Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Person(s) Searching for Mary Kelly

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Mr. Poster View Post
    You know....that could be it. He tuned out as she rabbited on. Misheard some things. Wasnt familiar with place names.

    Or.....like other prostitutes did.......she made it up.

    I know which one is most logical, most coherent with facts. The two most important facts being.....no evidence of her tale or Mary Kelly having been found in a century and alchoholic prostitutes of the time had aliases and told lies.

    Simples.

    P
    Can you name another one who told nothing but lies, never once told the truth about anything?

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Gary Barnett View Post
      Can you name another one who told nothing but lies, never once told the truth about anything?
      Pearly Poll?

      She was an alcoholic prostitute, but she didn’t really have an alias, just a trade name. However, her life after 1888 was a mystery for 130 years - she seemed to vanish into thin air. Until we discovered she had married and her husband’s surname had been mistranscribed. Then the dominos began to fall in rapid succession.

      Comment


      • It always got my attention that Barnett said Mary told him about her family hundreds of times but I was not sure how to take it. I think Gary pointed to something in a post below.

        Mary was known to be social, well liked, with a number of friends, male and female. I bet she talked a lot. I think Barnett had a hearing impairment because some of his information seemed to be off just a little based on sound and some modern researchers claim he had echolalia. When I was young, very old people with poor hearing, repeated what they thought they had heard.

        So maybe Mary talked a lot and Barnett heard her stories "hundreds of times" whether he really listened or not. And if Mary had the idea he was not listening she may have spiced up her stories to get his attention, to get a reaction like, "SEVEN brothers in London"?!?!!!

        Very little in this world is all one way or another. People who really do try to completely obscure their backgrounds usually fail because little things come out. Mary was at the least a problem drinker, at worst an alcoholic. I would doubt she could have kept lies straight when in drink and surely something about her background must have a glimmer of fact.
        The wickedness of the world is the dream of the plague.~~Voynich Manuscript

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Mr. Poster View Post
          The two most important facts being.....no evidence of her tale or Mary Kelly having been found in a century and alchoholic prostitutes of the time had aliases and told lies.
          I agree with Trevor that, everything else aside, her real name was very likely Mary Jane Kelly. Her alias was Marie Jeanette. She was a fantasist like Robert Donston. He had nicknames as did Mary but one alias Roslyn D’Onston, based on his real name. Who Francophonizes an alias?

          Signed
          Saint Francois

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Anna Morris View Post
            It always got my attention that Barnett said Mary told him about her family hundreds of times but I was not sure how to take it. I think Gary pointed to something in a post below.

            Mary was known to be social, well liked, with a number of friends, male and female. I bet she talked a lot. I think Barnett had a hearing impairment because some of his information seemed to be off just a little based on sound and some modern researchers claim he had echolalia. When I was young, very old people with poor hearing, repeated what they thought they had heard.

            So maybe Mary talked a lot and Barnett heard her stories "hundreds of times" whether he really listened or not. And if Mary had the idea he was not listening she may have spiced up her stories to get his attention, to get a reaction like, "SEVEN brothers in London"?!?!!!

            Very little in this world is all one way or another. People who really do try to completely obscure their backgrounds usually fail because little things come out. Mary was at the least a problem drinker, at worst an alcoholic. I would doubt she could have kept lies straight when in drink and surely something about her background must have a glimmer of fact.
            Good point about Kelly’s drunken anecdotes.

            Is it likely that she never told Barnett a single truth about her past, even when she was in her cups? The idea is bonkers.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Gary Barnett View Post
              Pearly Poll?

              She was an alcoholic prostitute, but she didn’t really have an alias, just a trade name. However, her life after 1888 was a mystery for 130 years - she seemed to vanish into thin air. Until we discovered she had married and her husband’s surname had been mistranscribed. Then the dominos began to fall in rapid succession.
              We didnt have as much information on Poll as we do on Kelly.

              So if she was telling the truth.....shouldnt take 130 years to find her.

              Especially given how wide the net has been cast by various researchers over the years.

              Its not me who defined insanity as repeating the same action again and again and expecting a different outcome each time.

              Id say ancestry.com and its ilk are getting awfully well thumbed for certain names by now.

              P

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Gary Barnett View Post
                Good point about Kelly’s drunken anecdotes.

                Is it likely that she never told Barnett a single truth about her past, even when she was in her cups? The idea is bonkers.
                She most certainly did. Its raining outside. I have a headache. Im pissed. I like fish and potatoes.

                But as the evidence shows, in relation to her pre whitechapel existence.......its all probably crap.

                Or have you actual evidence as opposed to fervent beluef that she was telling the truth?

                P

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Mr. Poster View Post
                  We didnt have as much information on Poll as we do on Kelly.

                  So if she was telling the truth.....shouldnt take 130 years to find her.

                  Especially given how wide the net has been cast by various researchers over the years.

                  Its not me who defined insanity as repeating the same action again and again and expecting a different outcome each time.

                  Id say ancestry.com and its ilk are getting awfully well thumbed for certain names by now.

                  P
                  We had a name and an exact address for Poll’s cousin. Poll’s name was indeed Mary Ann Connolly.

                  Comment


                  • And you have Kellys brother in a a named regiment.

                    And her husbands name and violent death circumstances.

                    And the former alone should have found her.

                    But it hasnt.

                    Porkies anyone?

                    P

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Mr. Poster View Post
                      7 brothers Caz. Not one. You think its a likely proposition that all 7 of them were estranged?
                      I may have worded it badly, Mr. P, but I was thinking about it the other way round, that the woman known as Mary Kelly may have become estranged from the rest of her family - which does appear to have been the case, doesn't it?

                      Mary kelly and Barnett may have meant nothing to them. But an Irish girl with 7 brothers, one in a named regiment and a blown up husband called Davies or whatever.....you might think that irrespecetive of the name...that description might alert one of teh seven?

                      Assuming any of it was true of course (which it wasnt in all liklihood)
                      I don't doubt she may well have lied about her blown up husband [much like Liz Stride used the Princess Alice disaster] to gain sympathy and give herself a respectable "widow" status. She may also have fondly imagined she had more relatives than in reality, but families were much larger then, and that many siblings would not have been in the least unusual.

                      No offence Caz ... but thats one of the weakest arguments Ive heard put forward.

                      And all it takes for me is to say.... all 7 of them? really...they all collectively felt that way? All 7 of them?

                      Assuming there was 7 at all. Not to mention her stage trotting sister.
                      And if just one or two feared the newspapers might pick on them, for not doing more to protect their sister; and one or two others were not sure the victim even was their sister; and the others didn't believe anyone outside the family would make the connection back from the 'common prostitute' Mary Kelly to dear little Irene O'Reilly with the kind nature and flaming red hair? Again, what would have tempted any of them forward to identify themselves and their sister, who might actually not be their sister at all?

                      Ddidnt seem to stop relatives of other victims coming forward. Women being portrayed in an altogether less rosy light than was the case for Kelly.
                      A bit trickier when a victim could be identified and her relatives might expect to be traced.

                      Doesnt matter really what argument is put forward as to why nobody came forward.

                      The argument heads straight for the dustbin when one is asked to consider that all 7 of the brothers felt the same way and never wavered.
                      They didn't all have to feel the same way - there were multiple reasons why each might think better of it. In short, if we agree that Mary Kelly was not her real name, and that not everyone from her early years had snuffed it by November 1888, then she was either not recognised by anyone who had once known her under another name, or if anyone did recognise her they chose - for whatever reasons - not to own her.

                      Love,

                      Caz
                      X
                      I wish I were two puppies then I could play together - Storm Petersen

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Mr. Poster View Post
                        Its not me who defined insanity as repeating the same action again and again and expecting a different outcome each time.
                        I wondered when Brexit would come up.
                        I wish I were two puppies then I could play together - Storm Petersen

                        Comment


                        • I may have worded it badly, Mr. P, but I was thinking about it the other way round, that the woman known as Mary Kelly may have become estranged from the rest of her family - which does appear to have been the case, doesn't it?
                          I wont mention the letters from her mother....... but I still find it hard to believe she was estranged from 7 brothers to the extent that all of them decided they would rather not show up at the funeral.

                          Its a bit strange that.
                          I don't doubt she may well have lied about her blown up husband [much like Liz Stride used the Princess Alice disaster] to gain sympathy and give herself a respectable "widow" status. She may also have fondly imagined she had more relatives than in reality, but families were much larger then, and that many siblings would not have been in the least unusual.
                          Indeed. 7 brothers for an Irish Family is not unknown (although less common one would think back then With all the infant mortality) but being estranged from all 7 to the extent that none showed up at her funeral ? Thats a bit hard to swallow.

                          And if just one or two feared the newspapers might pick on them, for not doing more to protect their sister; and one or two others were not sure the victim even was their sister; and the others didn't believe anyone outside the family would make the connection back from the 'common prostitute' Mary Kelly to dear little Irene O'Reilly with the kind nature and flaming red hair? Again, what would have tempted any of them forward to identify themselves and their sister, who might actually not be their sister at all?
                          I dont believe that.

                          By name or circumstance, if she was telling the truth, she would have been identifiable as ones sister. Especially given all the press coverage.And all the ncie things said about her. Even if only one of them had twigged it was their sister..by name or the oddly specific circumstances being given in the papers about her.......her would surely have said it to the others.


                          A bit trickier when a victim could be identified and her relatives might expect to be traced.
                          I posit that even if the name was wrong then teh circumstances of her life, assuming theyre being true, would have been enough to identify her to a relative. How many girls from Ireland had a brother in a named unit and a blown up husband in Wales?

                          They didn't all have to feel the same way - there were multiple reasons why each might think better of it. In short, if we agree that Mary Kelly was not her real name, and that not everyone from her early years had snuffed it by November 1888, then she was either not recognised by anyone who had once known her under another name, or if anyone did recognise her they chose - for whatever reasons - not to own her.
                          Orrrr...................she was a liar who didnt tell the truth.

                          I know which one is more easy to believe.


                          p

                          Comment


                          • Alice Pitts (McKenzie) had six siblings still alive when she died. Her identity was confirmed at the time and contacts in her home town of Peterborough were sought out and interviewed. The key elements of her ID - forename, age, Peterborough origins and the occupation of her father (postman) were made public before she was interred.

                            I have seen no evidence that her relatives made any attempt to attend her funeral or contact the press.

                            Strange?

                            Comment


                            • People left Ireland due to the necessity created by famine and sought a better life .
                              Makes one wonder why we should believe that Kelly's mother would return leaving her children in Wales
                              You can lead a horse to water....

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Gary Barnett View Post
                                Alice Pitts (McKenzie) had six siblings still alive when she died. Her identity was confirmed at the time and contacts in her home town of Peterborough were sought out and interviewed. The key elements of her ID - forename, age, Peterborough origins and the occupation of her father (postman) were made public before she was interred.

                                I have seen no evidence that her relatives made any attempt to attend her funeral or contact the press.

                                Strange?
                                Not really. McKenzie had said she was the last of her Family to the guy she hooked up With.

                                Which means she was either a liar (like kelly) or she was actually estranged.

                                Something we have no evidence for at all with Kelly (assuming she told the truth, which she didnt).

                                And at any rate...we know other victims families came forward.

                                SO why didnt Kellys?

                                producing a victim whose family didnt come forward as some kind of argument as to why the 7 brothers of Kelly didnt come forward (had they existed) is pretty weak debating.

                                P

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X