the Rent arrears

[Sam Flynn]

Sam....they are nothing alike.

Sorry, Mike, but they are.

You say:

Blotchy might have gone out unnoticed when there was nobody around to see him.

I've been saying:

Kelly might have gone out unnoticed when there was nobody around to see her.


Exchange the first and last word of each statement and try to tell them apart. (Clue: you can't; because the logic is identical in both cases.)

I don't know whether to laugh or cry, Mike. Exactly the same logic applies to Kelly, whether after 3AM, or during those moments between 1AM and the time of her death when nobody happened to be around to notice what she was doing.

In other words, the argument you've just advanced about Blotchy is precisely what I've been saying all along about Kelly.

Sam....they are nothing alike. My comment illustrates that after 3am there were no witnesses that might see someone coming or going still around. Until then, and sporadically throughout that same 3 plus hour period, there were 3 separate ones, cumulatively with 7 different timed opportunities to see anyone leave/come from the court or room 13 specifically.

To see a light come back on, hear footsteps, hear a door opening or closing, hear voices, hear more than one voice, see someone exiting the court, someone entering, see someone open Marys door through the archway.

All the best though,.....cheers.

[Sam Flynn]

do we rely solely on the available evidence or do we try to make what would appear to be reasonable assumptions as well?

Either way, we should interpret the evidence correctly, CD. There are huge gaps in the record, and we shouldn't have to progress through the Seven Circles of Hell arguing about them, or kid ourselves (and others) that they aren't important.

P.S. Sam, it sounds like you need a lie down.

I'm lying down already, CD - great things, these wireless keyboards

[c.d.]

It seems like we are going around in circles here. Really the question comes down to this -- do we rely solely on the available evidence or do we try to make what would appear to be reasonable assumptions as well? Pretty much a yes or no question. Pays your money and takes your chances.

c.d.

P.S. Sam, it sounds like you need a lie down.

[Sam Flynn]

In regard to Blotchy Face being in the room or not, is there any truth to the rumor that Erwin Schroedinger was once a tenant in Miller's Court?

... if that's true, then so much for Mrs Prater's cat!

[Sam Flynn]

The thing is Gareth, if he didnt leave until after 3am...then we would have no witnesses about to even spot him.

I don't know whether to laugh or cry, Mike. Exactly the same logic applies to Kelly, whether after 3AM, or during those moments between 1AM and the time of her death when nobody happened to be around to notice what she was doing.

In other words, the argument you've just advanced about Blotchy is precisely what I've been saying all along about Kelly.

[Supe]

In regard to Blotchy Face being in the room or not, is there any truth to the rumor that Erwin Schroedinger was once a tenant in Miller's Court?

Don.

The thing is Gareth, if he didnt leave until after 3am...then we would have no witnesses about to even spot him. And thats not adding one single thing to what is known, believed and recorded.

I dont suggest that no evidence = no implications or activities cd, ..in the case of your example, the reason we would have reason to speculate Abberline did sleep has precedent, and logic behind it. Humans need to sleep to continue living, and therefore since he is alive in the time were discussing, and not hospitalized or sent to Switzerland in the middle of the most controversial cases of the era ...he likely slept regularly.

I think were baking a pie without having the neccesary ingredients available, is all. Or in some cases, were baking a pie without any filling.

All the best Sam, Hop a long ....hows that knee coming along by the way cd?

[Sam Flynn]

We dont have to expect anything...we KNOW that Blotchy DID leave.

But nobody damned-well SAW him leave!! Seen in that light, the fact that nobody SAW Kelly leave means nothing. That's the salient point here, Mike.

[c.d.]

Well I think there is reasonable speculation and then there is pure speculation. For example, is there any evidence whatsoever that Abberline slept during the whole time he was investigating the Ripper murders? Any mention in official reports or newspapers? Not that I am aware of. Do we then conclude that he never slept? No wonder the poor guy couldn't catch the Ripper. He was probably a vegetable from lack of sleep. Ok. Granted that is a farfetched scenario but isn't the principle the same? No evidence = didn't happen. I personally think that is a bad way to approach things.

c.d.

[Hellrider]

Hello everybody,

I know that my question is only related to the topic in a wider sense, but since many of you leave the topic continously, I hope I will be forgiven for doing so once.

Somebody (I think Chava) brought up the possibility that Mary was killed because she was a potential danger to somebody. So, how likely is it then that a stranger (for example a punter) encountered her accidentally and decided to kill her, as Sam proposed? Would you rather say it's more likely than her being killed for personal reasons

Mike, I'm going to shout. Apologies in advance

Nobody saw Blotchy leaving either. If nobody noticed him slipping out, then why should we expect them to have noticed Kelly doing the same?

End of shout.

In a raised voice in response, to equally convey conviction not just yell at a mate ....We dont have to expect anything...we KNOW that Blotchy DID leave. Speculate on when all you like, and it can include after 3am when no witnesses are in the court at all.

When what I said is mixed with a crime scene that cannot be described as anything other than intimate, with wounds among her injuries that are stereotypically found in a less than satisfiying personal relationships that end with murder, ... the logic of her having a personal relationship of some kind with her killer is plain, and thats yet another reason not to even suspect a "client"/supplier relationship.

I speculate frequently, but I believe, or did at the time, that the speculation had justification of some form within known data. Do I take stretches without having a firm footing...sure. But I dont believe Ive ever made suggestions about something based soley on the lack of knowledge that exists. Thats a speculators heaven isnt it.....no barriers, no proof or foundation required.

Ive not requested that environment here, nor do I believe you would condone it, but I do think that you are participating in a form of that Gareth, perhaps not seeing it that way, but we both know that a lack of evidence is hardly proof or grounds for pure speculation.

We have no knowledge Mary ever brought clients in to her room, nor that she left her room after 11:45pm. I feel thats honest.

My best regards.

[Sam Flynn]

Mike, I'm going to shout. Apologies in advance

Nobody saw Blotchy leaving either. If nobody noticed him slipping out, then why should we expect them to have noticed Kelly doing the same?

End of shout.

I think Id like to suggest that Mary was perhaps wearing a beret when she is found in bed, because theres as much evidence of that as there is lots of "perhap's" "maybe's" and "its possible's" happened.

The answer to your earlier question is this Sam.....its not that its difficult to grasp that there was only a total of minutes where any of the courtyard witnesses might pass Marys room, or be in the courtyard.....including the something like 25 minutes when her light actually goes dark and that Elizabeth is in or near the archway entrance,...its that within the stories told, there is nothing, not one single piece of suggestion that would indicate that we should be exploring options on how she left unseen, or was out soliciting. Its the complete absence of any logical reason or suggestive evidence to even initiate such discussions that, respectfully submitted, you seem to be ignoring.

There are no precendents for most if not all of what is being suggested, there is no evidence from the 2 witnesses with the best vantage and most known knowledge of Mary personally, nor the visitor to that court that night, nor is there any sign that any of these notions were in sync with what the contemporary police believed happened.

Since the official line on the investigation to this day ends with a last sighting of Mary at 11:45pm, I dont see why that should be so difficult to grasp.

Best regards Sam, all.

[Ben]

I'm not saying that Mary's killer (whom I believe to be Jack) was stalking her.

Then again, CD, that would seem a pretty reasonable suggestion.

Serial killers have often been known to stalk their victims, especially the ones who are killed indoors, and it's not as if we don't have eyewitness evidence of someone surveying the scene an hour or so before the likely time of Kelly's death.

Ben