Parallel

[Pierre]

Evidence for MJK3 being the photograph showing the original position of the bed and table.

[Kattrup]

Hi Pierre


I think if you want comments on this, it would be useful to elaborate on what you mean.

I personally do not understand what you're trying to show, or say, or how you can decide MJK3 was taken before the tables were moved and MJK1 after.

[Sam Flynn]

Nice try, but wrong parallel, Pierre.

On MJK3, draw a reference line from the "garter" on Kelly's right stocking to the middle of the lump of flesh on the table. Now, draw the same reference line on MJK1, i.e. from the middle of the lump of flesh on the table to the "garter" on the stocking.

I've drawn the reference line in blue below, on both photographs, for comparison.



The "bump" which the reference line crosses in MJK3 is, in fact, that puffed-up fold of bedding (or whatever it is) we see just below Kelly's left hand in MJK1. A quick look at MJK3 shows that the sequence of relevant objects is: "hand", "few inches of something dark", "mysterious bump"; which is exactly the sequence of objects we see, in reverse, in MJK1, where the "mysterious bump" is revealed to be that puffed-up fold of bedding/whatever.

You've actually placed your first red box on Kelly's left kneecap, which is out of shot in MJK3.

[Abby Normal]

It's a moot point anyway because for all we know, in the tight confines of the room, they might have moved furniture to get better angles/shots.

[Sam Flynn]

It's a moot point anyway because for all we know, in the tight confines of the room, they might have moved furniture to get better angles/shots.

Indeed, but - from the photographic evidence - there's little reason to suppose that they interfered with the layout in any significant sense.

[Abby Normal]

Indeed, but - from the photographic evidence - there's little reason to suppose that they interfered with the layout in any significant sense.

But of course

[Elamarna]

Evidence for MJK3 being the photograph showing the original position of the bed and table.

My dear Pierre,

Been here before, but I notice a slightly different take and presentation.

I agree with Sam here, as you well know.

However for the sake of debate lets assume there is a difference, and you can demonstrate such to a high degree of probability,there is absolutely noway of knowing which photo would have been taken first is there?

And of course some such as Simon Wood claim that mjk3 is a fake, not something I agree with.



Steve

[Pierre]

My dear Pierre,

Been here before, but I notice a slightly different take and presentation.

I agree with Sam here, as you well know.

However for the sake of debate lets assume there is a difference, and you can demonstrate such to a high degree of probability,there is absolutely noway of knowing which photo would have been taken first is there?

And of course some such as Simon Wood claim that mjk3 is a fake, not something I agree with.

Steve

Hi Steve.

Look at MJK1: There is a space for sitting on the bed before going to bed or getting up in the morning. Therefore this is the position of the bed and table used by Kelly.

Look at MJK3: There is no space for sitting on the bed before going to bed or getting up in the morning. Therefore this is not the position of the bed and table used by Kelly.

Compare the distances between MJK1 and MJK3 between the leg and the flesh lying on the table. In MJK1 there is a distance. In MJK3 there is no distance. Therefore this is the original position of the bed and table after the murder, where they found the bed and table.

The killer cut from the leg and put it on the table beside the bed.

Now, if you believe in some camera-effect, try this: put a piece of fabric shaped like Kelly´s visible bone on a bed and another piece of fabric shaped like the flesh on a table standing parallel as in MJK3.

Look at it from one side, then from the other and you will notice there is a big difference when you see it from the other side. Try to photograph it to get the parallel and the explanation Sam believes in and see from what angle you must photograph it to make it parallel.

Regards, Pierre

[Elamarna]

Hi Steve.

Look at MJK1: There is a space for sitting on the bed before going to bed or getting up in the morning. Therefore this is the position of the bed and table used by Kelly.

Look at MJK3: There is no space for sitting on the bed before going to bed or getting up in the morning. Therefore this is not the position of the bed and table used by Kelly.

Compare the distances between MJK1 and MJK3 between the leg and the flesh lying on the table. In MJK1 there is a distance. In MJK3 there is no distance. Therefore this is the original position of the bed and table after the murder, where they found the bed and table.

The killer cut from the leg and put it on the table beside the bed.

Now, if you believe in some camera-effect, try this: put a piece of fabric shaped like Kelly´s visible bone on a bed and another piece of fabric shaped like the flesh on a table standing parallel as in MJK3.

Look at it from one side, then from the other and you will notice there is a big difference when you see it from the other side. Try to photograph it to get the parallel and the explanation Sam believes in and see from what angle you must photograph it to make it parallel.

Regards, Pierre

Hi Pierre we have discussed this point many times have we not?
It seems your view has not changed, neither as mine.

Perspective created by the focal length of the lens used has strange effects on apparent distance in finished photographs, I take it you are aware of this? Far more importantly we have no idea of the lenses used for each photo, we have discussed all of that before I am sure.

However the issue I raised as not been addressed has it?

How can one know which photo was taken first? There is no method I am aware of that will allow us to determine that with these two photographs.


Cheers

Steve

[Elamarna]

Hi Steve.

Look at MJK1: There is a space for sitting on the bed before going to bed or getting up in the morning. Therefore this is the position of the bed and table used by Kelly.

Look at MJK3: There is no space for sitting on the bed before going to bed or getting up in the morning. Therefore this is not the position of the bed and table used by Kelly.

Compare the distances between MJK1 and MJK3 between the leg and the flesh lying on the table. In MJK1 there is a distance. In MJK3 there is no distance. Therefore this is the original position of the bed and table after the murder, where they found the bed and table.

The opposite can be argued far more convincingly in my view. That is MJK1 is the orginal and some movement as been needed to take MJK3. However that assume your views on the distances in the photographs are correct, I am convinced they are not

The killer cut from the leg and put it on the table beside the bed.

Now, if you believe in some camera-effect, try this: put a piece of fabric shaped like Kelly´s visible bone on a bed and another piece of fabric shaped like the flesh on a table standing parallel as in MJK3.

It's not about some camera-effect, it's science my friend foreshortening due to lens length is completelty understood and documented.

Look at it from one side, then from the other and you will notice there is a big difference when you see it from the other side. Try to photograph it to get the parallel and the explanation Sam believes in and see from what angle you must photograph it to make it parallel.

Again you miss the issue that without knowing the lens length used for each photo, and if the same was used for both any experiment is fatally flawed and any results obtained by such are therefore pointless.


Regards, Pierre

Regards Steve

[Michael W Richards]

Nice try, but wrong parallel, Pierre.

On MJK3, draw a reference line from the "garter" on Kelly's right stocking to the middle of the lump of flesh on the table. Now, draw the same reference line on MJK1, i.e. from the middle of the lump of flesh on the table to the "garter" on the stocking.

I've drawn the reference line in blue below, on both photographs, for comparison.

[ATTACH]18045[/ATTACH]

The "bump" which the reference line crosses in MJK3 is, in fact, that puffed-up fold of bedding (or whatever it is) we see just below Kelly's left hand in MJK1. A quick look at MJK3 shows that the sequence of relevant objects is: "hand", "few inches of something dark", "mysterious bump"; which is exactly the sequence of objects we see, in reverse, in MJK1, where the "mysterious bump" is revealed to be that puffed-up fold of bedding/whatever.

You've actually placed your first red box on Kelly's left kneecap, which is out of shot in MJK3.

Hi Sam,

Your images show that the line across the garter actually ends on that bedding shoved down between the partition wall and the bed. I believe that point is where the camera was positioned, which raises a point weve discussed before...was that shot taken with a remote shutter?

If so, would the photographer be lining up his shot by looking back towards the lens, or would he be estimating angles from the end of the bed, beside the camera?