MJK1 & MJK3 don't tally!

[RivkahChaya]

I wish a single (twin) was the same as an outside door. We would have so much trouble getting them in, and it wouldn't be so much trouble getting wheelchairs in houses. 'Course, there's still the damn ramp problem, but getting a ramp is easier than widening a doorway.

Do you typically measure your mattresses in feet still? Or did you just give feet on the Kelly mattress because feet would have been used in the 1880s? I know the UK has for the most part gone metric, but there are still a few things non-standard measures are used for-- I still hear people's weights given in stones, which translated exactly to what the US calls a "standard" measure (ie, inches, feet, yards; ounces, pounds; pints, gallons), and not metric. Anyone in the US who does college prep science in high school, auto mechanics, computers, or is in the military, learns metrics, though. Also, every American knows what two liters is.

[Wickerman]

Thankyou Richard, Rivkah.

Yes, a single was about the width of an average outside door, about 36" wide.
The bed in the photo (Kelly) looks wider than an average door, but not anything near enough to be a double size (English).
Three-quarter (48"w) is a good approximation seeing as we have no definitive data.

Regards, Jon S.

[RivkahChaya]

Hmmm. I just measured, and 4'x6'+ (it happens to be 6'3) is what we call a double in the US (you can buy "extended doubles" if you are tall). It's what our futon is when opened. Our bed is "queen-sized," and is 5'x6.5' (6'6). There's also something called "full-sized," which I always thought was another word for "double," but the sheets that I have that are double are a little big, sideways, for the futon, so "full-sized" may be a short queen-sized. My son's "twin" is 3.25' (3'3)x6.25' (6'3). You can get mattresses that are usually described as "cot," which are about the size of Army bunks, and are about 2.25' (2'3)x6.25' (6'3). There're also crib-sized mattresses, which is a standard size, and is about the same width as "cot," but about 18" shorter.

"Cot" in the US doesn't mean a baby's bed; it means a folding bed, like the kind you might take camping, or that might be used in barracks. My mother still has trouble with the word "futon," and calls our futon chair (which is where I got the 2.25'x6.25') a "cot" when it is unfolded.

Just to clarify terms. There's 2.54 cm to an inch, or slightly over 30 to a foot.

[richardh]

Some years ago I had reason to show the missus the original photo, Stewart had kindly sent me a package of photo's. She felt quite certain the bed was a three-quarter, a little larger than a single but smaller than a double.

Regards, Jon S.

Yes, maybe, like this one which is 4' x 6'3"...



© Source

[RivkahChaya]

We had a female tv chef/cook here years ago called Fanny Craddock!

Did the name mean that then? I saw a friend's mother's high school year book, and there was a guy named "Dick Head." I sort of hope he didn't live long enough to learn what that eventually came to mean. I also hope his real name was "Richard," just in case there were any juniors.

Does anyone think this portion circled in red is her right hand?

It looks like the webbed, front flipper (or whatever) of the Creature from the Black Lagoon. Only daintier, and more feminine.

There's actually a surgical technique (new) for women who are donating a kidney as live donors, where the kidney is removed through the vaginal wall, so there's, y'know, juxtaposition. I'm not sure what my point is, except that there's such a mess, you can't really tell what the, well, goal was. Is it possible her pelvis was pulled apart? There's a fissure that has to pull apart to deliver a baby, so in a young woman, I suppose it's possible.

OK. I'm really creeped out now. I should not post to a JTR site after nine pm, EST. DH and the boychik are both in bed. I'm going to watch the "I have a dream" speech I DVR'd earlier, and go to bed as well.

[Wickerman]

Thanks, yes, I do consider what Bond wrote, but then we have to ask, at what stage of the post mortem was this photo taken?

If, as you say, the right arm is not in view here, then where is it?

There is nothing to obscure the arm, the abdomen has been cut away. Bond does not say it is lying tight down the side of the body (ie; out of view), it is "slightly abducted from the body".

Where is it?

Regards, Jon S.

[MajorParts]

I thought similar once (I thought her upper arm was visible), but according to Dr.Bond..."The right arm was slightly abducted from the body and rested on the mattress. The elbow was bent, the forearm supine with the fingers clenched."

So the right arm was slightly pulled away from the body, the elbow bent and the forearm/clenched hand facing upwards.

I don't think the right arm or hand is visible anymore.

[Wickerman]

Does anyone think this portion circled in red is her right hand?
I have always thought so, it hangs over or, on the far right side of the bed.
It doesn't appear to be laying down her right side, but almost perpendicular from her torso.



Regards, Jon S.

[MajorParts]

I would never have thought of googling the name! Googling "Major Parts" won't tell you if I'm male or female, and will probably return pages about car spares or something

Hade you been male, it would have made sense that you couldn't acheive that pose due to narrower hips and the shorter length of the bone that joins the thighbone to hip bone, but if it's still difficult for a female, then I would have to agree that you're probably not as flexible as you once were, or MJKs legs were forced into that position with joints popping out of place or something.

I'm glad you weren't offended, as no offence was intended

Yes, I am from the UK. The East End of London in fact! I'm pretty sure I have at least 1 ancestor who was a butcher in the Whitechapel area around 1888 too! Who knows, I might be the Great Great Great Grandson of Jack!

We had a female tv chef/cook here years ago called Fanny Craddock!

[RivkahChaya]

however, some of us have heard of this miraculous "google" thingy...

Yeah, but if he didn't even know it was a name in the first place, it's just as well to ask. I'm not offended, just slightly surprised.

I assumed for a long time that Errata was a man, just because I know another Errata on another MB who I know for a fact is a man. She set me straight, though.

There are probably common UK names that aren't familiar to me. There are other names that are more commonly girls' names in the US, as I understand it, and more commonly boys' names in the UK. I understand you have a lot of laughs any time we mention Fanny Brice, and that there was some debate over whether or not to voice-over the name of the middle son when Tim Allen's TV show Home Improvement was broadcast in the UK. What do you call men whose full name is Randolph?

[Cogidubnus]

Frankly the name Rivkah Chaya would probably be a total mystery to most of us right pond (and I suspect this is where Parts originates)...however, some of us have heard of this miraculous "google" thingy...

All the best

Dave

[RivkahChaya]

Are you male or female though?

I'm female. Where are you from? Rivkah Chaya doesn't read as a woman's name? I know it's really unusual outside of Jewish circles (I've never met a gentile Rivkah), but I haven't met too many people in the US who didn't have some vague awareness that "Rivkah" = "Rebekah/Rebecca" in the bible.

FWIW, I've had a baby, so I'm aware just what contortions can happen, and her legs are pretty darned far apart.

Also, RE: how limber I was in my salad days: I could put my feet behind my head. Only one at a time, but most people were pretty impressed. Hmm. I can touch my big toe to my forehead, but only if I lean over. Ooh. I hope that sound came from the chair.

[MajorParts]

I tried to get into the "from the door" pose (just now, and for totally academic reasons), I couldn't, because the thighs are spread too wide.

Are you male or female though?

[RivkahChaya]

Looking closely at MJK3 though, it seems that a lot of it is painted as there are what looks like brush strokes on both legs. The mess of skin on the table appears to extend past the edge of the table too! With MJK1, the edge of the table looks to be inline with her elbow, but MJK3 shows it going way past there.

I'm not sure what you consider brushstrokes, but FWIW, photographers did touch up plates, and no one considered that there was anything wrong with it. First, people didn't really "get" the idea of focus, and didn't always understand why only one portion of a picture was in focus, so a photographer would sometimes touch up the very close portions of a picture to make them look more in focus, second, since he couldn't take lots of shots, if something dripped on the negative, and he had a spot, he'd touch it up. It was the way things were done.

Now, a forensic photographer takes so many shots, that there will be something usable as evidence, and other photographers take lots of shots, and anyway, if there is a problem, photographers other than journalists can generally just retake it. Back then, a retake of even a portrait was laborious, and someone would rather have the background, or even their feet, touched up, rather than the ordeal of dressing up, going to the studio, and sitting still for five minutes.

[richardh]

I think the femur is off, and I think the reason is that you can't get the wooden model into the right position.

I'm not as limber as I was when I was 25, but I was pretty flexible once, and I tried to get into the "from the door" pose (just now, and for totally academic reasons), I couldn't, because the thighs are spread too wide. The muscles and probably ligaments and tendons on the inside of the thigh near the pubis have been cut, so the leg is hyper-extended. The joint might even be dislocated, I don't know, but the leg is definitely pulled unnaturally away from the thigh. The foreshortening in the upper leg hides it a little, but the pubic region is just too big. I know you can see what is what, but the space is still too big.

I'm not entirely sure what is holding up the piece of fabric on the leg closest to the camera in the "from the door" picture. It looks like the end of her femur is sticking up, but her leg is lying fully on the bed.



Sorry if that is really hard to see: the labels are "femur stump" and "patella." It looks like the leg has at least been partly disarticulated, at the bowed thing in the "from the wall" picture is either a tendon or ligament that is taut somehow, or maybe even a muscle that is in rigor, or maybe it is the fibula, somehow. If the tibia were disarticulated from the knee joint, and the tibia were not, you could have what seems like an optical illusion of the leg both bent, and lying fully on the bed. I can't find anything on point in the commonly available documents on Kelly-- that is, the official postmortem & autopsy reports, and the inquest.

I think we've just reopened the debate