"Murder...!" cry

[Michael W Richards]

Elizabeth Prater only gives us a snapshot of when she entered Miller's Court and climbed the stairs... an instant covering, perhaps at most, a minute. An instant, furthermore, during which I'd suggest she had no particular reason to pay much attention to what was going in in Mary's room - assuming Kelly was stilll inside, of course. If Prater had reported hearing definite snores coming from No 13, we'd know for sure - but, alas, no snores were heard.

Be that as it may, there were many, many other minutes that would elapse after Prater retired to bed, during which she had even less reason to pay attention to Kelly's comings and goings.

That's true Sam, but in context the silence and darkness is very possibly a sign that the evenings entertainment had ended.

There had been singing off and on for over an hour, ever since they arrived at the room, when that stopped, and the light went out, that could easily be a case of her, or they, bedding down.

[Michael W Richards]

"Taking a stand against the current is understandable, I for one had stood for a 2-3 person Canonical Group at the most for over a decade. But I use real data, not imagined, and I don't discard what doesn't fit with my own preconceptions."

I have always admired the man who can poke a little fun at himself.

c.d.

I'm glad you like that cd, even though you are one that also imagines data, like Israel Schwartz actually having some value as a witness despite any evidence that his story was entered into the Inquest records in his absence. When I say I use evidence, in this case, it means who is actually on record for the Inquest statements. Or the imagined Ripper popping in between Israel and Louis's arrival. To name but 2 instances.

[Sam Flynn]

That's true Sam, but in context the silence and darkness is very possibly a sign that the evenings entertainment had ended.

Indeed, but what happened after Blotchy left?

There had been singing off and on for over an hour, ever since they arrived at the room, when that stopped, and the light went out, that could easily be a case of her, or they, bedding down.

That is, of course, a distinct possibility, and you may be right.

But... when did she eat that fish?

[Wickerman]

Michael.
It will be nice the day you learn to use the quote feature.

So, to reply to your responses, in numerical order.

1) The name of the tenant is entered on McCarthy's register, and her rent book. This would establish a fact, so I'm ready when you're ready to produce either source.

2) So long as we read that Lewis & Kennedy arrived on Friday at different times, and spoke of different people, then logically they themselves are different women.

3) I thought you were going to tell me how Cox proved she knew Kelly?

4) To claim you have never seen anything to negate the "discredited" report is markedly untrue. You have been shown press reports concerning the police still looking for the Hutchinson suspect days after that bogus report from the Star. (So much for your "not discarding what doesn't fit").

5) You tried to claim "I didn't say that she was compared to Cox," yet your claim is written in plain English - "by witnesses like Mary Ann Cox."
What more is there to say....

Taking a stand against the current is understandable, I for one had stood for a 2-3 person Canonical Group at the most for over a decade. But I use real data, not imagined, and I don't discard what doesn't fit with my own preconceptions.

Real Data tells us Lewis arrived at 2:30, and Kennedy about 3:00.
Real Data has Lewis seeing two people outside the Britannia, and a loiterer in Dorset street, but Kennedy saw three people outside the Britannia, and no-one in Dorset Street.
[Clue!!! - at 2:30 Hutchinson was loitering in Dorset street, at 3:00 he had gone.]
Real Data provides at least two separate newspaper reports that the police are still pursuing the Hutchinson suspect DAYS after that bogus suggestion by the Star that he had been 'discredited'.
Not the first time the Star have been caught playing loose with the facts.

What seems to be a common phenomena is that some people try to project a higher opinion of themselves, than is observed by their peers.
When you do commit to using 'real data', there will be no need to claim this, as others will see it for themselves.

[Varqm]

The partly-digested fish in her stomach might suggest that she went out to buy food within 2 hours of her death which, if the cry of "Murder!" was indeed Kelly's, would mean that she went out again some 2-3 hours after she was last seen in Miller's Court. Unless someone surprised her by bringing her an impromptu fish supper, I suppose.

Having said that, we don't hear of any fish bones being found on the premises; maybe they went unreported, maybe they ended up on the fire, or perhaps Kelly ate her last meal on the way back from the chippy (something I've done many times).

No it does not. It could be 4 hours.As a previous post suggested somebody ate a vegetarian diet at 10:00 PM. and his projected death was at 2:00-3:00 AM..
Which means if time of death is known it could be also traced back when he ate.But we do not know how "partially digested" and also how much food.Medical evidence is too technical.

[Sam Flynn]

No it does not. It could be 4 hours.As a previous post suggested somebody ate a vegetarian diet at 10:00 PM. and his projected death was at 2:00-3:00 AM.

There are no enzymes in the stomach that digest the starches that predominate in vegetarian diets, and the cellulose in plant cell walls are practically indigestible for humans. There are stomach enzymes that break down proteins/meat, however, and fish meat - by its somewhat diaphanous nature - gets broken down much more rapidly than most.

[Varqm]

There are no enzymes in the stomach that digest the starches that predominate in vegetarian diets, and the cellulose in plant cell walls are practically indigestible for humans. There are stomach enzymes that break down proteins/meat, however, and fish meat - by its somewhat diaphanous nature - gets broken down much more rapidly than most.

Thanks for the info but it does not matter.We do not know how "partially digested".These things are too technical,it must require tests on the body.It's hard to ascertain from reading alone,especially from 1888, and as such it cannot be pinpointed ,the best is range based,2-5 for ex.?.Even today,with access to the body,according to that link in the previous post,the forensic pathologist did not know if it was 2 or 3 AM.The Lechmere medical evidence also cannot be pinpointed to a 1-2 minutes and the killer only needed seconds to escape by the board school if he sensed Lechmere entering/walking Buck's row or even by something else,a sound for ex..I do not know why people even bother/pretend.

[Sam Flynn]

Thanks for the info but it does not matter.We do not know how "partially digested".

I totally agree, but given that fish is broken down comparatively rapidly in the stomach, the mere fact that it was partially digested - as opposed to completely "dissolved" - could indicate that the fish was eaten within a couple of hours of Kelly's being killed. If it had been eaten 3, 4, 5 hours before death, there would have been very little recognisable fish left in the stomach, if any at all.

[Varqm]

I totally agree, but given that fish is broken down comparatively rapidly in the stomach, the mere fact that it was partially digested - as opposed to completely "dissolved" - could indicate that the fish was eaten within a couple of hours of Kelly's being killed. If it had been eaten 3, 4, 5 hours before death, there would have been very little recognisable fish left in the stomach, if any at all.

But it could easily have been 12:00 AM - 2 AM. And how do we know Kelly did not have the fish inside her room making going out unnecessary?

[Varqm]

I believe it would have been in the interest of the killer not to have any of the women make any noise,it would wake up/alert people.In Mitre Square,even with several people that could have heard,they heard nothing.In Kelly's room the client/killer had ample time to position himself not to let Kelly cry.Bagster's and Bond's report does not preclude an intruder or a client.The lurking man was ,to me,most likely not an innocent bystander,there was no indication Kelly left.Most likely it was an intruder.
But the killer could have fumbled.In Mitre square he did not.

[Sam Flynn]

But it could easily have been 12:00 AM - 2 AM.

I'd suggest no earlier than 2AM. Assuming the cry of "Murder" at around 4AM was significant, her eating the fish some four hours earlier is, I'd suggest, very unlikely.

And how do we know Kelly did not have the fish inside her room making going out unnecessary?

So her last meal was cold fish? Possibly, but what's more likely: that she ate cold fish at ~2AM, or that she ventured out at approx the same time - possibly with the money obtained from her last client - to buy herself a modest, but at least warm, meal?

[Sam Flynn]

Most likely it was an intruder.

Comparatively the least likely option, I'd say.

[Wickerman]

....there was no indication Kelly left.

I'm not sure what indication you expect.
The only indication we have that Kelly was out at 10:00 Thursday night is, that people said so.
The only indication we have that Kelly was out around midnight is, because people said so.
Well, people also said she was out between 2:00 and 3:00 am.

If the opinion of people is good enough before midnight, then why isn't it good enough after midnight?

The mystery is of your own making.

[Robert St Devil]

But it could easily have been 12:00 AM - 2 AM. And how do we know Kelly did not have the fish inside her room making going out unnecessary?

the only person (i see) bringing fish to Mary,s apartment is joe barnett. hanbury street is described as a refuse of newspapers discarded by patrons as they exited one of the many fried fish shops. this... along with ,,baked potato cans,,(?). this journalist finds it remarkable that these whitechapel residents, with their half-penny each supper of fish & potatos, have a culture of eating & drinking in ,,the thoroughfares,,. it,s not definitive but it supports the suggestion that mary ventured out for a supper with penny in hand as was her habit. why no one recalls seeing a young, ginger-haired girl ,strolling about, is beyond me?

[Abby Normal]

Maybe blotchy treated Mary to some fish and chips on the way home.
Naaah. Too boring.

Lets dance. Lol!