Face in the window?

[Debra A]

If I'm understanding Debra correctly, it was an arrival of 1:30pm, and a departure of 4:30pm.

Thanks Khanada, that's correct, the papers had his arrival as 1.30 and departure as 4.30.

One other thing, on the exterior shot there are no coverings showing at the windows (curtains, blinds, coat, whatever) we know Bowyer pulled back something from the smaller window to see through into the room but the larger window must surely have had something originally hanging there as well? If you look at the picture you can see a white type of fabric hanging loose in the larger window.
The conditions were dark, drizzly and dismall that day so the photographer would have likely wanted as much light as possible for the indoor photography so it makes sense the window coverings would have been removed or pulled back. I would have thought the indoor shots would have been the priority while the light was good, so the outdoor shots could have been taken after all activity had finished inside.
From all reports the photographer seems to have been one of the last away from the scene at anyrate, and was late arriving.

Debs

[Roy Corduroy]

Adrian Phypers wrote an essay Who was the Mortuary Photographer:

http://www.casebook.org/dissertations/rn-photographer.html

[Khanada]

Hi Debra.

If Martin arrived at 4:30pm, how can that fit in with the autopsy / reconstruction at Shoreditch Mortuary apparently taking place from 4pm until 10pm?

If I'm understanding Debra correctly, it was an arrival of 1:30pm, and a departure of 4:30pm.

[George Hutchinson]

Hi Debra.

If Martin arrived at 4:30pm, how can that fit in with the autopsy / reconstruction at Shoreditch Mortuary apparently taking place from 4pm until 10pm?

PHILIP

[Blackkat]

Alright if you must know, the "face" on the window, was something that I did. I leaned up against it, and then did some early morning "finger painting" with my breath and fingers. It just so happens I'm a rather talented artist and did my best to make it look like a face. Had my late great great grandmother in mind actually. LOL

I noticed that eerie looking "face" too, but knowing that people have touched the window - then when pictures are taken, the light reflects on the marks made and it comes back looking like faces or eyes, or whatever your mind makes it out to be.

[Debra A]

Also, of course, Brenda, this would have ruled out the idea of someone being in the room when it was taken. Access came when permission was granted to open the locked room at 1:30pm and it is highly likely that Martin took this exterior image somewhere between 11:30am and 1:30pm.

Hi Philip,
Looking through the papers that give any timeframe at all for the photographer's arival, a time of arrival of 1.30p.m.[stating this was a late arrival] and departure of 4.30 is given for the photographer.
Other accounts just say the photographer arrived after considerable delay and difficulty.

[Bailey]

Well, see I knew I'd read that about window removal somewhere. It makes sense in the cramped conditions that you'd never get a tripod inside the room, so you'd certainly have to shoot from outside. Removing the window frame would be easier than shooting through a single pane and allow more light in the dimness of the court. Not sure if I can see McCarthy going for it tho, unless he was offered compensation for the repairs.

Don, thanks for the reference to the photo article - it'll be added to my must get to list

B.

[j.r-ahde]

Hello Pirate Jack!

I hope, I have caught, what you mean!

There are the following attachments, though not relating to the theme of this thread. But, when converting to gray-scale and with a will to believe to the super-natural, the white shade on the right could be turned into a ghostly-female figure.

(To those being curious; the original one is in colour and is in fact the photo taken by me in The Ten Bells in spring of 2007...)

All the best
Jukka

[Jeff Leahy]

Just a quick comment about the object out side the window.

Which appears quite large for an ash tray.

13 Millers court was probably the original kitchen before being partitioned into smaller rental space. Therefore it seems probable that the fireplace in 13 Millers court may have been larger in comparison for such a small room.

The original design of the building would have meant a larger fire place.

So perhaps your 'ash tray' is in proportion?

Pirate

PS dont believe faces on negatives/prints,,i'm a photographer, its part of the process

[Sam Flynn]

Sam, back in 2005 I posted a pic of an ash pan to the 'drain cover' argument thread...I thought it was an exact match for the object and at the time so did quite a few others too.

Thanks, Debs, and I can see why some folks agreed.

[Robert]

I used to believe that the photograph was taken from outside - with or without removal of window - because of this passage from Paul Begg's "Uncensored Facts" :

'After considerable delay and difficulty a photographer was brought to the scene and took photographs through the window.'

[Celesta]

Nothing more than a simulcra or matrixing.

It is lot's of randomness colliding to create a something, which is nothing.

Ought to go on the TAPS forum, Mike!! They talk lots about matrixing over there!

[Debra A]

I suppose it's too big to have been the ash-pan from beneath Mary Kell's fireplace, is it?

Sam, back in 2005 I posted a pic of an ash pan to the 'drain cover' argument thread...I thought it was an exact match for the object and at the time so did quite a few others too.

[j.r-ahde]

Hello you all!

Since, like I have pointed out, the strange pattern doesn't always seem to appear in every copy, it's obviously the same kind of misprint as the "crucifix" in some copies of the crime scene photo.

However, again from the Mary Kelly introduction of this site:

"The room was approximately 12 feet square. Opposite the door was a fireplace. On the left of the door and at right angles to it were two windows, one of which was close enough to the door as to be able to reach through it and unbolt the door. To the right of the door was a bedside table so close that the door would hit it when opened. Next to the table was a bed with the head against the door wall, its side against the right wall. The room contained two tables and a chair and a cheap print entitled "The Fisherman's widow" hanging over the fireplace. Opposite the fireplace was a small cupboard which contained cheap crockery, empty ginger beer bottles and a little stale bread."

So, if there really is something it's obviously a distorted image of an item from the cheap crockery!

All the best
jukka

[Fisherman]

Philip writes:

"Never heard about the frame being removed to take the photo before"

The removing of the window was reported in two newspapers. The Times of November 10 wrote "Mr. Arnold having satisfied himself that the woman was dead, ordered one of the windows to be entirely removed."

Some days later the East London Advertiser reported almost exactly the same: "The police were sent for and Superintendent Arnold, having satified himself that the woman was dead, ordered one of the windows to be entirely removed."

Whether this happened or not, or if the proximity of the wordings in the two papers point to a mistake on behalf of the Times, later quoted in the Advertiser, I donīt know.

The best,
Fisherman