Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

MJK1 and MJK3

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Amanda Sumner View Post
    We don't know for a fact that more than one was taken of Mary, herself.
    We don't know for a fact there wasn't either.

    We do know more than one photo was taken, it would be illogical that others were not taken of the scene.

    Monty
    Monty

    https://forum.casebook.org/core/imag...t/evilgrin.gif

    Author of Capturing Jack the Ripper.

    http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/aw/d/1445621622

    Comment


    • Apparently having the photographer stay inside the room until 4:30 in the afternoon was to freak him out, rather than have him take more than one photograph.

      JM

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Phil Carter View Post
        Hello Monty,


        Am I correct in reading this post to mean you have evidence to show that there were, with certainty, French Officers around Millers Court? Woiuld you mind sharing this direct evidence with us? (We know that members of the Irish Constabulary were hanging around Millers Court...but French?

        Also, it is all very well to believe that this photo was one of a set, which you are very entitled to and fair enough, but based on the Bertillion Crime Scene photographic recovery process, exactly what evidence have you that

        a) it IS one of a set
        b) it IS of a crime scene a la Bertillion

        No, am not trying to extract the urine either. Just would like, quite respectfully, dead straight answers¨if that is possible?

        Fair enough if it is just a suggestion too. But to introduce the thought without explaining a known detail referring TO Millers Court is spreading the jam a little thick on the toast?... Just how I see and read it. No offence intended here at all.

        Phil
        No Phil,

        That is not what I am stating. I am saying that practices were shared, and that the Met and City police made trips to Paris in order to learn those practices.

        The French police were pioneers in forensics at that time, and were already using the camera to photograph crime scenes. It was only natural that the Met followed suit.

        Monty
        Monty

        https://forum.casebook.org/core/imag...t/evilgrin.gif

        Author of Capturing Jack the Ripper.

        http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/aw/d/1445621622

        Comment




        • Simon mentions some time ago the table was a different height to the original? The hand at the bottom looks to be the photographer's/ assistant's hand- the blurry image to the left of that,possibly his left hand.The 2 strips on the table which clearly overhang the table- cloth or skin?

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Monty View Post
            No Phil,

            That is not what I am stating. I am saying that practices were shared, and that the Met and City police made trips to Paris in order to learn those practices.

            The French police were pioneers in forensics at that time, and were already using the camera to photograph crime scenes. It was only natural that the Met followed suit.

            Monty
            Hello Monty,

            Thanks for the reply.

            And the answers to the other questions perhaps?

            "exactly what evidence have you that

            a) it IS one of a set
            b) it IS of a crime scene a la Bertillion
            "


            Most appreciated. Thank you.


            Phil
            Chelsea FC. TRUE BLUE. 💙


            Justice for the 96 = achieved
            Accountability? ....

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Monty View Post
              We don't know for a fact there wasn't either.

              We do know more than one photo was taken, it would be illogical that others were not taken of the scene.

              Monty
              I agree, and we do know that at least one photo was taken of the outside of the dwelling.

              Comment


              • There is no doubt that more than one photo was taken at the scene, but Macnaghten only mentions one taken of Mary.
                There has been nothing ever written about others taken of her, that I am aware of. Everything else is conjecture. We simply do not know.
                Which is why its provenance before 1970 would have been useful.
                Last edited by Amanda Sumner; 08-28-2014, 11:34 AM.

                Comment


                • Hi All,

                  Here's my post-modern nomination for Nick Warren's side-splitting femur idea.

                  A pair of coal tongs similar to these.

                  Click image for larger version

Name:	COAL TONGS 1.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	259.8 KB
ID:	665631

                  Regards,

                  Simon
                  Never believe anything until it has been officially denied.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Simon Wood View Post
                    Hi All,

                    Here's my post-modern nomination for Nick Warren's side-splitting femur idea.

                    A pair of coal tongs similar to these.

                    [ATTACH]16171[/ATTACH]

                    Regards,

                    Simon
                    Certainly the end of the tongs look similar....

                    Comment


                    • [QUOTE=Amanda Sumner;304673]
                      Originally posted by Wickerman View Post
                      An Autopsy is a Post-mortem, but a Post-mortem is not an Autopsy.

                      Any examination of a dead body is a post-mortem, but only the official examination authorized by the Coroner, and required to be submitted at an Inquest, is an Autopsy.

                      Dr bond conducted a post-mortem on the remains of Mary Kelly on Friday 9th Nov. as requested by Anderson in order to give Anderson his opinion on whether the wounds showed evidence of skill - that is all that he was requested to do.

                      Dr. Phillips conducted the Autopsy, ordered by Macdonald Saturday morning.
                      You appear to confuse one, with the other.QUOTE]


                      That is incorrect. An autopsy is an Americanism for postmortem. They are both the same thing.
                      I'm not going to repeat myself my dear.
                      One thing worse than someone who will not listen, is someone who will not learn.

                      "The term "autopsy" derives from the Ancient Greek autopsia, "to see for oneself", derived from αυτος (autos, "oneself") and όψις (opsis, "sight, view").[13] The word “autopsy” has been used since around the 17th century, it refers to the examination of inside the dead human body to discover diseases and cause of death."

                      In British Law it is a legally defined procedure.
                      Regards, Jon S.

                      Comment


                      • Hi Wickerman,

                        Are you normally so hugely patronizing to your wife?

                        Regards,

                        Simon
                        Never believe anything until it has been officially denied.

                        Comment


                        • OMG is Wickerman married to Amanda?

                          Originally posted by Simon Wood View Post
                          Hi Wickerman,

                          Are you normally so hugely patronizing to your wife?

                          Regards,

                          Simon
                          JtRmap.com<< JtR Interactive Map
                          JtRmap FORM << Use this form to make suggestions for map annotations
                          ---------------------------------------------------
                          JtR3d.com << JtR 3D & #VR Website
                          ---------------------------------------------------

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by richardh View Post
                            OMG is Wickerman married to Amanda?
                            OMG Jon I am so sorry! I didn't know.
                            G U T

                            There are two ways to be fooled, one is to believe what isn't true, the other is to refuse to believe that which is true.

                            Comment


                            • [QUOTE=Wickerman;304838]
                              Originally posted by Amanda Sumner View Post

                              I'm not going to repeat myself my dear.
                              One thing worse than someone who will not listen, is someone who will not learn.

                              "The term "autopsy" derives from the Ancient Greek autopsia, "to see for oneself", derived from αυτος (autos, "oneself") and όψις (opsis, "sight, view").[13] The word “autopsy” has been used since around the 17th century, it refers to the examination of inside the dead human body to discover diseases and cause of death."

                              In British Law it is a legally defined procedure.
                              Wickerman, my dear.

                              I was wrong...I admit it , I said it was Americanism, I was wrong. They use the word but do not use the word postmortem for an autopsy, but in English English, the former came into common use around 1850. We use postmortem examination, postmortem for short, more often than autopsy. However, dear, they mean exactly the same thing.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by GUT View Post
                                OMG Jon I am so sorry! I didn't know.

                                It's news to me too, Gut but, alas, I do not have that pleasurable, I'm sure, status in his life.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X