How did he do it?

[DVV]

I can see both sides of it and, personally, I think he did it.

Sad but true, I have little interest in the case.

Cheers.
LC

Hi Lynn, he certainly did it, so don't be sad. The case deserves indeed little interest, or let's say less than McKenzie - although it may be worth speculating the part played by the Ripper (as a suspect in Coles case) in Saddler's discharge. I wouldn't say the Ripper saved Saddler, but it could have helped to some extent.

[lynn cates]

interest is withdrawn

Hello Red. Disagreeing is fine. And, as I said, I have little interest in the case.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

time of inebriation

Hello C4. Was he that drunk when Coles was later murdered?

Cheers.
LC

[Wickerman]

MJK could have eaten back at 11.30pm, i think digestion can be as long as 5 hours, 1.5 hours seems too short to me, again this has been talked about here many times before

Yes, the 1-1.5 hrs is purely for the fish & potato's to leave the stomach. There was other food in the intestines which was not identified.

She couldn't have eaten at 11:30, she had no money until Blotchy paid her and their liason only began at 11:45.
These people did not have food laying around, the tenants we are talking about lived from hand to mouth.
These residents of Millers Court were even lower on the ladder than most struggling families.

Their basic situation is, pennyless. When they need to eat they go out and get money, then they can eat or drink, and are pennyless again. These women carried nothing of value, if they had it would be taken from them by any one of the ruffians who preyed on unfortunates. It was not in their interests to keep money aside, or food aside, or anything that could be taken from them. This is a way of life totally alien to us debating this.

Regards, Jon S.

[Malcolm X]

Yes, the 1-1.5 hrs is purely for the fish & potato's to leave the stomach. There was other food in the intestines which was not identified.

She couldn't have eaten at 11:30, she had no money until Blotchy paid her and their liason only began at 11:45.
These people did not have food laying around, the tenants we are talking about lived from hand to mouth.
These residents of Millers Court were even lower on the ladder than most struggling families.

Their basic situation is, pennyless. When they need to eat they go out and get money, then they can eat or drink, and are pennyless again. These women carried nothing of value, if they had it would be taken from them by any one of the ruffians who preyed on unfortunates. It was not in their interests to keep money aside, or food aside, or anything that could be taken from them. This is a way of life totally alien to us debating this.

Regards, Jon S.

HI
take care here, because we have no idea when Blotchy met Kelly, he might have met her in the pub 3 hours earlier
he'll be the one with the money for sure, especially if he's a labourer/ builder, or dressing down from someone who is far more successful in life.

.
.

[Ben]

Thanks for those extracts, Hunter.

I should clarify that I wasn't suggesting there was anything unlikely about the idea that Kelly took clients home. Indeed, unless Blotchy was just a casual drinking chum, she did precisely that on the night of her death. My point was that this was not the only means by which prostitutes solicited clients, and the availability of a private room needn't imply that all business was conducted there.

Mary Cox clearly had a bad night, but whether her comments were meant to imply that she had few clients or none at all that night is less certain.

She couldn't have eaten at 11:30, she had no money until Blotchy paid her and their liason only began at 11:45.

How do we know any of this, Jon?

We simply don't know when or even if Blotchy paid Kelly anything, nor do we have any idea how much money she had on her before she met up with him. The idea that Blotchy brought home Kelly's supper, which she ate later, is perfectly feasible.

All the best,
Ben

[Errata]

If I recall correctly (and I very may not) one of the reasons that potatoes were so popular with the poor is because they were cheap and left you feeling full for a very long time. The stomach has a hell of a time breaking down starch and cellulose, which is pretty much the contents of a potato. It typically takes five hours for the stomach to finish up and dump food into the intestines, but high cellulose food takes even longer. Full digestion, end to end so to speak, takes 12 to 48 hours.

[Wickerman]

Errata.
The problem does not lie with the potatoes, they seem to get all the attention but the time constraint is limited, not by the potatoes but by the fish.
Fish only takes half as long to digest as a potato, and the fish was not digested!

Bond wrote:
"In the abdominal cavity was some partially digested food of fish & potatoes & similar food was found in the remains of the stomach attached to the intestines."

Two criteria.
- Only in the abdominal cavity (stomach not intestines).
- Some partially digested fish & potatoes.

Obviously we cannot be precise, fish takes 30 - 60 minutes to digest, based on type of fish and how it was cooked.
Potato digests in the stomach from 60 minutes to 120 minutes, based on how it was cooked; mashed, baked or fried.

IF.... Kelly ate her meal 3-4-5 hours before she died the fish would have been totally digested from the stomach, it would only have been found in the intestines.

Based on all these criteria, if Mary died between 3:30-3:45 am then she ate her last meal around 1:30-1:45 or thereabouts, but not much before because some fish was still undigested, which would actually argue for less.

Regards, Jon S.

[Malcolm X]

uum and i doubt that she ate reheated food

it might be worth double checking this, because her stomach would also have been full of loads of booze and i expect the booze is absorbed first, thus slowing down digestion of the food... no idea

i cant see her going out again for food at 1.30am, way too drunk, more like crashed out !

.

[Errata]

Errata.
The problem does not lie with the potatoes, they seem to get all the attention but the time constraint is limited, not by the potatoes but by the fish.
Fish only takes half as long to digest as a potato, and the fish was not digested!

Regards, Jon S.

I'm sorry. I misinterpreted your post. I thought you were saying that the fish and potatoes HAD left the stomach in about an hour, therefore being the unidentified food in the intestines.

Mea Culpa.

[Wickerman]

it might be worth double checking this, because her stomach would also have been full of loads of booze and i expect the booze is absorbed first, thus slowing down digestion of the food... no idea

i cant see her going out again for food at 1.30am, way too drunk, more like crashed out !

.

You don't have a "stomach full of booze". Alcohol is not digested like food, it is absorbed into the stomach lining and the intestines rapidly, 30 mins to 1 hr depending on how much alcohol and whether it was beer or spirits.
Spirits are absorbed faster than beer. In consequence there is no appreciable effect on digestion.

Regards, Jon S.

[curious4]

Hello C4. Was he that drunk when Coles was later murdered?

Cheers.
LC

Hello LC,

Seem to remember he was legless most of the night - but will have to double check. Yes, he was refused admission to the Victoria lodging house by the night porter, a stout fat man (interesting use of "stout" there, meaning well built) because he was so drunk, wandered about for a bit then went to lodging house where Frances was but was thrown out, got beaten up again (at the docks) and finally ended up at the hospital. Donīt think Frances would have gone anywhere with him, anyway, he was very angry with her.

Found this gem while I was looking, report from the Met, Swallow Gardens Murder: "with reference to the murder attached, I beg to report..." wonder what they used to attach it?

Cheers,
C4