Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Person(s) Searching for Mary Kelly

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

  • Originally posted by San Fran View Post

    How could MJK read about her impostor in the paper and not suspect?
    A number of papers in wales didn't always provide such detail. It's not a subject women generally would take an interest in, too gory?
    Besides, the real Mary Kelly must have known her name was very common. Large families were not uncommon in those days either.
    Sure, she might have thought - 'the poor dear, with my name too, and seven brothers, oh its a small world'.

    I'm not defending the idea, though it feels like it. It's only speculation after all, I just wonder how long people are going to search for this murdered woman as if Mary Kelly was her real name.

    Regards, Jon S.
    "
    The theory that the murderer is a lunatic is dispelled by the opinion given to the police by an expert in the treatment of lunacy patients......."If he's insane
    " observed the medical authority, "he's a good deal sharper than those who are not".
    Reynolds Newspaper, 4 Nov. 1888.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by San Fran View Post
      Doesn’t the fact that Mary so quickly switch identity when it suited her, as in this case when confronted with the City Missionary, prove she wasn’t using a real person’s persona? Didn’t she switch because she knew she couldn’t fool him?
      You're referring to the fact the imposter received letters from her own mother, yet continued the deception of a false identity?
      If her real father had journeyed to London to find his wayward daughter, I have to wonder whether he was aware of the false name his daughter was hiding under.
      If he wasn't aware, then that might imply mother & daughter kept a secret from the father.
      Is this unusual for a mother & daughter to have secrets? - not in the slightest.

      Do you remember when the name Lizzie Fisher came into the story?

      "Her name is believed to have been Lizzie Fisher, but to most of the habitues of the haunts she visited she was known as Mary Jane."

      Early press reports suggested Lizzie Fisher was her real name. This has been pretty much sidelined today.

      Chris Scott searched for a Lizzie Fisher and found quite a few, but none were born in Ireland. Chris was looking for a Lizzie Fisher with a Mary Kelly biography. The scenario I am considering would suggest Lizzie Fisher 'might' be the real name of the imposter, who's true bio would naturally be very different to Mary Kelly's
      .
      Perhaps, Lizzie was Mary's childhood friend, Lizzie may have been born in Wales (someone said Mary spoke fluent Welsh), or perhaps England, and moved to Wales. Alternately, was Lizzie her cousin from Cardiff?
      Do you see how well intentioned research can go down the wrong path because there is a fixed assumption that they are really looking for Mary Kelly, when they are supposed to be looking for the identity of a woman who posed as Mary Kelly?

      By the way, McCarthy did say Mary received letters from her mother, it was in the Times, 10 Nov. 1888.
      Regards, Jon S.
      "
      The theory that the murderer is a lunatic is dispelled by the opinion given to the police by an expert in the treatment of lunacy patients......."If he's insane
      " observed the medical authority, "he's a good deal sharper than those who are not".
      Reynolds Newspaper, 4 Nov. 1888.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Anna Morris View Post

        A couple days before Mary's funeral, press articles stated that her family was expected to arrive very soon. Just that with no elaboration. Did investigators find letters in Mary's room? Did they contact her family? Did family attend the funeral? Was their presence protected from the press? Did Mary really come from a very decent family that wished to remain anonymous? (I come from a very old fashioned family and had older parents. If MJK had been a member of my morally strict, working class family back when, she would never have been mentioned again. I am not suggesting anything. My ethnicity is mostly East European.)
        There are reports somewhere that Scotland Yard communicated with the police in Limerick, but they could find no-one who knew of her in that town.


        Regards, Jon S.
        "
        The theory that the murderer is a lunatic is dispelled by the opinion given to the police by an expert in the treatment of lunacy patients......."If he's insane
        " observed the medical authority, "he's a good deal sharper than those who are not".
        Reynolds Newspaper, 4 Nov. 1888.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by San Fran View Post
          How could MJK read about her impostor in the paper and not suspect?

          It’s still a better explanation as to why the family didn’t come forward.

          • MJK stole the identity of a living person. This other Mary Jane Kelly is alive so her family would not make a connection unless they know of a missing neighbour, friend or family member who fits the bill.

          • The real family doesn’t know about the stolen identity. Hence, they don't show up at the funeral or come forward.
          Possibly, the real Mary Kelly, was something like Mary Ann Kelly, the imposter just preferred Jane. The real woman wouldn't make the connection if the middle names were different.
          The imposter is at liberty to alter any small detail she chooses, we can't let minor differences throw us off the track - assuming we ever get on the track
          Regards, Jon S.
          "
          The theory that the murderer is a lunatic is dispelled by the opinion given to the police by an expert in the treatment of lunacy patients......."If he's insane
          " observed the medical authority, "he's a good deal sharper than those who are not".
          Reynolds Newspaper, 4 Nov. 1888.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by San Fran View Post
            Yes, Chris, it’s that and the London City Mission magazine articles where he mentions the same things he is quoted as saying in the papers.

            DJA and I were discussing the Missionary’s identity when it was discovered. May I add that it was discovered because I had MJW’s niece’s marriage certificate and his name was in it as an added witness, with the word curate next to his name although I believe someone here pointed out it applied to the officiating prelate named above that.
            Thanks. That certainly seems to fit.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Wicker Man View Post

              You're referring to the fact the imposter received letters from her own mother, yet continued the deception of a false identity?
              If her real father had journeyed to London to find his wayward daughter, I have to wonder whether he was aware of the false name his daughter was hiding under.
              If he wasn't aware, then that might imply mother & daughter kept a secret from the father.
              Is this unusual for a mother & daughter to have secrets? - not in the slightest.

              Do you remember when the name Lizzie Fisher came into the story?

              "Her name is believed to have been Lizzie Fisher, but to most of the habitues of the haunts she visited she was known as Mary Jane."

              Early press reports suggested Lizzie Fisher was her real name. This has been pretty much sidelined today.

              Chris Scott searched for a Lizzie Fisher and found quite a few, but none were born in Ireland. Chris was looking for a Lizzie Fisher with a Mary Kelly biography. The scenario I am considering would suggest Lizzie Fisher 'might' be the real name of the imposter, who's true bio would naturally be very different to Mary Kelly's
              .
              Perhaps, Lizzie was Mary's childhood friend, Lizzie may have been born in Wales (someone said Mary spoke fluent Welsh), or perhaps England, and moved to Wales. Alternately, was Lizzie her cousin from Cardiff?
              Do you see how well intentioned research can go down the wrong path because there is a fixed assumption that they are really looking for Mary Kelly, when they are supposed to be looking for the identity of a woman who posed as Mary Kelly?

              By the way, McCarthy did say Mary received letters from her mother, it was in the Times, 10 Nov. 1888.
              Hi Wick.

              I've always had a nagging feeling that MJK was related somehow to Catherine Eddowes. One of Kate's sisters was named Elizabeth Fisher. The family lived in and around Bermondsey. Elizabeth Fisher and husband, Charles, had a large family. The eldest daughter (born in 1858) was also named Elizabeth Fisher. I believe she had 5 brothers and one or two sisters. Maybe worth looking into?

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Jerry Dunlop View Post

                Hi Wick.

                I've always had a nagging feeling that MJK was related somehow to Catherine Eddowes. One of Kate's sisters was named Elizabeth Fisher. The family lived in and around Bermondsey. Elizabeth Fisher and husband, Charles, had a large family. The eldest daughter (born in 1858) was also named Elizabeth Fisher. I believe she had 5 brothers and one or two sisters. Maybe worth looking into?
                That sound like a connection that could be full of intrigue

                Thanks for the heads up, I have identified two named Elizabeth Fisher born in 1861, one from Denbighshire, Wales, the other Whitechapel.
                I'd like to be sure the name Elizabeth Fisher didn't enter this case as the result of mistaken identity, being simply mistaken for Mary Kelly. If that is the case then it's a dead end.
                Otherwise, I'm intrigued as to why & how such a name could be associated with the victim in the first place.
                Regards, Jon S.
                "
                The theory that the murderer is a lunatic is dispelled by the opinion given to the police by an expert in the treatment of lunacy patients......."If he's insane
                " observed the medical authority, "he's a good deal sharper than those who are not".
                Reynolds Newspaper, 4 Nov. 1888.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by R. J. Palmer View Post
                  https://debbiemccauleyauthor.wordpress.com

                  EDIT: Just realised this was already shared

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Wicker Man View Post
                    The only part that rings a bell for me is something I read years ago, if I haven't misremembered it.
                    That (I think) one witness claimed her father came to London looking for her.




                    I just came across the reference for this.


                    "......but drifted from the West-end to the East-end, where she took lodgings in Pennington-street. Her father came from Wales, and tried to find her there; but, hearing from her companions that he was looking for her, Marie kept out of the way."
                    Star, 12 Nov. 1888.
                    Just looking at this thread for reference during my own research.

                    Is there any other newspaper source where this can be corroborated? I ask because anything that came from The Star fills me with dread for trust-worthiness. If it appears elsewhere I think we can give it more credence.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by J.W. Sage View Post

                      Just looking at this thread for reference during my own research.

                      Is there any other newspaper source where this can be corroborated? I ask because anything that came from The Star fills me with dread for trust-worthiness. If it appears elsewhere I think we can give it more credence.
                      Actually yes. I share your reluctance to accept anything from the Star at face value, but in this case that story must have been from an agency as it was in the morning papers (The Morning Post) on the same day. I counted 15 different newspapers who carried that story, but some carried it later on their weekend edition, so those could be mere copies.
                      But yes, it is reported in the Morning Post of 12 Nov.
                      Regards, Jon S.
                      "
                      The theory that the murderer is a lunatic is dispelled by the opinion given to the police by an expert in the treatment of lunacy patients......."If he's insane
                      " observed the medical authority, "he's a good deal sharper than those who are not".
                      Reynolds Newspaper, 4 Nov. 1888.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Wicker Man View Post

                        Actually yes. I share your reluctance to accept anything from the Star at face value, but in this case that story must have been from an agency as it was in the morning papers (The Morning Post) on the same day. I counted 15 different newspapers who carried that story, but some carried it later on their weekend edition, so those could be mere copies.
                        But yes, it is reported in the Morning Post of 12 Nov.
                        Perfect. Thanks!

                        Comment


                        • I too like the idea of Lizzie Fisher. I have looked for Mary under that name. Like I said earlier, I believe less and less in Mary Jane Kelly and tend to look in many other directions. I also have a sneaking suspicion that her husband's forename name--if she had a husband--was David/Davey, etc. I cannot imagine Barnett cohabiting with her for 18 months and the only name he remembered for Mary's husband was Davies or Davis. Surely in all that time she would have called her dear departed by his Christian name. Unless he never existed.....
                          The wickedness of the world is the dream of the plague.~~Voynich Manuscript

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by R. J. Palmer View Post

                            I already sent her an email yesterday, asking if she had any information on Michael Dunne's sources, or the photograph, but haven't yet heard back.
                            Here's an update, of sorts.

                            It's now been slightly over two weeks, and I never heard back about the Mary Kelly profiled on the Find A Grave site (linked in Post #541) or the provenance of the photograph.

                            There is an incomplete family tree for this same 'Mary Kelly,' posted on the Geni.com site, but it only raises more questions.

                            To give but one example, the tree claims that Mary Kelly's brother was a Henry Kelly (1864-1911) who died in Yorkshire on 6 April 1911.

                            I couldn't initially find him, but another poster kindly pointed out that this must be the 'Harry Kelly' listed as dying in Rotherham during the 2nd Quarter, 1911 (age 48) which agrees with the 1864-1911 date of the supposed brother.

                            This allowed me to trace Henry Kelly to the 1911 Census; he's living in West Melton (Rotherham) Yorkshire, with his wife Hannah and several kids, at No 140 High Street.

                            He certainly wasn't born in Ireland in 1864, so, if this is meant to be him, it doesn't fit. This Henry Kelly appears to have been living on his grandparent's farm in Brampton Bierlow in 1871, age 6, born Yorkshire.

                            It's a rather strange business. The family tree is populated with real people, but they don't appear to be connected, and unless I'm making a grave error, none of it appears to 'work.'

                            It's a lovely photograph of 'Mary Kelly,' but currently there doesn't appear to be any reason to believe it is her, and considerable reasons for doubting that it is her. I'll report back if I hear anything further.

                            As far as I can tell, the original poster was a sincere person, so I offer no explanations. It was noticed that one of the dates given for Mary Kelly's mother, Eliza Davies (Shaw) is April 1st. It is also unclear why her last name is the same as Mary Kelly's alleged husband.


                            Click image for larger version  Name:	Mystery Mary.JPG Views:	0 Size:	21.5 KB ID:	579507

                            Comment


                            • I am not 100% certain but on a very dusty ledge in my memory I have an idea that this photograph might be the same one posted a few years ago on a fiction fantasy site related to a ficticious orphanage/school for young ladies. There were biographical notes on several of the girl 'pupils' and one of those was a Mary Jane Kelly whose mother figured in the story quite significantly and there was suggestion it was the same Mary Jane Kelly murdered in 1888.
                              The photograph was seen by someone who posted it on Casebook who asked if it was a real photograph of Mary Jane Kelly and I linked to the fantasy website in that thread but can't find the thread now as it is probably archived.
                              As I say, it may not be the same photograph but I do think I have seen this one before

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X