Kelly photo 1 enhanced - graphic

[Stephen Thomas]

If done properly, Sam, this could yield interesting results. It wouldn't be too hard to duplicate the focal length of Victorian cameras with today's digital optical zoom cameras. Go for it, Blackkat.

[Blackkat]

oh NOOO - let's ask Ms. Corum since she did the 3d models and since it's assumed that professionals would have no idea of what to do. There can be only ONE who does reconstructions I suppose. (and even that leaves things to be discovered) It's flippin highlander around here. Lord forbid someone do something that could be a bit better and get us further along.

Sam you're knee is still too high and your angle is wrong. I think you're being a bit pompous, and a bit demeaning of what I could possibly contribute to casebook. You have no idea who I know or what connections I might have to help each of us here. I'm already working towards a forensic reconstruction for Spring of 09 - or should I not do that since we already have an artists "rendition" of what Mary may have looked like?

I don't mind being wrong, but I don't like being demeaned and the assumption that I wouldn't do things in the correct manner. By the way Stephen we would have been working with mjk1 - so whatever you could've gleaned from mjk1 for mjk3 would be up to you. I'll digress in the presence of such "experts".

[Jane Coram]

Hi All,

Well I do still have them, but it caused such a ruckus last time I posted them, I'm wary of doing it again. I have, however, done a quick sketch of where I think the knee falls.

I certainly think that any attempt at a reconstruction is worthwhile, and I'd be very interested to see the results. Although there will problems, it could produce something new we haven't seen before, it's certainly worth a go.

I will say that I had the worst nightmare trying to decide where the knee was. I originally thought that the knee was lower down, but what swayed me was the size of the foot in comparison. It must be an optical illusion due to perspective and the damage to the calf muscle. Obviously the sketch is very rough, but it gives the idea of how I see it.

I do agree though, that the left leg changed angles somewhat between shots, but I think that this might have been simply that when they moved the bed to get the camera around, the leg just flopped down, as there were no muscles to hold it up. It is possible though they did lower it so that they could get a better shot across the groin area, as otherwise the leg would have completely obstructed it. Either way, there does seem to be a change of angle between the shots.

I've tried doing a sketch of it with the knee further down and it just doesn't work. If anyone else out there fancies a go, they might have more luck than I did.

Much love

Janie

xxxxx

[Sam Flynn]

oh NOOO - let's ask Ms. Corum since she did the 3d models and since it's assumed that professionals would have no idea of what to do. There can be only ONE who does reconstructions I suppose.

Sarcasm will get you everywhere, Kat Not any professional has a good understanding of the details of the case, though. We must be aware that we're not just looking at "a woman on a bed", here. We're looking at an image of an etiolated, century-old photograph, depicting a grotesquely twisted and savagely mutilated corpse.

Lord forbid someone do something that could be a bit better and get us further along.

I often find that there's no need to do something a bit better when the pragmatic answer is staring me in the face. Still, what's pragmatic to one person may be seen as idleness by another...

I don't mind being wrong, but I don't like being demeaned and the assumption that I wouldn't do things in the correct manner.

It's not a question of your not doing the reconstruction fairly. However, unless you DO inflict a long gash deep into your subject's calf muscle, and unless you DO practically dislocate her hip and strip the flesh from her thighs, then any reconstruction is on a hiding to nothing.

[Sam Flynn]

I have, however, done a quick sketch of where I think the knee falls.

Excellent, Jane. It's interesting to see how restoring the outline of the (deeply gashed) calf muscle pulls everything back into proportion.

[Blackkat]

Jane,
Thank you for this post! Showing the knee in-between where Sam and I had placed it. This is what I had come to see as I stated to Sam in a couple of posts back. This was what I was going to try and show in the reconstruction.

[Sam Flynn]

Jane,
Thank you for this post! Showing the knee in-between where Sam and I had placed it.

Do what???? Jane puts the knee exactly where I put it! In contrast, your placement of Kelly's knee indicated that it had flown South for the winter!

Fair do's!!!

[Stephen Thomas]

By the way Stephen we would have been working with mjk1 - so whatever you could've gleaned from mjk1 for mjk3 would be up to you. I'll digress in the presence of such "experts".

I haven't even a vague idea what that is supposed to mean but by all means ignore everything I say if you wish. Ignorance is bliss as the saying goes,

[perrymason]

I think Jane has done the best job so far illustrating where the knee joint is....and funnily enough it is between Sam and BKat's mark...once again proving that we all believe we are correct, until a better opinion comes along. And I hand it to Kat to offer that same explanation to explain the variances in Sams and Kats contentions....even the best of us are wrong at times, its wise to bear that in mind when "asserting beyond all doubt". It also matches the fact that the left inner thigh only reveals its injuries when looking at MJK3, because its barely visible at all in MJK1. And Kats contention that the angle of her left leg, when using horizontal mapping, is "higher" in MJK3 than in MJK1, is I believe an accurate one.

Paddy Goose, if your urping at merely discussing the photos, perhaps taking in another less gory thread might be a good idea.

Best regards all.

[perrymason]

Do what???? Jane puts the knee exactly where I put it! In contrast, your placement of Kelly's knee indicated that it had flown South for the winter!

Fair do's!!!

Sam,

The hash marks on Janes picture indicate the kneecap, your estimate was not that the knee itself was there. It is not the top of the encircled area, which was your contention...I believe.

While we are redressing some issues, I still firmly believe that the line seen across her right calf below the knee was a slice, and made so that the killer could fully expose the knee joint...had he finished. That seems to me an indication, as I said, that he was considering removing the lower portion. Even the Torso killer left flesh on the parts he wanted intact.

Cheers.

[Blackkat]

No Sam with everything that you stated you made it seem as though the knee was higher - here let me show you:

I posted my first picture with text in purple and one area said "Upper thigh" you stated that it wasn't her upper thigh it was her knee and you made it sound as if the knee was here:



Which is the very reason why I thought your placement of the knee was too high and made her calf way too long. You're green line from knee to knee. At any rate, that's how it sounded and I think a few people thought you meant her knee was where I placed the X above.


I had already stated to you that both of us were wrong in our placement - meaning that I had the knee too low - and that I wanted to do a recreation to help out. You basically discredited that too, unless I could cut where I needed to cut (gashes etc) and have the exact kind of camera etc etc. Well f*** how do scientists try to recreate things of that nature in present time. They either have what they need or they get as close as they can. (computer software, etc etc)

It doesn't excuse the fact that you became demeaning - thinking I, nor professionals would be able to do the recreation justice, and that anything I might have added wouldn't be credible enough to contribute to casebook,and yes you made it sound as if you thought the knee was where the X is above, maybe not to everyone but to some it appeared that way. I wanted to recreate the scene and show were I thought the real knee was placed at - a clear photo that would show the knee was where Jane sketched it to be.

Since it's plain and in front of your face that's fine but as you said to other's it might not be so apparent and I wanted to help out. Thanks Sam. You're a real nice guy.

[Blackkat]

Hi Michael!

No I already stated that it was between both of our marks, I had actually seen where it was before Jane posted. I stated it in a previous post to Sam. That is why I wanted to do the recreation to show that.

Anyhoo I do like this sketch is shows it exactly as I had finally seen it. It helps.

between Sam and BKat's mark...once again proving that we all believe we are correct, until a better opinion comes along.

Stephen,
my post just meant that if we had done the recreation you could try to glean whatever you could from mjk1 for mjk3 - if you could have ( meaning if our recreation could have helped)

digress in the presence of such experts - there seems to be many around here at casebook.

Oh and by the way thanks for saying that it could have yielded some interesting results if done properly. I do appreciate that.

[perrymason]

I believe there is a real Casebook lesson here.....do not back down to someone because they say "youre wrong"....do not assume that someone else knows less than you do....do not mimic or mock others contentions unless you have unequivacable facts that show them in error....and dont assume that your opinion is worth equal value to those of the qualified medical opinions or notes...unless you are in fact a physician.

Cheers all.

[perrymason]

I was giving you praise... because you allowed for a possible error BKat...thats what I posted.

All the best.

[Sam Flynn]

I believe there is a real Casebook lesson here.....do not back down to someone because they say "youre wrong"....do not assume that someone else knows less than you do....do not mimic or mock others contentions unless you have unequivacable facts that show them in error....and dont assume that your opinion is worth equal value to those of the qualified medical opinions or notes...unless you are in fact a physician.

Less of the sanctimony, Mike. I'm frankly furious that I'm being painted out to be an imbecile, and that you've decided to take an unwarranted and platitudinous pop at me.

My original drawing showed the green line going from the top of Kelly's right knee to the equivalent point on her left, whereas Jane's drawing shows the bend of the knee - but both are part and parcel of the knee joint.



Credit where it's due. I was right, Jane backed it up. That's because we both have some idea of what we're talking about.