May 1996
The murder of Mary Kelly was no doubt the pinnacle of the Whitechapel Terror, thanks primarily to the horrendous mutilation of the body. As a result of this mutilation, a theory has advanced that the victim might not have been Mary Kelly at all (remember: Joseph Barnett identified her by the ears and eyes only). Also, testimony from at least two separate witnesses who claimed to have seen Mary Kelly on the morning after her supposed murder served to fuel this debate. What do you think? Was it someone other than Mary Kelly who was murdered in that room? If so, who might it have been and why?
Date: Sat, 20 Apr 1996 02:15:04 -0500
From: Andrew J. Spallek
Both of Mary's ears were partially severed. Probably Barnett was misheard at the inquest when he said he identified her by her eyes and ears. He probably said "eyes and hair," which could easily be confused in several English dialects with "eyes and ears." I doubt that someone who was as intimate with Kelly as Barnett would be mistaken, even grated the extensive mutilations of the body. The easier explanation is that the witnesses who "saw" Kelly later were mistaken. Anyway, if it wasn't Kelly that was killed, what ever became of her? Why did no one else see her other than these two witnesses?
2.
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 1996 15:02:35 -0400
From: Michael Rogers
If it wasn't Mary Kelly killed in that room then who was it? and what then ever happened to her. She doesn't seem to have turned up anywhere after that. The testimony of a couple of drunks doesn't hold much water with me. The case was the most famous event to ever hit that area, those two "witnesses" could either have been mistaken about seeing Kelly or could have just lied to get their names in the papers. Their 15 minutes of fame. Stranger things have happened. If it wasn't Kelly it was undoubteldy another tart. It doesn't matter who, anyone will do.
3.
Date: Tue, 30 Apr 96 20:50:18 -0700
From: Stephanie Richey
There is little doubt Mary Jane Kelly was the victim of Jack the Ripper. The body was found in Kelly's apartment at Miller's Court. Her lover, Joseph Barnett who had been living with her for a year, identified the body by her eyes and ear. People believe he may have said "hair" instead of "ear" and was misquoted, but it is difficult to believe this. The hair, as well as the clothes, probably played a factor in his identification, but "ear" and "hair" are to far apart to be mistaken.
The bottom line is, the body was found in Kelly's room, wearing her clothes, her lover identified her, and with the exception of two other people who were probably mistaken, was never seen by anyone again.
4.
Date: Thu, 02 May 1996 11:28:44 +0100
From: Paul Lee
I think there were more than two people who saw Kelly the day the body was discovered.
Wasn't Kelly in the habit of loaning her (admittedly scant collection) clothing to her female friends (there has been an indication that Kelly was having a lesbian affair with a girl called Harvey I believe)?
And considering the abominable state of the body, I doubt that a positive identification could ever be made. I do agree that the body was probably Kelly's (after all, as has been pointed out, she was never seen again if it was an imposter in her bed), but don't discount the witnesses who saw her hours after she died; for one thing, the inquests had to rely on the testimony of whores! And the ladies who saw Kelly were very adamant- and, as Paul Begg points out, their testimony is, to some extent, supported.
5.
Date: Mon, 27 May 1996 17:35:08 +0000
From: Tom Krailing
We have massive doubts about Kelly's membership among the genuine Ripper victims. It is a really good question whether the body found at Miller's Court actually belonged to Kelly. But if not Kelly, who was it?
And in this case, there are other questions to ask: - Was Kelly directly involved in the murder? If not, where did Kelly stay during the slaughter? - And where did she disappear to after she was last seen the morning after?
After her deal at Miller's Court including her performance as a singer between 11.45 p.m. and about 1.00 a.m. she went out again and returned accompanied by the man seen by George Hutchinson at about 2.00 a.m.
If one believes in Hutchinson's testimony in which he claims that he was waiting almost an hour alone in rain, darkness and cold watching the entrance at Miller's Court (why should he do so? But that's another question) it can't be taken for sure that Kelly did not leave Miller's Court within this time, we'll say, till 3.00 a.m.
Mrs. Cox, who returned home at 3.00 a.m. occasionally heard men going in and out the court throughout the rest of the night. Was she able to distinguish between male and female footsteps? It seems likely that she heard Kelly leaving Miller's Court a third time. We know that Kelly was allowing other prostitutes to stay in her room. It is possible that she lent her bed to another woman to share it with a client which sufficient money for a more comfortable deal than a quickie in a dark backyard. But where did Kelly spend her time in the meantime?
The scream "murder" heard by several persons at about 4.00 a.m. fits to the aproximately estimated time of death. Well, if Kelly was the victim and the man described by Hutchinson was the murderer, what did they do between about 2.00 a.m. and 4.00 a.m.? Probably what a prostitute and her client as a rule are doing; but Cox estimated that when she returned home at 3.00 a.m. there was sound or light was coming from Kelly's room. Maybe Kelly was asleep. But did her murderer really take a nap prior his attack? Does this suggest that the murderer had sexual contact to Mary Kelly? It would be peculiar to the other Ripper crimes.
Back to Previous Topic for Debate
Back to the Conference Main Page