JOSEPH BARNETT

MARY KELLY'S LOVER

She Told Him Her History

Joseph Barnett was the paramour of Mary Kelly, the woman who many now regard as having been the final victim of Jack the Ripper.

Her murder, which took place in her room at 13 Miller's Court, off Dorset Street, in Spitalfields, on Friday the 9th of November, 1888, was the most gruesome of all the Whitechapel atrocities.

Indeed, looking at the crime scene photograph of her remains lying on the bed in that tiny room, you find yourself in full agreement with her landlord John McCarthy - the second person to arrive at the scene after Thomas Bowyer had gone round to collect her rent, and had discovered the body - when he described what he saw in the room as looking more like the work "of a devil than of a man."

Until 9 days prior to her murder, Mary had shared that room with Joseph Barnett, and many of those who were acquainted with them considered them man and wife.

MARY KELLY'S LIFE

Almost all the information we have about Mary Kelly's life comes from what she had told Joseph Barnett about herself, which he repeated at the inquest into her death and to at least one reporter in the aftermath of her murder.

Lloyd's Weekly Newspaper, published a synopsis of his inquest testimony on Sunday, 18th November, 1888:-

He had lived with the deceased, Marie Jeannette Kelly, for a year and eight months, and had seen the body in the mortuary, which he identified. He was quite positive that the body was that of the woman he lived with.

Kelly was her maiden name.

Deceased occasionally got drunk, but generally speaking she was sober when she lived with him.

She had told him several times that she was born in Limerick, but removed to Wales when quite young. Witness could not say whether it was at Carnarvon or Carmarthen that she lived, but her father was employed at some ironworks.

She also told witness that she had a sister who resided with her aunt and followed a respectable calling. She had six brothers and sisters, one of the former being in the army.

She told him that she had married a collier named Davis in Wales when she was 16 years of age, and lived with him until he was killed in an explosion a year or two afterwards.

After her husband's death she went to Cardiff with a cousin and came to London about four years ago. She lived at a gay house in the West-end for a short time, and then went to France with a gentleman, but did not like it and soon returned to London, living in Ratcliff-highway, near the gasworks, with a man named Morganstone. She afterwards lived with a mason named Joseph Fleming, somewhere in Bethnal-green.

Deceased told witness all her history while she lived with him.

Source: Lloyd's Weekly Newspaper, Sunday, 18th November, 1888.

MARY KELLY AND JOSEPH BARNETT

Joseph Barnett first met Mary Kelly on Commercial Street, on Good Friday, April the 8th, 1887, and they went for a drink together.

They agreed to meet again the next day they both decided that they should remain together.

An article that appeared in The Penny Illustrated Paper on Saturday the 17th of November 1888 quoted Joseph Barnnett as saying:-

I was in decent work in Billingsgate Market when I first met her, and we lived along quite comfortably. She was fresh looking and well-behaved, though she had been walking the streets some three years previously."

THEY LIVED AS A COUPLE

Thereafter, they lived as a couple at various addresses around the East End of London.

The Penny Illustrated Post quoted Barnett as recounting:-

She lived with me, first of all in George Street; then in Paternoster Court, Dorset Street; but we were ejected from our lodgings there because we went on a "drunk" and did not pay our rent.

We took lodgings afterwards in Brick Lane, and finally in Miller's Court where the murder occurred."

RENTED THE ROOM FROM JOHN MCCARTHY

According to John McCarthy, Mary Kelly's landlord, the couple had rented the room ten months before, and their weekly rent was four shillings and sixpence, although, by the time of her death, the rent was twenty nine shillings in arrears.

Testifying at the inquest, McCarthy admitted that he did not concern himself to know whether they were married or not, adding that they seemed to live comfortably enough.

WHO WAS JOSEPH BARNETT?

Joseph Barnett was 30 years old at the time of the ripper murders.

He was 5 foot 7 inches tall, of medium build, with a fair complexion, blue eyes, and a moustache.

Since 1878, he had earned his living as a porter at Billingsgate Fish Market.

However, he lost his job in July, 1888 - the reason, it has been suggested by those who champion him as a suspect, being that he was caught stealing, although there is no actual documented proof that this was the case.

MARY RETURNED TO PROSTITUTION

The loss of his job put a strain on the couple's meager resources, and Mary Kelly had returned to prostitution in order to make ends meet.

In his inquest testimony he admitted that they "occasionally" quarreled, and during one argument a window of the room had been broken.

THEIR FINAL ARGUMENT

There had been an altercation between them on Tuesday the 30th of October. Blows had been exchanged, objects had been thrown, and Joseph Barnett had moved out.

The cause of this particular argument, and of their subsequent separation, was, according to Barnett, the fact that Mary had insisted on taking in a woman of "immoral or bad character", out of compassion, and he had objected and left.

WHAT HE TOLD INSPECTOR ABBERLINE AND THE INQUEST

In his police statement, given to Inspector Abberline on the day of the murder, Barnett recalled that:-"She told me that she had obtained her livelihood as a prostitute for some considerable time before I took her from the streets."

He also told Abberline that:- "in consequence of not earning sufficient money to give her and her resorting to prostitution, I resolved on leaving her, but I was friendly with her."

He told the inquest that Mary had, on several occasions, asked him to read to her about the Whitechapel murders, observing that she seemed afraid of some one, although she didn't express fear of any particular individual except when she rowed with him - although, he added, "we always came to terms quickly."

HE CONTINUED TO VISIT MARY KELLY

Having left 13 Miller's Court, Barnett had taken up residence at a lodging-house in New Street, off Bishopsgate, a five to ten minute walk from Dorset Street.

However, he continued to visit Mary on a daily basis and would give her money if he had any.

THE LAST TIME HE SAW HER ALIVE

He last saw her alive on the evening of Thursday the 8th of November, when he stopped by 13, Miller's Court at between 7.30 and 7.45 pm, where he found her in the company of another woman, who he did not know.

They chatted for about an hour, and, at some stage during this time, the other woman left.

Barnett left shortly afterwards, but, before he went, he told Mary that he was very sorry that he had no work and was, therefore, unable to give her any money.

He then returned to his accommodation on New Street, where he remained for the rest of the evening.

HE HEARD ABOUT THE MURDER

The next day he heard that there had been a murder in Miller's Court, and headed over there.

En route, he met his sister's brother-in-law who told him that the victim was Mary.

He went to Miller's Court and there saw the police inspector, and told him who he was and where he had been the previous night.

JOSEPH BARNETT QUESTIONED BY THE POLICE

Given his history with the victim, the police obviously viewed Barnett as a person of interest in her murder, and, in consequence, he was questioned for more than four hours by Inspector Abberline, and his clothes were minutely examined for any traces of blood.

None were found and, having satisfied the police that he had not been in any way involved in Mary Kelly's murder, he left police custody completely vindicated of any suspicion.

SHE WAS GOOD-HEARTED

The Penny Illustrated Paper quoted him as saying:-

Marie never went on the streets when she lived with me. She would never have gone wrong again, and I should never have left if it had not been for the prostitutes stopping in the house.

She only let them in the house because she was good-hearted, and did not like to refuse them shelter on cold, bitter nights.

It is worth noting that Barnett may have been treading carefully in his various statements, since, had he admitted that Mary Kelly had worked as a prostitute during their time together, he may have left himself open to a charge of living off immoral earnings.

IDENTIFYING MARY KELLY

Either way, Barnett had the unenviable task of identifying Mary's body; and, at the inquest, at which he was the first witness called, he confirmed that:-

I have seen the body. I identify her by the ear and eyes. I am positive that it is the same woman I have lived with.

MARY KELLY'S FUNERAL

On Monday the 19th of November, Joseph Barnett was the chief mourner at the funeral of Mary Kelly, and he was in the first of two carriages that followed the coffin as it was conveyed through immense crowds as it made its way to St Patrick's Roman Catholic cemetery, in Leytonstone, where the woman whom Barnett had known as Marie Jeanette Kelly was laid to rest in a common grave.

And with that Barnett's association with the Whitechapel murders came to an end.

JOSEPH BARNETT AS A JACK THE RIPPER SUSPECT

Now, you’ve probably noticed that - other than his four hour spell in police custody - there is nothing to suggest that Barnett was ever suspected of being the Whitechapel murderer.

Indeed, he was able to convince the experienced Inspector Aberline that he had'’t been involved in Mary's murder, and, a few days later, at the inquest into her death, the Coroner, Dr. Roderick Macdonald, was so impressed by Barnett's composure as he gave his evidence that he afterwards observed:- "You have given your evidence very well indeed."

So, how has his name turned up on the ever expanding list of suspects?

Well, the case against him largely consists of his being involved with Mary Kelly, being in the area at the time, and to a few canards about the crimes that have long been discounted by serious students of the case.

Much of the supposed evidence against him consists of an awful lot of supposition, little of which is backed up by concrete facts.

The strongest pieces of evidence are that he undoubtedly knew Mary kelly, by his own admission argued with her, and that he was in the immediate area at the time of her murder.

Those who accuse him of her murder propose that his motive was that he was passionately in love with Mary Kelly, and during their time together the thought that she might go back onto the streets troubled him no end.

Whilst he held down a secure job at Billingsgate, and the couple were able to live comfortably together he had no trouble preventing this from happening.

THE LAST STRAW

But when, in July 1888, he lost that job, Mary returned to prostitution.

Desperate to discourage her from a dissolute lifestyle - and to encourage her to settle down with him - Joseph Barnett began brutally murdering other prostitutes in an attempt to frighten her away from an immoral life.

At first this worked.

But, at the end of October, Mary invited another prostitute to stay in their room, and Barnett strenuously objected, causing the couple to fight on the 30th of October, after which he moved out.

Joseph, though, continued to visit, and made several attempts at reconciliation.

After a failed last ditch attempt, he was forced to accept that it was over between them, and, overcome by jealousy and rage, he murdered her, the mutilations being so terrible because this time it was personal.

THINGS THAT POINT TO HIS GUILT

Those who favour him point out that, as a porter working at Billingsgate Market Barnet would have filleted fish and would, therefore, have possessed a filleting and boning knife, the weapon that he used to carry out the murders.

However, it should be pointed out that Barnett was'’t a fishmonger but rather a porter, whose job would have been to move the produce around at Billingsgate.

Barnett, so those who believe in his guilt hold, matched the descriptions given by witnesses who may have seen the face of the murderer - although I have to say that his proponents do tend to be somewhat selective when ot comes to which witnesses they put forward.

There were, it is true, similarities between Barnett's appearance and some witness descriptions, but witnesses such as Elizabeth Long, who saw Annie Chapman talking with a man outside 29 Hanbury street 30 or so minutes before her body was discovered, described an older, shorter and foreign looking man.

THE CRIME SCENE IN MILLER'S COURT

Then we come to the crime scene itself.

When the order was eventually given to enter the room, John McCarthy had to force the door open with a pickaxe because the door was locked from the inside.

According to The Times on Saturday the 10th of November:-

The lock of the door was a spring one, and the murderer apparently took the key away with him when he left, as it cannot be found.

However, Joseph Barnett told Abberline that he and Mary had lost the key to the room some time before, and that they used to reach through the window to unlock the door.

Those who propose Barnetts candidature, suggest that Barnett had, in fact, kept the key with when he moved out, and he used it to let himself into the room, and, having carried out the murder, used it to lock the door as he left.

THE PHYSICAL EVIDENCE AGAINST HIM

Then we come to the only physical evidence that places Barnett at the scene of the crime, a pipe that was found in the room, which Barnnett admitted to Inspector Abberline belonged to him.

Those who champion him argue that if, as he claimed, when he moved out he took his possessions with him, then he must have left the pipe behind after he had committed the murder.

I will leave it to you dear reader to identify the possible flaws with that particular argument.

THE NIGHT OF THE DOUBLE MURDER

On the 30th September - the night of the double murder - when Elizabeth Stride was murdered in Berner Street and Catherine Eddowes in Mitre Square, the escape route taken by the killer from Mitre Square led, according to one of those who accuse him, "to Barnett's then home - Miller’s Court, in Dorset Street."

He washed his hands at a public sink - the bloody water was still flowing down the drain. Where was the sink? Miller's Court, 26 Dorset Street - the same place where he would later kill Kelly. Coincidence? Hardly. Major Smith claimed he was, "five minutes" behind the Ripper that night. In fact, he must have been seconds behind him. The only place the killer could have gone is through his own front door.

In the interests of accuracy, I should point out that there never was any bloody water still flowing down a drain - and the one man who said that there was - Major Henry Smith, who at the time was the Acting City Of London Police Commisioner - did not specify the location as being Miller's Court, only that it had been in Dorset Street.

It should also be noted that the only mention of the bloody water appears in Smith's autobiography, From Constable to Commissioner: The Story of Sixty Years Most of Them Misspent, published in 1910 - a book that is a highly entertaining read, but which, to be polite, doesn't let the facts stand in the way of a good story.

In none of the police reports, newspaper articles or inquest evidence from 1888 was there any mention of bloody water being found flowing down a drain anywhere, let alone in Dorset Street.

CIRCUMSTANTIAL OR FABRICATION

There are several other points used by those who suggest that Joseph Barnett was Jack the Ripper, but the majority of them would never stand up in court, and most certainly wouldn't convince an unbiased jury of his guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

The evidence against him is at best circumstantial and coincidental, and at worst fabrication - and, although circumstantial evidence is admissible in court, I will leave it to readers to decide whether the case against Joseph Barnett meets the criminal standard of proof, or whether it is simply speculative conjecture that has been put forward as established fact.