Person(s) Searching for Mary Kelly

[Anna Morris]

The post above was difficult but I got it done and can't seem to edit. My point is obvious. A Mary Janet Acraman was also listed as Mary Jane. The location is Wales. I checked a lot of other Mary Janes and Janets to see if it was a custom to change Mary Janet into Mary Jane but I do not see that it was.

I realize the entry above is not getting us anywhere near Marie Jeanette KELLY -- or Davies. I doubt Mary Janet Acraman could ever be MJK but I found this marriage entry interesting.

I still think another good line of inquiry would be if Marie Jeanette had a French relative, perhaps a mother. In various sources Joe B. said that Marie Jeanette (Kelly) was her maiden name, her real name, her Christian name. I am less of a romantic than I was when I joined this forum but I still think Joe's words may be telling us a more simple truth than that Mary acquired a French name in France or while living with the Morgansterns. I am not sure about any of Mary's surnames, Kelly or Davies, but I still think there is something in Marie Jeanette, a name very difficult to find in UK databases from the time.

I think a reasonable avenue to explore is Mary Janet/Jannet/Jannett/Jennet/Jenett/Etc. I ran a number of these combinations through UK BMD today. It is also possible that Jennet or a similar spelling could have been Mary's last name, thus Joe could have been correct to say Mary/Marie Jannett...or whatever...was her maiden name.

I cannot match any of these combinations to Kelly or Davies/Davis/Davey/David/Etc. At least not until MJK's death certificate in 1888.

[Wicker Man]

...
Are we going to assume her birth name was Marie Jeanette and there really is a collier husband named Davies based on this public record?

Even though it's almost a year old, the question is still relevant.

This is what a neighbour told the Central News on the day of the murder.


"I don't know her proper name. We called her 'Mary Jane'. We don't often know one another's names. Nobody knows mine."

We do have a few press interviews where the witness claims to have only known her as 'Mary Jane', so this much is true.

[Markus Aurelius Franzoi]

Are we going to assume her birth name was Marie Jeanette and there really is a collier husband named Davies based on this public record?

That statement was made in response to my assumption that some were deeming public records, and I mean death records and all civil records, as authoritative and that one draw absolute conclusions from them, when we know we have one death record of a single woman alone in a court generated two index entries and two certificates for MJK with questionable information.

They were just covering the bases with all their entries. In the end, it's all based on second hand information from an informant who was probably lied to, so the certificate isn't a strong basis on its own for making any conclusions.

We do know she used the name Mary Jane Kelly and Marie Jeanette. I definitely don't think her real name was Marie Jeanette.

[Wicker Man]

We do know she used the name Mary Jane Kelly and Marie Jeanette. I definitely don't think her real name was Marie Jeanette.

I definitely do not think her real name was Mary Jane Kelly, but I do understand those who think it is the only lifeline they have, so they cling to it as if their life depended on it.

[Markus Aurelius Franzoi]

All 1881 Wales Census results for Mary Jane Kelly

Results 1–4 of 4

	Mary Jane Irwin	Henry, Jane	abt 1853	Bassaleg, Monmouth, Wales	Daughter	Graig, Monmouthshire
	Mary Jane Kelly		abt 1878	Ruabon, Denbighshire, Wales	Inmate	Bersham, Denbighshire
	Mary Jane Kelly	Jno., Rachael	abt 1875	Yorkshire, England	Daughter	Clase, Glamorgan
	Mary Jane Kelly	David, Ann	abt 1877	Llantrisant, Glamorgan, Wales	Daughter	Ynysawdre, Glamorgan

All 1871 Wales Census results for Mary Jane Kelly

Results 1–2 of 2

	Mary Jane Kelly	Henry, Jane	abt 1853	Bassalleg, Monmouthshire, Wales	Daughter	Rogerstone, Monmouthshire
	Mary Jane Kelly	William	abt 1845	Newport, Monmouthshire, Wales	Daughter	Rogerstone, Monmouthshire

In all of Wales, there's only 1 possible candidate for MJK with that exact name the right age range, (or maybe zero depending on how you look at it.)

England has about 20.

So unless you think she's one of these girls, you have to expand your search to other names.

Drop the Kelly and the Welsh results for MJs are the same but 30 or 40 in England. Nothing to hang on to name-wise alone.

[Chris Phillips]

In all of Wales, there's only 1 possible candidate for MJK with that exact name the right age range, (or maybe zero depending on how you look at it.)

England has about 20.

So unless you think she's one of these girls, you have to expand your search to other names.

Drop the Kelly and the Welsh results for MJs are the same but 30 or 40 in England. Nothing to hang on to name-wise alone.

But on the information given by Barnett she would have been married by 1881, and could still have been in Ireland in 1871. Of course, middle names were often omitted in census returns.

[Markus Aurelius Franzoi]

But on the information given by Barnett she would have been married by 1881, and could still have been in Ireland in 1871. Of course, middle names were often omitted in census returns.

I'm the one who believes her name is Mary Jane Kelly. With Ireland select birth and baptism records, you still have only about 80 in a two decade range. So the England numbers would be fairly accurate by comparison. P.S. About 100 born in England (1850-1870) with 33% infant mortality, immigration etc....

My point is that I do hang on to names, if I don't believe the person was a criminal or hiding and using an alias. But I wouldn't hang on to it as if "my life depended on it" unless it was Jane Smith, and I was sure she wasn't a criminal with an alias and I still had work to do.

It's easy with Ancestry to satisfactorily eliminate the few dozen Mary Jane candidates by that name, if you're inclined. Once they're eliminated to your satisfaction, then there's no point in holding onto the name "for dear life".

I do agree with Wicker though that the death certificate information is somewhat inaccurate and unreliable, even though it's an "official" document. I'm the last one to rely on it.

P.S. But he is correct in saying the name should not be a keyword search any longer if you've eliminated the few dozen that exist in England.

[Chris Phillips]

I'm the one who believes her name is Mary Jane Kelly. With Ireland select birth and baptism records, you still have only about 80 in a two decade range. So the England numbers would be fairly accurate by comparison.

My point is that I do hang on to names, if I don't believe the person was a criminal or hiding and using an alias. But I wouldn't hang on to it as if "my life depended on it" unless it was Jane Smith, and I was sure she wasn't a criminal with an alias and I still had work to do.

It's easy with Ancestry to satisfactorily eliminate the few dozen Mary Jane candidates by that name, if you're inclined. Once they're eliminated to your satisfaction, then there's no point in holding onto the name "for dear life".

I do agree with Wicker though that the death certificate information is somewhat inaccurate and unreliable, even though it's an "official" document. I'm the last one to rely on it.

On the whole I think she probably wasn't born with the name Mary Jane Kelly. I was just making the point that we can't necessarily expect to find her under her maiden name in the 1871 or 1881 censues.

[R. J. Palmer]

But on the information given by Barnett she would have been married by 1881

I always assumed, perhaps wrongly, that she was right on the cusp age-wise, and could have married that very year, though the point is rather moot since no marriage has been found either.

Anyway, isn't it a little unusual that she supposedly reverted to her maiden name? Especially for a young widow whose husband died tragically?

Tabram, Nichols, Chapman, and McKenzie didn't.

[Chris Phillips]

I always assumed, perhaps wrongly, that she was right on the cusp age-wise, and could have married that very year, though the point is rather moot since no marriage has been found either.

Anyway, isn't it a little unusual that she supposedly reverted to her maiden name? Especially for a young widow whose husband died tragically?

Tabram, Nichols, Chapman, and McKenzie didn't.

Well, Barnett said that she had been 25 and had married when she was 16, so if that's correct she should have been married at least 8 years before the murder. Of course, there's a question mark over the accuracy of all the information about her before she came to London.

Yes, I think it would be pretty unusual to revert to her maiden name after being widowed.

[Markus Aurelius Franzoi]

We know she started using the alias Marie Jeanette so a change in last name might also have been in order if the married name wasn’t “sexy” enough. Davies or Davey might sound too masculine. Other names might sound too conservative.

As to the name Mary Jane, I’m sure they are two names (Jane as a middle name) but that doesn’t mean she would go by Mary. There’s a good likelihood that there’s already a Mary in the immediate Irish family so she would likely go by Mary Jane as almost a first name until she gets married perhaps.

A 60s arrival in Wales would be quite unusual to begin with. It’s the same with a 70s arrival. Is there a reason to hang on to an unusual case scenario at this point or would it be alright to stick with MJK and look outside the borders of time and location?

[Wicker Man]

Just to throw it out there, what harm can it do....

Plenty of those girls who took up that trade adopted a false name, no surprise there.
If you are going to adopt a false identity, it's well known in certain circles that you should adopt the identity and family of someone you know.
You'll know their age, where born, how many siblings they had, where they went to school or work, etc.
This avoids you having to remember names, dates & places you'd otherwise have to make up. You didn't need to make them up, you've known these details for years, probably all while you were growing up.
There's nothing worse than being caught out, and thinking, did I say my eldest brother's name was Tom or Tim, or I was born in Bedford or Bradford?

Maybe I'm being too clandestine, but if the victim's real name wasn't Mary Kelly, which the longer this goes on the more convinced I am, then I wonder if the victim was really her cousin from Cardiff - the one she blamed for getting her in this business in the first place.
Mary was alive & well with her family totally oblivious that her cousin, whom she possibly had not heard from in ages, became the last victim of Jack the Ripper.

[Markus Aurelius Franzoi]

I wonder if the victim was really her cousin from Cardiff - the one she blamed for getting her in this business in the first place.
Mary was alive & well with her family totally oblivious that her cousin, whom she possibly had not heard from in ages, became the last victim of Jack the Ripper.

I definitely smell a pseudocide with Mary Jane Kelly.

[Wicker Man]

I definitely smell a pseudocide with Mary Jane Kelly.

Hm, I wouldn't go that far, I don't think there was intentional deception going on from Mary's point of view, I would guess she had no clue.
Whomever did end up as the victim, in my view, must have been someone close to the real Mary, a friend, neighbor, or that cousin even.
There's too much detail in the stories she told Barnett, in my view they must have been based on a grain of truth. We're relying on Barnett's recollection though, c/w the recollections of others. I wouldn't be put off if not every detail they gave panned out, but overall there's possibly something to pursue.
I mean compare what we know with genuine published recollections of police officials, and the errors they contain.

[Markus Aurelius Franzoi]

If Mary didn't come forward and just disappeared, then wouldn't she have been using a situation as an unintended, virtual pseudocide?

The Mary Jane Kelly Survived Theory has always been a part of MJK lore. People think it's part of the "romanticization" of MJK.

MJW theory has been shunted because of a disbelief in pseudocide and fraud against the public record. Now we are talking about disregarding the public record and accepting theories that don't accord with that public record.