasearched "Johnto", with the possibility that it may have been a nickname for a surname. He did find that a Private Henry Johnston served with 2nd Battalion Scots Guards in 1888.
He found no evidence linking this man to Kelly, though he did have a novel speculation on the matter. King thoerized that Johnston visited Miller's Court as a client; Joe Barnett interrupts and Kelly comes up with the excuse that Johnston ("Johnto") is her brother.
It seems far-fetched given Barnett's statement and inquest testimony. If he thought he had met one of Kelly's brothers, i'm sure he would have said so.
I do agree that the "Johnto" angle is problematic, and that "Johnno" is a more likely nickname. "John too" is definitely a more reasonable interpretation of what Barnett meant.
Back in school, there was this kid we used to call "Johnny" because his last name was Johnson. Not that that has much relevance to this dicussion.
Cheers,
John |
Author: Simon Owen
Sunday, 20 January 2002 - 07:19 pm | | It would probably be best to list all the men named Henry from the 2nd Scots Guards somewhere , either in a magazine article or on the Casebook. After all , Mary's brother has to be one of these men.
A possibility is that Henry's middle name was Jonathan , as sometimes men prefer to be called by their middle names ( or a variant thereof ) rather than their first names.
Simon |
Author: Neal Shelden
Monday, 21 January 2002 - 04:25 pm | | Hi Jack and Simon,
Listing all of the names of the men in the 2nd Scots Guards in 1888 would be the best way to start searching for Mary's brother. But there are likely to be many names, so the research to first identify and then prove who the real Mary Jane was, is likely to take up a great amount of anyones time. Anyone named 'Henry' would be a candidate, but I wouldn't restrict the search to that name only.
On another point about Kelly's landlord John McCarthy at Dorset Street.
I have now discovered where McCarthy was living prior to Dorset Street by finding the Birth Certificate of one of his daughters namely 'MARGARET McCARTHY' in Shadwell.
The Birth Certificate gives her birth date in JANUARY 1876, and the address was 14 JOHNSON STREET, SHADWELL. JOHN McCARTHY the father gives his occupation as a BRICKLAYER, and the mother's name is given as 'ELIZABETH STEVENS'.
This explains why their famous Music Hall singer son John Joseph McCarthy took to the stage with the name of 'Steve' McCarthy taken from his mother's name. And the fact that the mother came from either the Shoreditch or Spitalfields area, offers an outside chance that she could have been related to a couple of witnesses at Chapman's inquest. Both William Stevens and Frederick Stevens stayed at Crossingham's Lodging House in 1888.
More interestingly it means that in 1876, McCarthy was living in Johnson Street off Cable Street, that I believe was the site of the STEPNEY GASWORKS. This ties in again with Mary Jane Kelly who spent time with a man who worked at that particular site, albeit some years afterwards.
There is more to be learnt about McCarthy yet!
Also, in looking up the 1881 census for 157 Bow Common Lane, the address for Elizabeth Phoenix in 1888, I was interested to find a couple called James and Caroline Williams living there. Once again the name of Williams crops up!
All the best.
Neal. |
Author: Simon Owen
Monday, 21 January 2002 - 06:13 pm | | | If Mary was related to John McCarthy in some way , it might explain why he let her build up such a great deal of arrears on her rent without evicting her. A relative on her mother's side perhaps ? |
Author: Rosemary O'Ryan
Monday, 21 January 2002 - 10:26 pm | | Dear Simon,
What are you trying to say? Save yourself from some future embarrassment...you are beginning to sound desperate!
Rosey :-) |
Author: Simon Owen
Tuesday, 22 January 2002 - 02:58 am | | Not desperate , merely making suggestions. Sometimes the same old facts looked upon in a new way will suddenly come to life in the light of new possibilities or new information , we should always be open to possibility.
One of these days one of our keys might turn in the lock ! |
Author: Neal Shelden
Tuesday, 22 January 2002 - 04:17 pm | | I think the fact of the matter is that until we find as many details as can be proved about John McCarthy, then we shouldn't completely rule out the remote possiblity of a family connection between Mary Jane and her landlord.
After all, what have we proved to date about Mary Jane's story?
This might sound like a daft theory? But from my initial research, I still think there's a slight chance that the (Mc)Carthy's of Breezers Hill could have been related to John McCarthy of Dorset Street?
If it were true, what could be the implications for the evidence given by McCarthy himself, or the McCarthy's at Breezers Hill, or even the elusive Elizabeth Phoenix? If they kept quiet about being related to each other, they might have kept quiet about more detailed knowledge concerning Mary Jane?
If this all sounds far-fetched? I still believe that Mary's stories told to Barnett and her friends at Spitalfields were mostly made up. In particular, the one about living in Wales which I believe was either a complete fiction or borrowed from a friend's life story.
I think that Mary Jane had lived in England for a considerable time before her death. Not just 4 years as she said. I also believe that because her father had come to look for her on one occasion in the East End, that he could have been familiar with the area during his life? |
Author: Kev Kilcoyne
Monday, 04 March 2002 - 05:03 pm | | A few bits and pieces to add here, more to do with the slightly earlier French angle.
McCarthy was born in France. This seems slightly odd (given people's more resticted tendancy to wander then). What was his family doing there? Stranger still is MJKs apparent French affectations - 'Marie Jeanette Kelly?'
From the A-Z (and also Stephen Knight's flawed book)there is also the story of Kelly going to France and returning because she disliked the lifestyle. Did she go abroad to go on the game, or was she maybe tricked? This could be where she picked up the classy name affectation. Why would she collect expensive dresses from a French Lady in Knightsbridge?
Somewhere possibly in a book I also recall reading that Kelly had a connection with the Elephant and Castle district and regularly travelled there.
The name 'Johnto' is remeniscent, to me, of an Irish affectation (if true not surprising) which I am desparately trying to place.
As regards Neal's assertion that Mary's stories as told to Barnett and co were made up, I have my doubts. It would be difficult for example to carry off a tale that you came from Wales or Ireland if you had a plainly English or maybe French accent. I suspect like many of us she enjoyed embellishing her tales. Clearly there is evidence for this in her romanticising her name. There is also evidence that the basics were true - such as Barnett knowing that the Scots Guards were in Dublin at the time. I also suspect that Mary was guarded, possibly to the extent of changing details or ommiting them. This was probably because she was wary of someone (not a murderer), possibly some family member(s) trying to track her down.
All in all I think that there is a good deal more to both Mary Kelly and John McCarthy than met the eye, much of which we may never know. I do think however that these parts of their lives had little to do with the murders.
Regards
Kev |
Author: Christopher T George
Tuesday, 05 March 2002 - 01:23 pm | | Hi, Kev:
I believe all of these women were apt to make up tales about themselves, e.g., Liz Stride with her tale of being aboard the steamship Princess Alice in the collision on the Thames, which has been proven to be a work of fiction--or at least no modern researcher has been able to verify her story. I think the women made up such stories either to make themselves seem more interesting or perhaps, as you suggest, to make up a past so they could evade some bad customers from their past. I think you are right that the Irish and Welsh aspects of Mary Jane Kelly's story sound plausible but I am wondering if the supposed sojourn in France actually took place. In this sense, your speculation, as I assume you are saying, that there may have been some connection between Mary Jane Kelly and John McCarthy in France, is perhaps less plausible than that other parts of her alleged story are true. That is not to say that you may be wrong, but who knows? We need some hard facts here--items that are very hard to come by! McCarthy may have been a pimp and that may have been the connection between the two of them in France and up to the time of time of her death, but we don't have evidence to back up that hypothesis.
All the best
Chris George |
Author: david rhea
Tuesday, 05 March 2002 - 02:31 pm | | | Is it a fact that MK had a time in France? Is it a fact that MK had a fling at prostitution on the West Side.If so it is a viable question to ask why she was in the East Side living with several men,a step down from men she had known, as well as prostituting herself.When I raised the question awhile back about MK existence in the East Side as a hiding place from some one she was afraid of, I got in reply that her father was there at one time looking for her and she avoided him.It appears to me if her father knew so much,he had some connection there(McCarthy-Hutchinson-the Barnett brothers and one or two others mentioned).I don't believe the father story was true.She had something to hide.The problem of identity had something to do with that mutilation.There was a certain intentional ferocity to it. |
Author: Christopher T George
Tuesday, 05 March 2002 - 02:38 pm | | Hi, David:
West Side/East Side in New York. West End/East End in London.  Sorry to be a stickler.
I don't believe there is anything to verify absolutely MJK's story of her West End sojourn or of her tale of her stay in France. Both may have been embellishments that she added to make herself appear more exotic. In any case, if she had something to hide, and was hiding out in the East End, as it were, why broadcast these details about herself. Wouldn't it be more politic to stay quiet about them and not to give them out? I think it is more our inability to verify these facts, as with much of this case, that make us think there is more here than is readily knowable. Thus are the conspiracy theories born. Don't forget too that with MJK we have the very basic problem of the extreme commonness of her name which presents a very real stumbling block to anyone who is trying to track her movements.
Best regards
Chris George |
Author: david rhea
Tuesday, 05 March 2002 - 03:33 pm | | | Do you ,Chris, discount the tale about MK father looking for her and she dodging him?Do you believe that Eddowes and Kelly swapped aliases from time to time as the need arose?Do you believe that Eddowes could have been mistaken for Kelly? Tell me something about the person that wrote the article about the possibility of 2 D'Onstons.That statement he made about the scholarship and connections that wenr into "The Patristic Gospels' is very interesting.Certainly you don't acquire that knowledge to the extent that you would be listened to in academic circles overnight.You would have to be a true recognized scholar to move in those leagues. Anyway has he done anything else in this area? I would like yo read more. |
Author: Adseph Joam Fetus-Jacunis
Tuesday, 05 March 2002 - 04:53 pm | | Dear Chris George,
You know why the Titanic hit an iceberg? Pretty much the same way you seem to easily cast away the so called ‘embellishments’ of MJK. For example who’s to stay she was hiding out? (apart from your ‘thus are the conspiracy theories born,’ I myself too must give MJK a shadow of doubt whether her stories were true, but one must realize, that they were not modern contempory theories, but ones proven to be given by the ones who loved and knew her best, when she was brutaly murdered by JTR! The theories of course have only ran amock due to the ignorance of fact – or where possible individuals have needed to prove there own theory. Why do you find it so hard to believe the story of her West Side connections? And even if perhaps she did accompany a gentleman to France (maybe in some old [hotel] French record book are the entries of their names – around 1884-1885? And as for the basic problem of the extreme commonnness of her name, as you put it, there is no need to discard that perhaps there are facts out there that have yet to be exhasted (I have not yet seen any attempt to do so!) If the stories and her name fit some sort of factual evidence (document wise), I think for now, it is safer to slow down, and watch out for these iceberg sized theries. If I was her, and had done such trips, and once lead a life of that which is not improbable, I would most probably lark about it to my friends, and fellow unfortunates – especially since I was young more beautiful, and had just drifted from such a life style – wouldn’t you.
Your dedicatingly,
A. J. Fetus-Jacunis. |
Author: Kev Kilcoyne
Tuesday, 05 March 2002 - 06:26 pm | | Chris/A.J./David
I think we are all partially correct. Like most of us she would have liked things to be more interesting and exciting than they really were. This is why we embellish stories about ourselves which may have a firm basis in truth. If she was of Irish decent, I find this even less surprising. The Irish love a good tale.
Mary, for example, had been to France. I am sure I have seen good evidence as regards this. Almost certainly she would play the cosmopolitan with local people whom she knew, who would have no idea what France might be like. It all makes her a more interesting person in her own mind, thus more interesting to her peers. We can thus imagine her amazing people such as Catherine Eddowes (this is just an example) who had been no further than the Kent Hop fields or the Midlands, with descriptions of what she had got up to in France. The trick where we can, is to see the wood for the trees. Mary had been to France, but Mary was not called Marie Jeanette. This is often difficult or impossible to do where we only have hearsay to go on and leads to many of the difficulties we now have with the case.
Clearly names are the most interchangeable aspect of any such evidence. People were far less fussy about being accurate, as regards personal details, in Victorian times. In many cases not giving the correct name was very advantageous, in court, to the rent man or landlord, to a client etc etc. Prostitutes in particular had strings of aliases and nicknames and frequently used each others.
So if we chuck a few embellished tales, a variety of similar and interchangeable names and one or two very singular facts into the pot, give it a good mix and what do we have? Basically, a very difficult jigsaw with some bits missing.
There is also this. Whilst JTR will be identified
eventually and I feel sure will turn out to be nothing more than a nasty, cowardly little sadist, you would have to say that the people associated with the case from victims to policemen were all pretty remarkable people, many with more than a few secrets and unusual attributes. This then is the true fascination of the case and I cannot think of any other case which even comes close when it comes to human interest. Mary Kelly is merely one example. Incidentally Marie sounds far sexier than Mary don't you think, but maybe in France they think the opposite?
Regards
Kev |
Author: Christopher T George
Tuesday, 05 March 2002 - 08:11 pm | | Hello, Jacunius:
You are right that we should not totally discount Mary Jane Kelly's stories about herself. Perhaps you will allow me to quote your personal quote back to you: "Only a fool knows not the half to be more than the whole." So we would be foolish to accept MJK's story as being true without some verification, wouldn't we? It seems that around MJK more than any other victim these romantic legends have grown, and she, I think, is partly responsible for them. The reality was a little less rosy though wasn't it? A sccummy room in the worst part of the East End with a broken window and 29 shillings of rent owed.
Hi, David:
To answer your question, the author who wrote about Robert Stephenson and Roslyn D'Onston perhaps being two people is Des McKenna, an author from Wigan, England, who has been a long-time contributor to Ripperologist and Ripper Notes. Des is an interesting writer who floats a number of hypotheses and writes in a colorful style. He also wrote an article for Ripper Notes hypothesizing that MJK was not the woman killed in 13 Miller's Court but that another prostitute was killed in her place. Of course, he is not the first to suggest this possibility. Melvyn Fairclough, for example, says the same thing in The Ripper and the Royals. These two writers have the same problem: no evidence! 
Best regards
Chris George |
Author: Adseph Joam Fetus-Jacunis
Tuesday, 05 March 2002 - 10:29 pm | | My dear Watsonian Christopher T George,
Your perception has enlightened me greatly, however I’ am not Jacunius but the mere Nemesis from the rotten grave, Jacunius was sent to by the last cyber-war last year on Dr. Bond’s report. My personal quote is that taken from one of the 20th centuries most famous novelists, of whom had also wrote a short story on JTR. However, one could also ask themselves in the context you and many others seem to follow: “Is it foolish to give credit to the less important parts of MJK’s story, as being considered fiction with an embellishment of fact,” especially if you consider her to be the only victim with more romantic legends around her? Answer YES! But what about Stride? Come now if the famous London journalist & editor of the Pall Mall Gazette; W. T Stead was saved instead of perishing on the Titanic, and then was murdered years later, down some New York alley, I’ am sure people would have a hard time believing his embellishment, no doubt left with a journalistic flare! “I survived the Titanic Disaster! Some times part of the truth lays beneath a layer of fiction twisted and bent but still there. Your definitely right MJK was partly responsible for any story that unfolded after her horrible murder. But I am positive at that stage in the East End, still with the uncertainty that the killer was going to kill again, the panic, the ferociousness of her murder, there is no doubt that as many people who knew her best would collaborate the life of a poor wretched soul, to young to die especially at the hands of this infamous Jack the Ripper (Just look at the newspaper reports on her funeral, to know how deeply loved she was – even by strangers). If any thing her memories pasted on to others would have been intimate and most probably some if little contains the truth. It seems sad that many still believe her stories to be something of a romance, when in fact it resembles something more like a tragic black thriller. Yet as you say Chris George, it is partly because of her, but that does not mean she embellished all, the very sombre neighbourhood and friends that wanted her remembered that way most definitely did so in respect for her poor soul. God Bless Mary Jane Kelly, many others and I will avenge you!
Yours Sympathetically,
A. J. Fetus-Jacunis. |
Author: Christopher T George
Wednesday, 06 March 2002 - 09:13 am | | Hi, AJ ex-Jacunius RIP  :
I say God bless Mary Jane Kelly as well! I would like to think the story of MJK being a high class prostitute in the West End and also in Paris has some basis of fact. Let's hope we can somehow find out more about her and whether these stories were true. My sense though, to repeat, is that the stories were not quite the way she portrayed them. However, you may be righter than I am in putting your faith in them. I do think though that your comparison of Liz Stride's Princess Alice story with the episode of W. T. Stead being involved in the sinking of the RMS Titanic is not a good one. We know Stead went down with the Titanic: he was on the passenger list and he was not among the survivors. By contrast, all research by modern investigators fails to show any evidence of Liz Stride or her family among the Princess Alice passengers/survivors, so no wishful thinking will make her story so.
All the best
Chris George |
Author: Brenda L. Conklin
Saturday, 16 November 2002 - 10:07 pm | | A lost clue on the identity MJK?
Please click or cut-n-paste on the link below:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=736044788
Ebay auction for old newspaper pertaining to MJK's murder. Now, there are a lot of things wrong with this article like the head and the bloodhounds, but I have never, ever heard of the name Lizzie Fisher. Is this an old rumor that was squashed many moons ago on this board or do you find this fascinating?
*going now to do a board search on "Lizzie Fisher"* |
Author: Brenda L. Conklin
Saturday, 16 November 2002 - 10:20 pm | | *Back*
Yup, someone else has found this name before. How interesting! Has anyone ever been able to find out if this may have actually been MJK's name or is it a mistaken identity? Anyway, in searching the threads, I came upon an absolutely fabulous discussion in one of the old threads that I feel compelled to go back and read in full. "I love this site!" |
|
|
|
|
