MJK1 & MJK3 don't tally!

[richardh]

Here's the link to the short YouTube video to show a bit more.
YouTube Link

[Magpie]

Forgive my ignorance. What's the item on the left side of the table?

Oh dear.

As per the traditions of the casebook, you must now shove a radish up your bottom and sing "I've got a lovely bunch of coconuts" in a Belgian accent.

[lynn cates]

purpose

Hello Richard. Nice work. Looks almost as if MJK3 was done to show the exact extent of injury to the thighs.

Cheers.
LC

[richardnunweek]

Hi,
All joking aside , that item on the table is actually there , and should be discussed in a rational manner, it has all the hallmarks of a bolster, or some kind of bedding .
To ignore that distinct possibility, and what it may suggest, is not helpful to the vast number of people who visit this site, in an attempt to understand these murders.
Regards Richard.

[lynn cates]

moved

Hello Richard. IF it is a bolster, could not the police have moved it to the table to get a clearer shot of the cadaver?

Cheers.
LC

[richardnunweek]

Hi Lynn,
Possibly, but where was it originally, and why not sling it on the floor.
I don't know what the procedure was for 1888 police, but today, objects found at the crime scene remain stationary, until the investigation, and inventory is completed.
Also why put the item onto a blood stained table amongst heaps of flesh?
I would suggest that the item was there before the flesh was.
Regards Richard.

[Cogidubnus]

Since we're being serious

That plus the bed being moved (to enable the photograph in the first place) are in my view very sensible suggestions...but then we have to ask where the bed was before being moved, and where was the bolster before being moved (pushed down between the bed and the partition?)

All the best

Dave

PS Hello Richard...just saw your post (we crossed) and I agree

[lynn cates]

reasons

Hello Richard. Thanks. As for procedure, perhaps Neil can say something?

If "MJK" placed it there, perhaps it was not needed? Could it be the assailant-- for the same reason?

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

position

Hello Dave. Given the blood splashes, perhaps it was next the wall?

Cheers.
LC

[Tecs]

Tecs, I doubt I can prove anything but it's an interesting exercise nontheless.

R

It is indeed, fascinating too.

What grabs me is simply that I've been looking at these photos for over twenty years and have seen clearly that her left leg is down in the first photo and up in the second, but never thought why?

Shows that there are still things to be found from the info we have available.

thanks,

regards,

[Tecs]

Just been thinking,

complete speculation and totally unproveable, but I wonder if someone in the room, perhaps influenced by Victorian ideas of decency, attempted to close her legs to afford the poor girl a modicum of decency? But then was told "No point, we've already taken one photo like that, leave her as it is. You can't really see anything anyway." Or

"No! Don't move her, you must leave her as she is."

"Why? We're only here to photograph the injuries aren't we?"

"Just do as you're told and leave her."

Interesting to think that, as was portrayed in Ripper Street reasonably accurately, this was the beginings of photographic pornography. In our world today we think nothing of it. But how would a prudish Victorian man respond to this situation? Remember we are surrounded by, what we English call "smut!", but back then, nobody would have seen anything like it.

Several victims were found in this pose, but Mary is the only one to be photographed like that. Probably just because she was indoors and it could be done.

Pure speculation!

regards,

[richardh]

could the thing that keeps getting referred to as a bolster actually be the bedclothes that can be sen in MJK1 at MJK's right leg? Maybe when they took the 2nd photo (MJK3) they moved those bedclothes onto the table (bolster position)?

[Bridewell]

the Item On The Table

On balance, after looking at both photos, I tend towards the view that it's the bedclothes. There looks to be a distinctive fold which appears, largely unchanged, in each image. If MJK1 was taken first, the bedclothes would have to be moved before taking MJK3 as otherwise they would have fallen onto the floor when the bed was moved to gain camera access. If that's right it supports the view that MJK1 was taken first because, had the bedclothes been on the table from the outset, they could have been left there for both photos,

[richardh]

On balance, after looking at both photos, I tend towards the view that it's the bedclothes. There looks to be a distinctive fold which appears, largely unchanged, in each image. If MJK1 was taken first, the bedclothes would have to be moved before taking MJK3 as otherwise they would have fallen onto the floor when the bed was moved to gain camera access. If that's right it supports the view that MJK1 was taken first because, had the bedclothes been on the table from the outset, they could have been left there for both photos,

Yep, that's what I said. I concur!

[RivkahChaya]

Hello Richard. IF it is a bolster, could not the police have moved it to the table to get a clearer shot of the cadaver?

Cheers.
LC

If it was under her head, or part of her body, and moved before the police took any photos, then apparently there wasn't much rigor in the torso.

The only place under her body I can imagine the killer putting it is under her knees, to keep then in the bent and up position, because once he cut tendons from her thighs, her legs would have fallen down. So maybe there was some rigor in her gluts keeping her legs in that position.

I wonder if the killer quit when he did, because rigor was beginning to set in, and the muscles were getting too tough to cut.

Is it even remotely possible he could have somehow known that heat slowed down rigor, and that was the reason for the fire? did slaughterers know that? I know that rigor was a "problem" for the meat industry, and at some point, a technique for sending an electric current through freshly killed animals was developed to somehow induce some kind of chemical reaction that got rid of one of the chemicals necessary for rigor. I don't remember the details, though. Was heat ever used as a way of retarding rigor? I know it causes meat to spoil, but since people didn't understand about bacteria and toxins, keeping the meat warm until it could be frozen, or sold, might have happened, I have no knowledge whatsoever of the history of the meat industry.