MJK1 and MJK3

[Observer]

Simple. We are told he kept " the victim photographs under lock and key in his desk"

He would know the difference between one single photo of MjK and a wholf set of 6 or 8 or more (RE his words in the MM)

Phil

How do you know he got the full compliment of the photographs which were taken that day?

[Amanda Sumner]

How do you know he got the full compliment of the photographs which were taken that day?

Do you know that he didn't?

[GUT]

What Macnaghten said was:

A photo was taken of the woman, as she was found lying on the bed, without seeing which it is impossible to imagine the awful mutilation.

This could mean that there was one photo [out of a number of photographs taken that day] that had to be seen to appreciate the full horror of the event.

As opposed to only one photograph having been taken on the day.

[Observer]

Yes I do because we have MJK3, and a contemporary newspaper report which states that several images were taken of the remains that day. How about the reporter interviewing the photographer, still no comment from you respecting that aspect.

[Observer]

What Macnaghten said was:



This could mean that there was one photo [out of a number of photographs taken that day] that had to be seen to appreciate the full horror of the event.

As opposed to only one photograph having been taken on the day.

It sure could Gut

[Amanda Sumner]

What Macnaghten said was:



This could mean that there was one photo [out of a number of photographs taken that day] that had to be seen to appreciate the full horror of the event.

As opposed to only one photograph having been taken on the day.

It could. Although it is strange, is it not, that only one was reported missing?

[Amanda Sumner]

Yes I do because we have MJK3, and a contemporary newspaper report which states that several images were taken of the remains that day. How about the reporter interviewing the photographer, still no comment from you respecting that aspect.

Do you have access to the printed interview?
I would be very interested in that.
Suggesting that the photographer was interviewed is merely conjecture without proof that the newspapers did get information from him.

[Observer]

It could. Although it is strange, is it not, that only one was reported missing?

Could you explain yourself here, I don't understand your meaning.

[Observer]

Do you have access to the printed interview?
I would be very interested in that.

The printed interview? I asked you a straight question. Do you think it's possible that the reason the reporter knew that there were several photographs taken of the remains was down to the fact that he interviewed the photographer? Yes, or no?

[GUT]

It could. Although it is strange, is it not, that only one was reported missing?

I am not too sure what is meant, but what if at the time of writing only one was missing?

[Amanda Sumner]

The printed interview? I asked you a straight question. Do you think it's possible that the reason the reporter knew that there were several photographs taken of the remains was down to the fact that he interviewed the photographer? Yes, or no?

I thought I had answered it. Of course it's possible. Does not make it fact though, does it? Anything is possible but it's proof we need.

[Amanda Sumner]

Could you explain yourself here, I don't understand your meaning.

The original of MJK1 went missing. As far as I'm aware other photos of Mary were not ever reported missing.

[Observer]

I thought I had answered it. Of course it's possible. Does not make it fact though, does it? Anything is possible but it's proof we need.

No you did not. At least you now admit that it is possible. As Gary has also pointed out newspaper reporters received inside information from certain police officers, the reporter could have gleaned the information that more than one photograph was taken thus.

Let me ask you a question. Where do you think the reporter got his information from when he informed his readers that more than one photo was taken of the remains? Or do you think he just made it up?

[Observer]

The original of MJK1 went missing. As far as I'm aware other photos of Mary were not ever reported missing.

Why would they be? You've lost me here

[Phil Carter]

How do you know he got the full compliment of the photographs which were taken that day?

I take his word for it.

What factual evidence have you to say that specifically SIR MM didnt have them? Any written word of his? None. Its called first hand account which tops 2nd hand odd newspaper reports any day.