MJK photo 4 enhanced

[Sam Flynn]

Is that the pattern of the blood on her arm or has her actual arm been shredded

Not quite "shredded", but certainly savagely cut. From Dr Bond's notes: "The arms [were] mutilated by several jagged wounds".

[Mascara & Paranoia]

Perhaps I should've worded that differently. But whoa, you can really see the damage and savagery of Jack's handiwork when these pictures are enhanced (kind of a moot thing to say admittedly haha). Vicious stuff.

[Brenda]

These enhanced photos are breath-taking. MJK owned the world's ugliest bolster.

[Midnyte]

Thanks SGH, for posting those pictures for us.
I ask you to consider the wounds on Catherine Eddowes lower abdomen, thighs, and genital area. Deep slashes were made down each of the inner thighs that separated the outer labia. These are the type of wounds I can see on the large object on the table that some call a "bolster", although a bolster is never mentioned in any report.
What I can see is the flesh on the table from the body, with many cuts in between the thighs and pubic area, made before the flesh was removed.
These wounds match up with cuts seen on the raw flesh left behind on the body. The flesh was posed (upside down in relation to its original position on the body), so if the picture is reversed, you can see the rounded cut at one end matching the right thighs circular cut, and all the way to the other end,the left calf, which dangles from the table with deep slashes, a muscular appearance, with a tendon at the end giving the flesh a firm appearance.
What can explain the shot being taken at that angle if it were not to include the large object on the table?
WHy were the police so horrified by this murder, if all he had done was toss organs around?
No, I truly believe that Jack the Ripper had skinned the whole surface of the most intimate areas of his victim and posed them on the table to horrify the finder, and to denigrate the profession of the women he killed.
He used his knife on the women as though it were his sex organ, and then mutilated the face from shame.
Just my opinion!
Those stocking stitches noticed by Jane Coram,are very visible in your shot, even the end where the stitches have come unravelled.
Great work!
Joan O. (Midnyte)

[GordonH]

This is very good work.

What is the situation with the original photos?
Or are there any first generation (from the plate) prints?

If it was possible to get back to the closest to the original then there may be all sorts of possibilities for future enhancement.

[Nothing to see]

I've never noticed that line on her right calf before. Yeah, imagine this in color. I think I can see her eyes open. I really wish I could see her face.

The first photo. There's some French term for it but I can't think of it at the moment. I think it's to do with the processing of the film. I can see the breasts on the table. But her lower abdomen, it all is just a blur of blood and bits to me.

[Nemo]

It's probably an anomaly but I see the number 285 above the line on her rt calf

Overall, I'm surprised by the lack of blood

You would think that the bed would be saturated

Just goes to show how little blood would flow during the dissection after the victim had been bled via the throat wound

[Mascara & Paranoia]

I really wish I could see her face.

The closest thing I can make out of how she used to look is (and I don't mean this in a bastardy way at all) that she had gapped teeth.

[Khanada]

I can see the breasts on the table.

For what it's worth, Dr Bond described the breasts as being in locations other than the table:

"The viscera were found in various parts viz: the uterus and kidneys with one breast under the head, the other breast by the right foot, the liver between the feet, the intestines by the right side and the spleen by the left side of the body. The flaps removed from the abdomen and thighs were on a table."

For what it's worth.

Some time back Suzi did some ... well, not really enchancements, precisely ... to the main full-body photo, specifically the face, with Paint. Frankly, it was the first time I could make out any facial features at all -- ironically, it made the photo much easier to bear looking at. Poor girl.

[neathy]

Important Clue ?

I increased the contrast of the enhanced MJK photo by 50% and discovered something others may have missed. I have outlined my discovery in light brown. Coincidence ?

[sgh]

A good try Neathy!

I increased the contrast of the enhanced MJK photo by 50% and discovered something others may have missed. I have outlined my discovery in light brown. Coincidence ?[ATTACH]4895[/ATTACH]

Very artistic and a good try, Neathy.
The eye tends to search for patterns as you have recognised here, however
the problem being, and I'm assuming those are drawn curtains where you have placed your sketch upon, that the sunlight would have cast dark shadows that could have shown a silhouette on the inside of the curtains if anybody was standing closely to the window on the outside, whereas we can see slightly lighter patches in and around the areas of your sketch.

Steve

[sgh]

This is very good work.

What is the situation with the original photos?
Or are there any first generation (from the plate) prints?

If it was possible to get back to the closest to the original then there may be all sorts of possibilities for future enhancement.

I made my enhancements of the MJK3 photo on the low res image of only 120 kb's which I found on this site which is a copy of a copy of umpteen previous copies, so the quality was low to start with, hence there's the very basic information to work with to provide a bit of an improvement for general visual purposes.

If I had a professionally produced high resolution scan of the original image which would then contain high quality bit data to work with, then much more information could be extracted from the image.

As an example, there are several marks on MJK's right lower leg that appear to be finger smudges of body fluids/blood. It might be possible to ascertain whether these are finger smudges (which I think they are) and also if they are made by bare fingers or rubber gloved fingers (Indiarubber gloves were available and used at that time by medics I believe).
Should it be the case that these smudges can be proved to be made by a rubber gloved hand then I'm sure this would alert the JTR experts to consider and evaluate their prime suspects who might be considered likely to use them!


On Mary's left knee area there are at least five marks that appear similar to finger marks. As these are closest to the camera lens they too could be a good source of information as to determine a bare or gloved hand.
And again, on Mary's left wrist there appears to be at least one smudge similar to a finger mark. Although that wrist 'mark' is slightly angled away from the lens, it's close to the main focal point of the lens - the groin area,
so a decent visual may be possible.

I'm not saying that finger prints worthy of proper identification could be extracted from a hi res image, although I do not doubt the the resolution capabilities of film, even of that period, but that would be expecting too much I think. On the other hand, using advanced enhancement techniques
of forensic standards can reveal much more than one sometimes expects!

As an note, I'm curios as to the suitabilty of rubber gloved hands due to the danger to the operative of causing accidental self damage due to a sharp instrument unstable in slippery hands considering the voracity and apparent speed at which this mutilation was carried out.
However, a bare hand will still have a similar level of dangers.

To finalise, the question is, how to get hold of a genuine direct from the original hi res scan. Do the authorities allow this! If not - Why ?

[Suzi]

That little finger does look odd there- in it's positioning /angle looks more like a thumb but we know it isnt!!........unless there's more to Mary than we know (!) x ??

Trouble is Neathy, you can look long and hard at that ghastly image and after a while you can see anything you please-including Baphomet...well in extremis!!!!.......and that's just a start!!

sgh

Trouble is - it's a tad late for that now re the fingerprints/gloves etc. Tantalising though it is..............

Suz x

[Suzi]

The closest thing I can make out of how she used to look is (and I don't mean this in a bastardy way at all) that she had gapped teeth.

'Er where did you get from?

[George Hutchinson]

Neathy - does this prove The Beatles (circa 1967) had something to do with it?

PHILIP