Could MJK have survived Miller's Court

[RivkahChaya]

Hello Rivkah.

"But I wonder if her legs would have been in that position, because so much tissue was missing"

Possibly. I wonder, though, if it could be that way because the assailant needed room to work?

Cheers.
LC

I phrased that very badly.

Obviously, the legs were in the sort of "examination" position (all you need are stirrups) because the killer put them there; there weren't put there later by the police.

Someone later suggested that they then froze that way in rigor, the evidence being the supposed need for some unusual kind of box to cart her away.

I'm questioning whether the language really merits the assumption that there was anything special about the size or shape of the box, first of all, and then second, I'm wondering whether, regardless of rigor, her legs would necessarily be frozen at the pelvic and knee joints, because of the amount of muscle missing.

[lynn cates]

room

Hello Rivkah.

"But I wonder if her legs would have been in that position, because so much tissue was missing"

Possibly. I wonder, though, if it could be that way because the assailant needed room to work?

Cheers.
LC

[RivkahChaya]

I have been trying to find out, but Google-fu is failing, and I'm squeamish about directly questioning the right people, because I'd probably end up going on at length about the Jack-the-Ripper MB I post to, yadda, yadda.

But I wonder if her legs would have been in that position, because so much tissue was missing, not because of the time it takes for rigor to set in. From what I understand of the autopsy report, her gluteal (butt) muscles, and hamstrings were intact, but with the opposing muscles not present, and the femurs and pelvis being some of the heaviest bones in the body, I wonder if there would have been an illusion of incomplete rigor. Maybe they could pull her legs down, or at least fold her knees together.

[lynn cates]

lucky me

Hello Mike. Thanks.

Of course, if it can have onset in 10 minutes, what could happen in 2-3 hours?

Cheers.
LC

[Michael W Richards]

Hello Mike. It CAN have onset in as little as 10 minutes.

http://chemistry.about.com/cs/biochemistry/a/aa061903a.htm

A good title with "Number 13" in it? Your wish is my command, Effendi.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WB11l54HBbw

Cheers.
LC

Hi Lynn,

Since we are in the early stages of 2013 should we be extra cautious based upon your Triskaidekaphobia?

I read the link Lynn, and 10 minutes may be enough to initiate a process...although its the first time Ive read that brief amount of time is enough.... but its not enough to stiffen limbs, and I believe thats the implication here.

I believe that Mary was taken from the room in a box, not a wooden coffin, which, based on the position of her legs in MJK1, may have been needed for its extra width...assuming her legs were fixed in that position.

Cheers Lynn

[lynn cates]

rigourous

Hello Mike. It CAN have onset in as little as 10 minutes.

http://chemistry.about.com/cs/biochemistry/a/aa061903a.htm

A good title with "Number 13" in it? Your wish is my command, Effendi.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WB11l54HBbw

Cheers.
LC

[Michael W Richards]

Hi Tecs,

Id like to address a couple of points made below by both you and Bridewell if I may. There seems to be a few key points here.

Q: What reason is there to believe that the woman in Mary Kelly's bed was not Mary Kelly? Which woman went missing on the night that Kelly died and never re-appeared? Are you aware of one? If not, why not accept the likelihood that the occupant of the bed was Mary Kelly?

A. The minimalist manner in which Barnett, her most recent lover, could identify the body...the fact that the remains were so extensively mutilated, lending credence to a suspicion that the reason for that was the anticipated"identification",...the fact that we dont know that an actual baptized Mary Kelly rented that room, or whether it was someone else using that name,...and we would have no records for a faceless street waif, long lost to the accountability of the system, if she simply vanished one night. And technically, she could have disappeared earlier that week. These are a few reasons off the top of my head.

Statement: I don't dismiss Maxwell's story.

Rebuttal: You should though,..... she barely knew the woman, and her evidence, as the coroner at the Inquest pointed out to her, differs from all the other evidence, including Bonds. She claims a woman that lived down the street from her, to whom she said basically "Good day" twice in 4 months, is suddenly calling her by her first name and spilling her guts out both figuratively and literally? Then of course there is also the scientific data.

BWQ: Isn't the more credible alternative version that Bond was wrong in his estimation of the time of death? It was, at best, an approximation. That seems (to me anyway) more likely than the substitute body scenario.

A: Rigor had commenced when she was first examined in the early afternoon, that is not compatible with her death happening 4 hours earlier. The onset of rigor is variable, sure, but there are minimum time thresholds before it can appear, 4-5 hours isnt enough time.

Statement: I agree that an incorrect estimate of T.O.D. is more likely but opens another can of worms, namely the Ripper veering from his usual M.O. and committing murder not only in broad daylight CF Chapman, but for a length of time through the morning and the morning of the Lord Mayor's show at that, when many, many people were sure to be up and about. The chances of being seen leaving No13 if he left at 10-11 AM must have been enourmous and Jack just didn't take risks like that.

Rebuttal: Although I am against the "Jack" inference, I would say that the killer egress issues with a later murder time are daunting. As is the science.

Statement: Also, the witness stories through the night seem consistent. Cry of Murder at 4ish, someone leaving the court around 5:30 (I think off the top of my head) and the doctors observation that it would take around that sort of time, 90 minutes to dissect the body and the guess that T.O.D. was some time in the night/early hours. These simple points all suggest a straightforward scenario, but then there's that damn Maxwell and her evidence!

Rebuttal: The fly in the ointment is only troublesome if you let it be, on the science alone, it remains but a fly.

Q:What reason is there to believe that the woman in Mary Kelly's bed was not Mary Kelly?

A: See above.

There comes a time in every investigation I would think that some evidence has to be assessed for its trustworthiness,.. using mathematics, using proven scientific principles, or perhaps even just using Occam's Razor.

The Investigation of the Murder in Room 13.....(sounds like a good book title to me..)...has witness evidence within it that cannot be relied on. It also has guesstimates and approximations made by the Investigators,..but surely some leeway can be extended there.

All the best

[lynn cates]

risky

Hello Colin.

"Jack (if there was one) seems to have taken all sorts of risks - and got away with doing so."

Well spoke, mate.

Cheers.
LC

[RivkahChaya]

There would have been nothing remarkable about a man leaving 13, Millers Court and it wouldn't have mattered unless he was actually seen emerging from the door, as only that would link him to her. MJK made her living through prostitution. It wouldn't have mattered if he was seen in Millers Court, as long as he wasn't noticed - if that's not too fine a distinction.

Well, and he needed not to be stopped, which means he needed not to emerge conspicuously blood-covered. But JTR apparently managed to get around inconspicuously blood-spattered, or covered up, or cleaned up somehow, so that he wouldn't be stopped. He'd had a few practice runs, and if he had dark clothing, a little spatter wouldn't show, plus he probably had a coat, which he wasn't wearing when he did the killing.

There would need to be just a little water (or even coffee, or beer) for him to get blood off his hands and face, and he was good to go. People were generally grimier then, so a little left around the fingernails wouldn't matter.

[Bridewell]

The chances of being seen leaving No13 if he left at 10-11 AM must have been enourmous

There would have been nothing remarkable about a man leaving 13, Millers Court and it wouldn't have mattered unless he was actually seen emerging from the door, as only that would link him to her. MJK made her living through prostitution. It wouldn't have mattered if he was seen in Millers Court, as long as he wasn't noticed - if that's not too fine a distinction.

Regards, Bridewell.

[Bridewell]

I

agree that an incorrect estimate of T.O.D. is more likely but opens another can of worms, namely the Ripper veering from his usual M.O. and committing murder not only in broad daylight CF Chapman, but for a length of time through the morning and the morning of the Lord Mayor's show at that, when many, many people were sure to be up and about. The chances of being seen leaving No13 if he left at 10-11 AM must have been enourmous and Jack just didn't take risks like that.

Hi Tecs,

If the correct number of murders by the same was five (as per MacNaghten), and if the Chapman murder was committed at or around the Cadosch/Long time estimate, that would make 40% of the murders at or after daybreak against 60% during the hours of darkness.

Jack just didn't take risks like that.

Jack (if there was one) seems to have taken all sorts of risks - and got away with doing so.

Regards, Bridewell.

[RivkahChaya]

Coming from Ireland. Speaking with a pronounced Irish accent ditto above
etc.

Since this was before any kind of mass media, we can't be certain that people in the East End would know what an Irish accent sounded like. They were probably aware that people born there had a distinct way of speaking, and that people who lived in the wealthier part of town, but with whom they interacted frequently, spoke differently, and they knew that foreigners had pronounced accents. They could probably identify an accent of a large community of foreigners who stayed together, like the Yiddish speaking E. European Jews, but I think it's a bit much to expect that they could tell a Welsh accent from an Irish accent. They probably couldn't tell different upper class accents apart, either; there was probably just one "toff" accent, as far as they were concerned.

Who said anything about dismissing witnesses? ... I don't dismiss Maxwell's story.

Isn't the more credible alternative version that Bond was wrong in his estimation of the time of death?...

Regards, Bridewell.
....

Hi Bridewell,

So much agreement!

I agree that an incorrect estimate of T.O.D. is more likely but opens another can of worms, namely the Ripper veering from his usual M.O.

Personally, I think the fact that he was indoors can account for that. I think the age of the victim is a more serious deviation from his MO than the time of day, or the extent of the mutilations, both of which can be accounted for by the fact that MJK had a private space to offer, which none of the previous victims did.

Also, the witness stories through the night seem consistent. Cry of Murder at 4ish

I'm prepared to dismiss "cry of murder" out of hand. Unless someone can demonstrate that the person who gave that statement did not yet know a murder had been committed at the time of the statement, it sounds to me like retrofitting; someone heard something, which after the fact was remembered as "murder." Aside from the fact that it is just a very human thing to do, and exactly the way our memories work, "Oh, murder," is a very odd thing to say on discovering a body. I know it has been said that it was a Victorian expression, like "bloody hell," but if that's the case, then it could have been said for a number of reasons that have nothing to do with a literal murder.

[Tecs]

Who said anything about dismissing witnesses? All I asked was:-
What reason is there to believe that the woman in Mary Kelly's bed was not Mary Kelly? Which woman went missing on the night that Kelly died and never re-appeared? Are you aware of one? If not, why not accept the likelihood that the occupant of the bed was Mary Kelly?


I don't dismiss Maxwell's story.

Isn't the more credible alternative version that Bond was wrong in his estimation of the time of death? It was, at best, an approximation. That seems (to me anyway) more likely than the substitute body scenario.


Regards, Bridewell.


Hi Bridewell,

So much agreement!

I agree that an incorrect estimate of T.O.D. is more likely but opens another can of worms, namely the Ripper veering from his usual M.O. and committing murder not only in broad daylight CF Chapman, but for a length of time through the morning and the morning of the Lord Mayor's show at that, when many, many people were sure to be up and about. The chances of being seen leaving No13 if he left at 10-11 AM must have been enourmous and Jack just didn't take risks like that.

Also, the witness stories through the night seem consistent. Cry of Murder at 4ish, someone leaving the court around 5:30 (I think off the top of my head) and the doctors observation that it would take around that sort of time, 90 minutes to dissect the body and the guess that T.O.D. was some time in the night/early hours. These simple points all suggest a straightforward scenario, but then there's that damn Maxwell and her evidence!

To answer your questions directly.

What reason is there to believe that the woman in Mary Kelly's bed was not Mary Kelly?

Only really that two witnessess said that they saw her at a time which means the time of death must have been wrong if the body was MJK. So not really a massive reason to think so, but as I've said before people have been hanged on the evidence of one witness so two people telling the same story have to be taken seriously. As we've pretty much agreed, the idea that they got the day wrong is ridiculous, so either they were lying, or the T.O.D. is wrong, if the body was MJK.

Which woman went missing on the night that Kelly died and never re-appeared?

I have no idea! All we know is that other women did use the room so it is not impossible that someone else was using the room on that fateful night as we know they did in the run up to the 9th. I imagine that many of the women were also unknowns, runaways, used aliases etc so if one of them went missing at the same time would anyone actually notice or care?


regards,

PS Happy new year everyone!

[Wickerman]

On the other hand, the other invented variables are the ones that need to be tested and these are where the story falls down. ie no need to mention anything about Wales or pit accidents so these are either true additions or made up parts. These happen to be the parts that we haven't found any trace of, so maybe it points to the story more likely being untrue?

regards,

One of the best ways to maintain a lie, is to blend it with the truth.

The problem for latter-day researchers is where to draw the line.

Not locating a marriage to a Davies/Davis; not locating medical records of a stay in hospital in Cardiff; no name on a passenger list of a ship to France (has anybody looked?), may only mean we are looking under the wrong name.

All we can claim to be aware of is that she used the name "Marie Jeanette Kelly" from her days at Pennington St. onwards.

Regards, Jon S.

[lynn cates]

available evidence

Hello Tecs.

"So maybe we could look at the chances of three serial killers......."

Indeed. Or, perhaps just the available evidence?

Cheers.
LC