The broken window

[DJA]

Fish has a thread on imaginary CCTV cameras.

Might have some video of the bloodhounds

[David Orsam]

Hi David,

So the fact that Millers Court had been stuffed to the gills with policemen, doctors and residents, and Dorset Street was thronged with rubberneckers, would have had no impact on the efficacy of bloodhounds.

What a strange question. Do you think I am an expert on bloodhounds?

Mr Taunton explained in the Times of 13 November 1888 that he did not think that the bloodhounds would have been of any use in the Kelly case because 'it was then broad daylight and the streets would have been crowded with people.' He also said: 'The only chance the hounds would have would be in the event of a murdered body being discovered, as the others were, in the small hours of the morning, and being put on the trail before many people were about.'

Frankly, what I think about the efficacy of bloodhounds and what Mr Taunton thought about the efficacy of bloodhounds is utterly irrelevant. All that matters is what Inspectors Abberline and Beck thought about the efficacy of bloodhounds and even that is irrelevant if they were under orders not to enter a murder scene until the bloodhounds had arrived and they were expecting the imminent arrival of those bloodhounds.

As to that, I note that you have failed to demonstrate that these officers knew the bloodhounds were not available. It is perfectly obvious that they were waiting for the bloodhounds and that is the answer to the question you posed earlier in this thread.

[Simon Wood]

Hi David,

Sorry, I did.

My mistake.

Regards,

Simon

[DJA]

My apology to both of you,as I thought Simon was addressing me.

The D is for David.

[David Orsam]

Hi David,

Sorry, I did.

My mistake.

That's quite alright Simon, don't mention it.

Glad we've finally sorted this out.

[Wickerman]

Could be that Arnold saw it as the easiest way of entry due to the door mystery. The times was remarkably accurate regarding the mutilations so there's a good chance they were right about this.
What if the window was removed to get someone in to open the door but it still couldn't be opened.Would make a lot of sense

The press were not allowed in the court, so the reporters may have obtained any details from residents after they were allowed out.
There is an account that tells us some reporters managed to get on to the roof to look down in the court at some point.

That said, the only reason I can see for a window being removed, or at least the glass broken out might (might), be to allow the coffin containing the body to be passed out of the room.
The coffin can be brought in upright through the door because it is empty at that point.

The outside wall opposite the side door may have been too near to allow for them carrying it out, with the coffin horizontal and heavy.
That is just a thought mind you, not that I believe the window was removed, I don't, it is just that a reason may be found if we think about it.

[packers stem]

Phil, unless you can demonstrate that Inspectors Abberline and Beck both knew that the bloodhounds had been removed from London, and that they were aware that any previous orders issued by Sir Charles Warren about the use of bloodhounds had been countermanded, everything you say is no more than piffle and nonsense.

Hi David
I think the problem isn't with Beck or Abberline,the delay seems to be way further up the chain of command.They were only acting on orders.
My question would be what was Arnold doing so important that it took him till 1.30 to drag himself there..
He got to Goulston Street pretty sharpish,as did Warren for that matter...

[packers stem]

The press were not allowed in the court, so the reporters may have obtained any details from residents after they were allowed out.
There is an account that tells us some reporters managed to get on to the roof to look down in the court at some point.

That said, the only reason I can see for a window being removed, or at least the glass broken out might (might), be to allow the coffin containing the body to be passed out of the room.
The coffin can be brought in upright through the door because it is empty at that point.

The outside wall opposite the side door may have been too near to allow for them carrying it out, with the coffin horizontal and heavy.
That is just a thought mind you, not that I believe the window was removed, I don't, it is just that a reason may be found if we think about it.

Hi Wickerman
What I'm struggling with is the photo itself really.
There's not a soul in sight.
The sharp angle of shadow suggests midday sun in June
In the UK in November, even at midday you'll do well to get the sun at a 45 degree angle off the horizon, this I know as I can only use a washing line between March and September due to some nearby trees lol
Also only one broken pane is visible.... Where there should be 2
I'm not convinced that this photo wasn't taken well after the event,possibly years and that it is still possible that the window had been removed as the report stated

[David Orsam]

My question would be what was Arnold doing so important that it took him till 1.30 to drag himself there..

Hi packers stem,

Your question assumes that Arnold did not 'drag himself' to Millers Court as soon as he received the news of the murder. But I don't think we have any evidence about when he received the news or where he was at the time he received it.

It also seems to assume that he was sitting around not doing very much on the day of the Lord Mayor's Procession, just waiting for another murder so he could leap into action.

You mention that he got to Goulston Street 'pretty sharpish'. The graffiti in Goulston Street was discovered by PC Long at about 2:55am and reported by him to an inspector at about 3:10am. If Arnold was on duty at the time and got there within 2 hours, i.e. before 5:10am, it begs the question as to when he got the chance to sleep (so perhaps he slept in the day). I note that the writing was said to have been rubbed out at about 5:30am. If Arnold didn't get there until 5:10am that means it took him two hours to arrive, just like the two hours between 11:30am and 1:30pm

In short, I can't see why you think that the question is of any importance or what you think the answer to it would reveal but then I am baffled by a lot of questions being asked on this forum.

[packers stem]

Hi packers stem,

Your question assumes that Arnold did not 'drag himself' to Millers Court as soon as he received the news of the murder. But I don't think we have any evidence about when he received the news or where he was at the time he received it.

It also seems to assume that he was sitting around not doing very much on the day of the Lord Mayor's Procession, just waiting for another murder so he could leap into action.

You mention that he got to Goulston Street 'pretty sharpish'. The graffiti in Goulston Street was discovered by PC Long at about 2:55am and reported by him to an inspector at about 3:10am. If Arnold was on duty at the time and got there within 2 hours, i.e. before 5:10am, it begs the question as to when he got the chance to sleep (so perhaps he slept in the day). I note that the writing was said to have been rubbed out at about 5:30am. If Arnold didn't get there until 5:10am that means it took him two hours to arrive, just like the two hours between 11:30am and 1:30pm

In short, I can't see why you think that the question is of any importance or what you think the answer to it would reveal but then I am baffled by a lot of questions being asked on this forum.

Strikes me as odd that's all for a superintendent and a commissioner to be on duty between 3 and 5 am
The Lord Mayor's parade day I would expect

[David Orsam]

Strikes me as odd that's all for a superintendent and a commissioner to be on duty between 3 and 5 am

Do you think, maybe, perhaps, someone could have woken them up?

[Wickerman]

Hi Wickerman
What I'm struggling with is the photo itself really.
There's not a soul in sight.
The sharp angle of shadow suggests midday sun in June
In the UK in November, even at midday you'll do well to get the sun at a 45 degree angle off the horizon, this I know as I can only use a washing line between March and September due to some nearby trees lol
Also only one broken pane is visible.... Where there should be 2

One Casebook member tried to enhance that backyard photo. I'm not sure if this will come across clear enough but there appears to be three window panes in that smaller right-hand window that are broken. Both bottom panes, and the top right pane.

I'm not convinced that this photo wasn't taken well after the event,possibly years and that it is still possible that the window had been removed as the report stated

If I recall, the backyard shot came from a collection of police photo's. Wasn't it located among those photo's of Kelly?
Police crime scene photo's will be dated to the time of the crime.

The press complained that they were not allowed inside the court, and any residents were not allowed out.
I would expect the police would tell them to go home and stay there, so I wouldn't expect to see people around, but you might expect to see a policeman or two, I agree to that.

[packers stem]

Do you think, maybe, perhaps, someone could have woken them up?

Hi David
Do you think maybe someone should have woke them up with the discovery of two bodies? Or was a scrap of apron and a chalked message of greater importance?

[David Orsam]

Hi David
Do you think maybe someone should have woke them up with the discovery of two bodies? Or was a scrap of apron and a chalked message of greater importance?

Maybe they did wake them up with the discovery of the bodies. But then again, the discovery of the bodies didn't require any urgent action on the part of the police that night, outside of normal procedure in a murder case. The discovery of the graffiti did, however, require immediate action on the part of the police at a senior level. Keep or remove? Photograph or not? A decision was required by someone with authority to make it.

But this is really all just detail. Questions for which there are very simple and straightforward answers. No need to imagine conspiracies everywhere.

[packers stem]

One Casebook member tried to enhance that backyard photo. I'm not sure if this will come across clear enough but there appears to be three window panes in that smaller right-hand window that are broken. Both bottom panes, and the top right pane.






If I recall, the backyard shot came from a collection of police photo's. Wasn't it located among those photo's of Kelly?
Police crime scene photo's will be dated to the time of the crime.

The press complained that they were not allowed inside the court, and any residents were not allowed out.
I would expect the police would tell them to go home and stay there, so I wouldn't expect to see people around, but you might expect to see a policeman or two, I agree to that.

Oh Dear...the dodgy late 80s delivery then,explains it lol
Probably taken just before demolition
I can still only see one broken window, top right but we know the lower left one should be broken but all 3 other panes look identical to me. On top of that with the way the top right is 'holed' they would have ripped their arms to shreds every time they wanted to open the door. If it was used for access they would surely have removed the edging to make it a 'clean' square...and, Kelly would have probably have had to stand on the window sill to stretch in far enough...Nothing rings true does it?