picture of mary kelly's room

[Stewart P Evans]

Oh, ok.
Does anyone see the word 'MAY' in this pic

Sorry, but no!

[Mike Covell]

Thanks for posting these two Stewart. I can see the blood on the walls, but fail to see how people can read into this further, or see any letters!

[A L Morrison]

If you consider the conditions that the photograph was taken - in a room that was probably not adequately lit for getting good pictures - then any lettering (if it existed) which showed up in the photograph would have been very obvious to those who saw the room at the time of the murder. The fact that nobody ever mentioned it, not the police or the press, leads to the obvious conclusion that there was no writing to see.

[Soothsayer]

Thanks for posting these two Stewart. I can see the blood on the walls, but fail to see how people can read into this further, or see any letters!

Hi Mike,

On the contrary - I was extremely surprised that Stewart posted the two pictures as he is an avowed anti-diarist (I think I'm right in saying that, Stewart), and both the B&W and sepia versions Stewart posted show the letters. In truth, the 'F' in the sepia version is only discernible if you know exactly what you're looking for, which is hardly compelling evidence.

Stewart, the B&W (Rumbelow) version could hardly have been more clear. Were you drawing on the absolute original when you posted this? Do you still have access to it? Is what you posted what we would see if we had the original?

If the latter question answers 'Yes', I am unexpectedly bouyed by this knowledge.

As an aside, I worked in management support at New Scotland Yard in 1988/89 (hmm...I've just noticed the significance of the dates), and was desperate to see The Black Museum but the tours were booked up for ages. One day, I came back to my desk to find a note saying that I'd been rung as they'd had a drop-out and the tour was about to start. Unfortunately, the note was timed about 45 minutes earlier! (I did not get another chance, sadly.)

[Omlor]

Thank you, Stewart, for bringing reason and good sense to the discussion.

Your knowledge about all of this is appreciated.

Of course, common sense and thoughtfulness can never trump individual desire and the will of blind faith, especially here on the internet.

All the best,

--John

[stevey]

Ha, ha. Thanks for clearing this up for me.

I can get back to believing the murderer was George Hutchinson now.

[richardnunweek]

Hello Stewart,
May I ask you a question.?
What opinion have you when you look at Kellys right leg, is the mark a circular cut, or the top of a garter?
We have spent many a time on 'Casebook' discussing that question, personally i see it as a elasticated top of a stocking.
Regards Richard.

[Soothsayer]

If you consider the conditions that the photograph was taken - in a room that was probably not adequately lit for getting good pictures - then any lettering (if it existed) which showed up in the photograph would have been very obvious to those who saw the room at the time of the murder. The fact that nobody ever mentioned it, not the police or the press, leads to the obvious conclusion that there was no writing to see.

I don't know how rigorous policing was in 1888, but I do know that whoever went in that room must have been overwhelmed with the carnage (and the thought of the carnage when the jury visited). I question whether it occurred to anyone at that time that serial killers might want to play games and leave clues, and therefore that they ought to look at shapes on the wall or walls for those clues.

With the benefit of 120 years of rather unpleasant hindsight to draw on, we now know that killers are not averse to such games, and therefore everything gets analysed and recorded.

The 'FM' may very well be no more than random blood formations - but the fact that we are debating them, and the fact that they are clearly referenced in the diary, is the most deeply unsettling aspect of what otherwise not unreasonably is written off as a hoax.

[Omlor]

Tom,

A.) We aren't actually "debating them." You are just saying over and over that they are there despite what everyone else has pointed out.

B.) They are not "clearly referenced" in the diary. You have taken vague lines which do not even mention Mary Kelly's room and extrapolated them out to be references to the photo because of your own desire. The diary does not mention any F or M on Mary's wall.

This is all just silliness.

--John

[Stewart P Evans]

Original

Stewart, the B&W (Rumbelow) version could hardly have been more clear. Were you drawing on the absolute original when you posted this? Do you still have access to it? Is what you posted what we would see if we had the original?

My copy of this photograph is a first generation copy made from the original back in the 1960s. The 'M' on the Rumbelow version has always appeared to be more distinctive than the sepia one but the vagaries of the two prints may be seen in the scans I posted on the 'crucifix' thread. I think this may be something to do with contrast. In truth, when viewing the original under a powerful glass it really does appear as random blood marks. Here is a scan of the 'M' only. Try copying my image here and blowing it up in your photo editing facility.



Obviously the fact that letters could be made out was an idea floated in 1988 and any subsequent fantasising about letters would, no doubt, have been instigated by that.

[Stewart P Evans]

I don't know how rigorous policing was in 1888, but I do know that whoever went in that room must have been overwhelmed with the carnage (and the thought of the carnage when the jury visited). I question whether it occurred to anyone at that time that serial killers might want to play games and leave clues, and therefore that they ought to look at shapes on the wall or walls for those clues.

A lot is made of the 'carnage' in Room 13 and how those seeing it would have been permanently affected. In nearly 30 years of police work I have seen a lot worse and I never did see a police officer overcome by what he saw. You just have to get used to such things and get on with the job. I am sure that most of the older police officers of 1888 would have been pretty hardened men. Still it makes for good movie-making to have a police officer stagger and throw up.

[Stewart P Evans]

Blood

Hello Stewart,
May I ask you a question.?
What opinion have you when you look at Kellys right leg, is the mark a circular cut, or the top of a garter?
We have spent many a time on 'Casebook' discussing that question, personally i see it as a elasticated top of a stocking.
Regards Richard.

Hi Richard, I have always thought that it is a line of blood that has run around her leg before congealing.

[Robert]

Hi Stewart

Might the police not have been affected by the sheer smell? Also, what about Dew and Beck?

[Stewart P Evans]

Hi Stewart

Might the police not have been affected by the sheer smell? Also, what about Dew and Beck?

Hi Robert, the smell would have been no different to an autopsy and the police had to attend those as a matter of routine. What about Dew and Beck?

[Victor]

Hi Richard, I have always thought that it is a line of blood that has run around her leg before congealing.

Hi Stewart,

That explanation makes sense especially as I (think I) can see a trail running down the shin in your photo in post #91.

I've always been confused as to what exactly MJK is wearing as there appears to be contradictions in the contemporary reports between she was naked, naked apart from some undergarments, and what could be bedsheets of some sort.

Is there anything that might confirm things one way or the other?