Kelly photo 1 enhanced - graphic

[Hunter]

Dew's memoirs:
"All this was horrifying enough, but the mental picture of that sight which remains most vividly with me is the poor woman's eyes. They were wide open, and seemed to be staring straight at me with a look of terror."

As we speculate and debate about Mary Kelly's death, indeed, all of them, let us keep that quote in mind.

God be with them. No one else was.

[DVV]

Hi Ghoulstonstreet,

from Barnett (inquest) :

"I identify her by the ear and the eyes."

Perhaps of help are Dew's memoirs also :

"All this was horrifying enough, but the mental picture of that sight which remains most vividly with me is the poor woman's eyes. They were wide open, and seemed to be staring straight at me with a look of terror."

Amitiés,
David

[ghoulstonstreet]

Where Are Her Eyes?

In the many books written on the subject there arestatements saying that Mary Kelly could be identified only by her eyes. I'd like to know if anybody feels confident that they can in fact see her eyes. I've never been able to, turning the picture sideways and everything. Can you point them out or forward a photo with arrows on it? Thanks

[Stephen Thomas]

I worked in the art dept of a newspaper in the 1980's and 1990s and many of the older mono prints from the library were retouched by hand with white and black watered down ink/gouache to give more contrast on the old black and white litho presses. As the apple mac came in we did it digitally, but when you see the original prints they can be quite crude, of course the old mono pictures in the newspapers from before the 1980's were pretty crappy with i think only a resolution of about 70 dpi.

The white lines on MJK right look exactly how a retoucher would try and give some substance to pretty murky image, of course some were better than others and this may be a case of poor craftsmanship.

Thanks for sharing that, Nail, and welcome.

As far as I can see the full body MJK photo has been modified only slightly around the left leg area whereas the reverse angle photo has been tampered with something rotten due to the near elements being out of focus on the original negative.

[blackfingernail]

I know its a bit late to add my twopennies worth but i have been archiving the past threads and catching up on previous posts, me being a newcomer to the forum.

Just want to add that I worked in the art dept of a newspaper in the 1980's and 1990s and many of the older mono prints from the library were retouched by hand with white and black watered down ink/gouache to give more contrast on the old black and white litho presses. As the apple mac came in we did it digitally, but when you see the original prints they can be quite crude, of course the old mono pictures in the newspapers from before the 1980's were pretty crappy with i think only a resolution of about 70 dpi.

The white lines on MJK right look exactly how a retoucher would try and give some substance to pretty murky image, of course some were better than others and this may be a case of poor craftsmanship.

[Jane Coram]

Hi Julian,

This has been dealt with before, but I don't think it was on this forum, so I'll post what the conclusions were.

If you look closely you'll see that it's actually an optical illusion caused by small pieces and slithers of flesh lying over the bone, making it look like a break. It's quite hard to see on some of the copies of the photo, but if you look at the high resolution copy, it is quite clear. It really does give the impression of a break though, so I can see why anyone would point it out.

Hi Tenth Bell,

I think that we really have to stick to the doctors reports when dealing with all of the victims, although of course there is some conflicting testimony here and there which makes interpretation difficult and open to discussion.

In this case though, Bond was quite clear that the heart was absent and nowhere near the body - so I'm afraid it is an optical illusion. There are so many imperfections in the photo that it's almost impossible to differentiate objects and shapes in the dark areas. The most likely option is that the killer took it away with him.

Hugs

Jane

xxxxx

[Tenth Bell]

Hi folks... Hope all have had a good day. If you would please look on page three of this thread, at Mike Covell's second post down the page. What he says about the finger holes of what could be a scissor. Brace yourselves. Look closely. I think this is her heart guys, with the severed openings of the Great Vessels somewhat facing the direction of the photographer in MJK2. U know what all the reports say, of course, but ... just what if????
What if it was clandestinely removed before her body was taken out ... or what if, worse yet, it got bundled and tossed out with the horribly blood-soaked garments?? I can see a heart there. But perhaps my eyes are just involved in sordid trickery.

[Julian1066]

Speaking of that denuded femur...does it appear fractured above that horizontal line? It seems that there is a "bend" at the upper line of the femur, at least to me.

[Julian1066]

for the pictures and the information in this thread. It's a sad picture to look at, but such a lot of information to be had.

Am i imagining it or can i see her lips?

Babybird, not only do I see lips, but turning the photo so the face is configured as we generally see faces, the set of the mouth looks...well, peaceful. At rest. And it doesn't really go together with the butcher's shambles to me. That tells me she definitely met her death before the carnage got underway, as I believe everyone pretty much believes. Correct me if I'm wrong. Lower left hand corner of the face actually does look relatively unscathed, and the rest - well, it beggars description.

Lips? yes, I see them.

[babybird67]

thank you all

for the pictures and the information in this thread. It's a sad picture to look at, but such a lot of information to be had.

Am i imagining it or can i see her lips?

[Daveshredder]

Hi Gareth
Re. the ring on Kelly's leg near the camera on photo 2
Looking at this closely, (see below from original form of the photo) my immediate thought was that it looks as though some one has drawn this in pen on the photo, though why they might have wanted to highlight that area is not clear
Regards
Chris

Hi Im sorry if this is out of place, but its only my second post.
Im sure read in a book that the whole of the bottom mjk3 was painted on by a police artist years after the pic was taken. Just to give it some depth and perspective, also the bottom of the bed was pushed away from the wall to give access to the camerman, accounting for any angle confusions.

[Stephen Thomas]

.....the photograph seems to have been badly scratched in that region .

Hi Sam

Scratched in a way but really the word is 'retouched'. The near leg on that photo would by optical necessity have been completely out of focus and a lot of this image, including the area between the legs which looks a bit like the Amazon jungle has had the negative retouched. This did involve scratching the film emulsion to produce dark areas and lines on the positive print rather in the way that artists use cross hatching in drawings to denote shading. If Kelly had been wearing the sort of men's sock shown earlier then it would easily be seen on the full body photos.

[Sam Flynn]

Great socks! However, I think it's worth considering that the photograph seems to have been badly scratched in that region - so the "weave" might be merely an artefact, rather than any fabric in contact with Mary's calf.

[j.r-ahde]

Hello, just a curious lurker!

I will say; a very good could-be!

All the best
Jukka

[just a curious lurker]

Yeah, I think it's a stocking too.

Hi,

What I find amazing is that you can actually see the stitches of the knitting quite clearly there. I don't know if there are any fellow knitters out there, (and that includes the men! ) but it looks like knit 2, purl 2 rib, at the top there, over where the knee is, changing to stocking stitch lower down, which is exactly what you would find in a knitted stocking of the time. (The ribbing is designed to make the top slightly more elastic to help keep it up.) If she wasn't wearing a stocking on that leg, (not the other one, which I think was bear) then she had very hairy legs.

I quite like the idea of the thickish 'black' line around it being a make shift garter of some kind, or as an alternative, it could be that her killer attempted to cut through the woollen stocking and found it was too much effort (knitted wool is notoriously hard to cut through with even a sharp knife) and decided to move further up the leg where it was an easier target.

The 'black' line there is consistent with a thin cut which would actually cut through the flesh underneath, but not cut through the thickness of the wool above. (Odd, I know, but have a go on an old wool sock and a piece of fruit! ) The blood from the wound below would seep into the wool above and look something like that.

I'd go for it being either that or a garter of some kind.

Sorry, I can't see any numbers or letters there. I suspect the circle might be a photographic artifact of some kind.

Hugs

Jane

xxxx

Hello all. I'm a newbie here, though I've lurked here on and off for long, long time. I'm a knitter, and I found a good picture of a knitted sock, and I would agree with Jane about there being a stocking on the left leg. Here are the images side by side. Be kind please.