MJK1 & MJK3 camera positions - plan view. (Warning - graphic images)

[FISHY1118]

I wouldn't waste time focusing on the classic 'show and tell' psychology adopted by several of the members on this site.
Using cryptic sentences to tell us there's a hidden mystery, but revealing nothing of any credible value to progress the case.

The only anomaly that I've ever found unusual regarding the murder of MJK is the fact her death certificate says she was murdered in flat 1 instead of 13.

And apart from her inquest being rushed through disturbingly quickly, I see no other peculiarities that would warrant her death being suspicious outside the realms of her having been a murder victim.



RD

Well there's also the other issue with MJK death . Reports and witness statements of seeing her alive the following morning at that is was someone else who was murdered in her place . Plenty of threads and topics on that scenario if ones interested .

[The Rookie Detective]

Well there's also the other issue with MJK death . Reports and witness statements of seeing her alive the following morning at that is was someone else who was murdered in her place . Plenty of threads and topics on that scenario if ones interested .

What i find fascinating is that almost all the initial reports indicated she was murdered the next morning after bring spotted by at least 2 "witnesses."
Initially there was no mention of her being slain in the early hours.

A similar thing happened with Nichols; the initial reports of multiple witnesses hearing a woman fleeing an attack close to the Jewish cemetery and then being heard heading South and then west into Bucks Row, plus the alleged blood trail zig zagging across the road and something resembling bloodied hand marks on a wall...were all discarded and forgotten about in favour of PC Neil's account etc...

Its quite remarkable how so many accounts from potential witnesses were just lost in the wind.
It does make me wonder whether something that was discarded as irrelevant could have been a crucial clue and the police made a critical error of judgement


RD

[Elamarna]

Surely an explanation is warranted to this bizarre nonsensical claim.?

Not my claim.

Steve

[Elamarna]

Steve,

You seem to be getting the picture.

Simon

No, just explaining your view.

Steve

[FISHY1118]

Not my claim.

Steve

Yes noted , its was a open question hoping for a response that never came .

[Yatish]

Can I ask - on MJK3, why is the photographer's hand / camera crudely painted on the photo? Is this normal for the standards of the day to show the position of the camera? And why would Kelly's right leg be painted on? Doesn't that just make the whole photo look a bit ridiculous? Or did this occur on other occasions during crime photography of the day - excuse my ignorance.

[Mark J D]

Can I ask - on MJK3, why is the photographer's hand / camera crudely painted on the photo? Is this normal for the standards of the day to show the position of the camera? And why would Kelly's right leg be painted on?

It looks to me that the reason the leg has been painted on is that the actual leg would have been wildly out of focus so close to the lens.

As for the seeming hand, doesn't that look like an attempt to represent the hand-hold that put the killer's bloody fingerprints on MJK's calf -- or perhaps to depict the fingerprints themselves?

M.

[Yatish]

It looks to me that the reason the leg has been painted on is that the actual leg would have been wildly out of focus so close to the lens.

As for the seeming hand, doesn't that look like an attempt to represent the hand-hold that put the killer's bloody fingerprints on MJK's calf -- or perhaps to depict the fingerprints themselves?

M.

Yes, I see what you mean and that’s a very good point regarding the leg would be totally out of focus. Just the painting on of the camera and the hand seems very bizarre to me. Nothing is painted on on MJK1, which just looks like a “normal” photo to me.

My understanding is that MJK3 was anonymously sent in 1989 to Scotland Yard. Has anyone since uncovered who sent this? An ex senior police officer?

I am an amateur student of the case, even though I don’t contribute much, but I remember reading Simon Wood’s Essay many years ago on Miller’s Court.

https://www.casebook.org/dissertations/rip-swood.html?printer=true

Regarding this part:

”That said, writing is indeed visible all over the photograph we know as MJK3. Most of it is illegible or nonsensical, probably the result of people writing on the envelope in which the photograph was kept. But at some point an original print was die stamped. In the area below the raised left knee clearly visible concentric circles contain the letters HO. Home Office? Within the circles, and to the left, a notation reads 'SIB8FGA' and, beneath, a second reads: 'pd 2/4'.”

This has always fascinated me very much. Does anyone else see this notation or has it been shown through a powerful close-up?

[Mark Hodgson]

Welcome to the Bolster debate. The bed is not flush to the wall, there is bedding stuffed down between them. The camera could have been placed there for the shot back over her towards the nighttable. Some say its a Bolster stuffed down there, some say bedding, for me, bedding is acceptable. And no, there would not be enough room for the killer/cutter to work from that side.

As for Marys position when first attacked, she is facing the partition wall, on her right side, towards the upper part of the bed and oriented to the right hand side. The blood splashes on that wall indicate arterial spray. The gap that the bedding made may not even have been there when he attacked, he might have stuffed it there before taking Mary apart.

She was on her right side facing the wall towards the right side of the bed, a position anyone might have found themselves in when their partner arrives after they had retired and intends to slip into bed with them. You know, you just scootch over a bit.

Not only does the bed appear to be apart from the wall, the headboard appears to be well away from the wall of the alley. Above Mary's head, to the right of the partition door, are vertical lines that appear to be wainscotting on the same wall. This would make the bed over a foot away from the wall of the alley (which is out of shot to the right). In addition, the headboard appears to be at more than a right angle from the wall behind. The bed has been moved down the room or, more likely, the foot of the bed has been swung out, moving the headboard from its usual place in the corner of the room to next to the partition door frame. The width of the vertical lines top right are far too wide apart to be on the same wall as the entrance door.
This is a surprise, as I thought the partition door through to the main house was very close to the alley wall.

[richardh]

Not only does the bed appear to be apart from the wall, the headboard appears to be well away from the wall of the alley. Above Mary's head, to the right of the partition door, are vertical lines that appear to be wainscotting on the same wall. This would make the bed over a foot away from the wall of the alley (which is out of shot to the right). In addition, the headboard appears to be at more than a right angle from the wall behind. The bed has been moved down the room or, more likely, the foot of the bed has been swung out, moving the headboard from its usual place in the corner of the room to next to the partition door frame. The width of the vertical lines top right are far too wide apart to be on the same wall as the entrance door.
This is a surprise, as I thought the partition door through to the main house was very close to the alley wall.

I have always felt that the position of the bed is as you have stated - a foot from the passageway wall, away from the partition wall and angled so the feet end of the bed is very close to the fireplace. Because that is where we would all place the bed in a tiny cold room in November. That is the best position to get the most warmth from the fire when you’re in bed. That was the position that Mary had the bed in on that cold November night.