What the photos may tell of her last moments

[Sam Flynn]

Taken over from "Kelly photo... enhanced" thread, on the basis that there may be a more "thread-worthy" topic than merely looking at cryptic areas within the MJK photographs themselves. Namely, does what we can actually see in those photographs tell us about Kelly just before she died?

For starters, my take on the whole sock'n'garter question, for a long time, has been that Kelly was attacked whilst getting undressed. I'd suggest that she'd only just taken off her left stocking, which I'm pretty sure we see draped over the (still rolled-up) blanket behind the foot of the bed when her killer struck.

She may indeed have been in the process of removing her right stocking, when her assailant chose his moment to strike. Perhaps her head was momentarily turned or inclined at that point, giving him a perfect opportunity to take her by surprise.

If so, that puts Kelly in a conscious - albeit possibly still merry - state of mind when she met her killer. Reading a little more into it, I'd suggest that she may well have been in a rather playful and seductive mood as she prepared to ply her trade for the very last time.

Cat... firmly... amongst... the... pigeons

[The Good Michael]

Whoa there Nellie!

I don't think it's possible to tell if she was undressing or dressing. Either is a possibility. It would have taken little effort to push a dressing woman ontp the bed, especially if she was sitting on the edge. I think it can go either way in the photo. I think the photo can tell us no certainties. Well, the FM, the crucfix, the bottle, and Baphomet excepting.

Cheers,

Mike

[claire]

I don't know whether she would be undressed to an undershirt, and perhaps a sock or two, to service a client...I think the fact that she is in an undershirt tells us that she was ready for sleep, or had been asleep. The room was seemingly warm enough to sleep in just a shirt, so it would have been warm enough for her to completely undress, if she had been with a client. And, whilst this is beyond the immediate remit of the photograph, her state of dress as indicated in that photo begs the question: would she have allowed a client to stay overnight (to the extent that she would have been all cosied up in her shirt), given that she shared the room with others, that she'd run-ins with Barnett about people in the place, and that she'd most likely need the place vacant to do a bit of washing with Maria the next day? Would she want a casual punter still there in the morning?

[claire]

Hmm. I tend to disagree, Gareth. As I just noted on the other thread, I am a long way from convinced that she is wearing a stocking or sock of any description, and I also don't see, as you appear to, a similar garment over that rolled up blanket. I've looked at that (since your hypothesis here seems to hinge on that flirtily flung stocking [although the knit one, purl one pattern that was proposed for said stocking doesn't speak to me of something flirtily flung, not least because, if the interpretations on the other thread hold, they were held up by boot laces or some other makeshift garter]), and I don't see any readily differentiated pattern or texture on there.

I'm not arguing that she wasn't taken by surprise by her attacker, nor am I suggesting that it didn't happen in the course of a 'commission' or more regular lover. I think both of those are both plausible and probable. But I will suggest something to you...if she was feeling playful and seductive, I doubt that it would have been for a punter.

[Robert]

Gareth, I reckon she was asleep. I doubt if the killer would have waited for her to undress. But if he did wait for her to undress, he surely would not have struck when she still had one sock to go. That is like something out of the Goons.

[Robert]

Also, I'm no authority on strip clubs - they say harm can come to a young lad like that - but if she was being seductive, would she really leave the SOCKS to last? I mean, all that tense waiting and impatient expectation - to see the SOCKS come off?

Claire, if you're thinking of Barnett, he'd seen it all before.

[Sam Flynn]

Well, she's taken off her coat, her shoes and her dress and she's down to her chemise, Rob. Unless you want to suggest that she peeled her own skin off, the stockings were surely the next logical - um - step?

[Robert]

Hi Gareth

Well, that's normal undressing. I thought you had something more sizzling in mind.

Re the coat, I brought this up some years ago. I said that Kelly would surely have worn the pilot coat, as it was raining, but was assured by female board members that this would have detracted from her pulling power.

[j.r-ahde]

Hello you all!

So far the following thing pointed out by perrymason is the most likely one, that really could have taken place; MJK put her left hand on front to protect her face!

But then; why did JtR almost cut off the right arm?!

With the dressing/undressing before things started, it's impossible to make any definite conclusions!

All the best
Jukka

[perrymason]

Hello all,

I think that what we see in that room is a woman who was washed up for the evening and fell asleep while undressing, and since there is no account of any sounds that would be present by her being attacked while awake, and with the killer using his knife first rather than choking her, I think the killer attacked her left handed while she lay on her right side close to the wall, and the wounds on her left forearm are due to her becoming aware of the attack and raising her arm to try and protect herself.

That allows for the blood staining on the right side of the bed and the wall, perhaps the sheets being cut, and the lack of any real struggle that would move furniture about. That suggests she was asleep, or lightly so when attacked.

The evidence that has been accepted since November 16th 1888 is that she came home with a man very drunk before midnight, and that she sang off and on for an hour or so, and soon thereafter, by 1:30am according to Elizabeth, her lights were out and the room silent.

If this man was her attacker, and he attacked her while she was awake and undressing....which would in all probabilty mean her candle is still lit, so before 1:30.... then why doesnt Liz see or hear anything at all when she comes in, nor Mary Ann see or hear anything.... from 1:30am on. If her room was dark by 1:30, surely she partially undressed before dousing the light.

Best regards all.

[Sam Flynn]

Taken over from the "MJK photo" thread

Hi, Di

I lived 18 years in Wisconsin. It got extremely cold there in the winter and there was many a night when I wore socks to bed to keep my feet warm.

Why had she apparently taken one stocking off and draped it over the rolled-up bedsheet? Why, for that matter, was the bedsheet rolled up if she'd actually gone to bed?

[perrymason]

11:45pm-approx 1:15-:20am: Singing off and on
1:30: Room dark and quiet-for balance of early morning
3:44am: Mary wakes up to knocking at window or door.
3:44:01: Diddles does too
3:45am: Mary drags herself to the door to see who this is, and upon opening it exclaims "oh-murder" faintly. Lets the visitor in without a loud protest, closes the door.
3:45am: Liz hears the cry "as from the court"
3:45am: Sarah hears the cry as if "at the door".
3:46am-3:50am: Liz is falling back to sleep, hearing nothing after the cry.
4:00-6:00am: Mary Ann hears footsteps in the court a few times during this period.

Although the times are approximate, I think the only thing missing is the departure of Blotchy, if he did leave before she dies, and the arrival of the visitor at 3:45...if that was Mary's voice.


afterthought......for all we know, Blotchy could have still been there when the visitor arrives, maybe he lets him in.

Best regards all.

[j.r-ahde]

Hello you all!

For some reason this thread got wild after my last post!

So I'll repost, what I had to say:

"Hello you all!

So far the following thing pointed out by perrymason is the most likely one, that really could have taken place; MJK put her left hand on front to protect her face!

But then; why did JtR almost cut off the right arm?!

With the dressing/undressing before things started, it's impossible to make any definite conclusions!

All the best
Jukka"

Sorry for the inconvenience!

All the best again
Jukka

[Pippin Joan]

It seems more likely that she was attacked while asleep or passed out, but if she was overpowered while undressing, it could give some credence to the supposed patterns on her legs. I honestly think all the patterns are in the photograph itself and not on her legs. It's amazing what you can find in a photo blown up a zillion times. Faces on the surface of Mars-type stuff. She may have had some knit-patterns in her skin, like sock-ankles.

[Sam Flynn]

Hi Mike,

I think that what we see in that room is a woman who was washed up for the evening and fell asleep while undressing

Is that what the photographs tell you, though?

and since there is no account of any sounds that would be present by her being attacked while awake, and with the killer using his knife first rather than choking her, I think the killer attacked her left handed while she lay on her right side close to the wall, and the wounds on her left forearm are due to her becoming aware of the attack and raising her arm to try and protect herself.

That allows for the blood staining on the right side of the bed and the wall, perhaps the sheets being cut, and the lack of any real struggle that would move furniture about. That suggests she was asleep, or lightly so when attacked.

The evidence that has been accepted since November 16th 1888 is that she came home with a man very drunk before midnight, and that she sang off and on for an hour or so, and soon thereafter, by 1:30am according to Elizabeth, her lights were out and the room silent.

If this man was her attacker, and he attacked her while she was awake and undressing....which would in all probabilty mean her candle is still lit, so before 1:30.... then why doesnt Liz see or hear anything at all when she comes in, nor Mary Ann see or hear anything.... from 1:30am on. If her room was dark by 1:30, surely she partially undressed before dousing the light.

All worthy stuff, I'm sure - but it has everything to do with various theories (and a whole range of subjects) that have little or nothing to do with the subject of this thread, which is what the photos may or may not tell us.

Let's please focus on the photographs - which is why I started this thread - and what they alone might tell us. From first principles, if possible, and without straying into other aspects of the case that warrant (and already have) threads of their own. In consultant-speak: "Let's try not to boil the ocean here"

Respect and best wishes.