Kelly photo 1 enhanced - graphic

[George Hutchinson]

Hi Mrs B and thanks for a very civil response.

I agree with Jukka about the thing in the red circle - just a flap of skin on the pile of flesh.

The reason we don't have SoC photos at the other sites is, again, one for theorising and debates and I'm not into that side. I have a personal hunch that we have several minor reasons why a SoC image was taken here - firstly, being in a room there might be a lot more to need to record than being on the street and it could be a reference tool. Secondly, there'd now been 'X' murders beforehand and, following the City Police taking several shots of CE at Golden Lane - also showing the injuries - maybe the Met were either learning or trying to impress (or stop detractors, what with the bloodhound debacle and all). Thirdly, it might have been such a mess that it was felt an ID picture at Shoreditch mortuary would not have helped and maybe chances were improved by showing the remains in context of their supposedly known environment. All little things but, combined, would make sense as to why we have a SoC image. I think the saving face (perhaps a poorly chosen expression in this case) option is the most important of these.

As to acquiring a hi-res copy of MJK3, you are best looking for the large version on this very website. You will only find small copies of victim photos in our book, and then only one for each person. The whole point of the book was to concentrate on topography, cartography, geography and bricks and mortar.

PHILIP

[Sam Flynn]

Probably the object on the circle is just a piece of badly cut flesh...

... or, more likely still, a combination of fleshly artifacts, fluids and shadows that coalesce in the imagination as a single, solid object. A bit like the "Face on Mars", to cite a familiar example.

[Blackkat]

I still say it would or will be nice for the other photos to surface that were taken. Maybe we will be able to see more or gain something from them.

[Mrs.Bucket]

I still wonder how much about the crime scenes we don't know, specifically MJK's. I worked as a reporter/editor for several years and I remember how often the police withheld details to either a) catch a suspect telling them something only the killer would know or b) weed out people that may try to lay claim to the murders. Being that the photos didn't show up until 80 some odd years later, they could have easily leaked what they wanted and withheld what they wanted.

Does anyone know of any official records, circa the time of the crimes, of people that tried to take credit?

[George Hutchinson]

Hi Mrs B.

Far from the photos not showing up until 80 years later, the main image was published in France in the 1890s. Rob's book covers all this in extreme detail.

We are not relying on newspaper reports. There are contemporary police records and other sources (check, for example, THE JACK THE RIPPER SOURCEBOOK).

PHILIP

[Mrs.Bucket]

Sorry Philip. I read "discovered by Don Rumbelow in Snow Hill in the 1960s" to mean it was previously unknown to the public.

Thanks for the recommendation on the book, I will keep it in mind as I have several making their way into my library as we speak. Previously, I was just reviewing them for free at Barnes and Noble.

I still think we are assuming that the police reports were complete, which they were not necessarily especially if there were tensions between higher-ranking officers in the City police and Metro. They wouldn't have put anything on paper they may have had to share, especially if they were each gunning for the glory of solving this.

[jmenges]

Various prints of the MJK photographs

Photograph of Mary Kelly from André Lamoureux De l'Éventration au point de vue médico‑légal (1894)


Photograph of Mary Kelly from Alexandre Lacassagne Vacher l'Eventreur et les crimes sadiques (1899)


MJK 1 (discovered by Don Rumbelow in the City of London Police photographic department 1967)


MJK 2 (returned to Scotland Yard in 1988)


MJK 3 (returned with MJK2 to Scotland Yard in 1988)


I hope this makes it a bit clearer, as I sense some confusion, Mrs. Bucket!

JM

[Mrs.Bucket]

Thanks JM. This does show the difference between MJK1 and 2, as two appears to be a wider shot. But it doesn't change my questions about the public's knowledge of the crime scene and the metro and city dept's forthcomingness about the scenes.

Who owned copies, and why were they first published in France? If they were published in France, how likely was it still that the public was aware of this crime scene as we know it from the photos?

[jmenges]

So I have spent the last week dilligently looking over MJK1 and MJK3 (side note, why do we call it 3 when there's a 4 written on it?) virtually negelecting all other responsibilities.

Just for curiosity, here is how MJK2 & MJK 3 appeared when they were received by Scotland Yard in 1988. Note that the tear that appears in MJK 2 went through the entire album. Which, if the information I've heard is correct, means that this album page was handled and damaged by a certain Ripper researcher before the photos were removed from this album page.



I'm still trying to track down the origin of the #4 on the image on in Casebook's photo archive. I have a good idea of where the 8-cornered MJK3 reproduction came from, but am unsure of the origin of the numbering.

JM

[Stewart P Evans]

Photographs

Jonathan, I have now found my original photographs. The '8-cornered MJK3 reproduction' came from me and was taken by me. The photographs were removed from the old album page at the PRO and remounted in pages by 'corner slits', and given numbers, by the PRO. The numbers have no relevance other than PRO references.

[Stephen]

Kellys wall

The wall at the side of Kellys bed appears to have been partially cleaned....were the police erasing a blood scrawled message?

[protohistorian]

... or, more likely still, a combination of fleshly artifacts, fluids and shadows that coalesce in the imagination as a single, solid object. A bit like the "Face on Mars", to cite a familiar example.

I suspect your right Sam. Theres a cognitive psych test with two sets of dots on different sides of the paper and subjects are asked which sets are random . The majority ( unsure of #) select the side of the paper where the dots are euidistant from each other. The mind at a subconcious level is equating equidistance with randomness. The human mind just loves to find patterns. Kive strong Dave

[protohistorian]

Jonathan, I have now found my original photographs. The '8-cornered MJK3 reproduction' came from me and was taken by me. The photographs were removed from the old album page at the PRO and remounted in pages by 'corner slits', and given numbers, by the PRO. The numbers have no relevance other than PRO references.

Het, wait a minute...sniff...sniff...you don't smell like a newbie....IMPOSTER!!!!!

[Sam Flynn]

The wall at the side of Kellys bed appears to have been partially cleaned....

... you mean it was cleaner in parts than in others, Stephen. That partition was filthy even before Mary's blood was shed upon it. There'd have been a goodly build-up of grime, soot, mould and goodness knows what else on it, I shouldn't wonder.

Were the police erasing a blood scrawled message?

If so, it was bloody huge - the "cleaned" patches extend almost the length of the bed, and three-quarters of the way to the ceiling. The partition was either patched unevenly with grime, as I suggested, or we're looking for a very tall killer with very long arms. 'Ere, wait a minute... !

[Mrs.Bucket]

I believe the possibility of a written message has been pondered before...
Interestingly, in reviewing the Horrors of Whitechapel written in Dec. 1888, the writer stated, "Having butchered and mutilated the Kelly woman, he walked a dozen blocks from the scene, when he threw away the piece of the victim's apron, and stopped to write a message on the wall. He had provided himself with a piece of chalk for this purpose, as was the case in the Chapman affair, when he scribbled on the shutter that this made four, and that when he had killed sixteen he would surrender himself to the police." This is the only reference to this I have come across thus far. Should we surmise the writer made this up or have I just not crossed another source of this information yet? We would seem to question it saying Kelly made four, but if the killer didn't feel he fulfilled his wishes in killing Elizabeth Stride, as was likely since he sought out Catherine Eddows, he may have discounted stride from his own count all together.