MJK1 and MJK3

[Monty]

Hi Monty,

I don't make up this stuff.

Through a mortician I know, I was able to show a copy of MJK1 and MJK3 to three doctors at the Cedars-Sinai Emergency Room in Los Angeles.

They unanimously agreed that the two photos do not match.

They also declared that MJK3 contained the oddest assortment of non-human detritus they had ever encountered.

Regards,

Simon

Did they Simon?

Interesting, as the one medical man I know of, a forensic pathologist in Hertfordshire, admittedly via my brother, viewed the pre autopsy shots of Eddowes, and all the Kelly images in 2001, and did not point out any discrepancies to me.

Then again, I didn't prompt him. Did your guys view the images without prejudice, or were your concerns mentioned to them before the analysis?

Cheers
Monty

[Phil Carter]

Hello Simon,

A question if I may?

Would not the object of actually taking a photograph such as MJK3 be to enhance, at close quarters-physical human details of the murdered corpse?

Just perhaps asking the obvious.

Because if one looks at MJK1- an enhanced close up taken of the body in THAT photograph from THAT side of the bed would indeed show clear human anatomical fibre, tissue AND bone structure. Yet amazingly- it is all either painted over... or not there in MJK3.

I cant understand how a photographer using that amount of paint brush technique would believe that he was helping to enhance detail. It HIDES detail.

Phil

[Amanda Sumner]

Given the carnage wrought upon the body, I'm surprised Amanda expects anything resembling a human to remain.

Monty

So are you saying that in MJK1 there is nothing remotely like a human being, mutilated, on the bed?

[Amanda Sumner]

And your training in the field of anatomy is....?

I remember you said "nothing will convince me otherwise", etc., so all these exchanges are to some degree pointless.

That said, why don't you seek out a professional opinion, a surgeon or an anatomist, and provide them with the best versions you can of both photographs (the body on the bed, and MJK3), and see if they confirm your doubts.

It is obviously a waste of time discussing these doubts with the likes of us. It appears you are in no position to make the claims you do, and we are in no position to explain why you are wrong.
So obtain some legitimate professional opinion and then come back and tell us what they said.

Ah, Wickerman, always a pleasure...

Does one need credentials to recognise limbs, kneecaps, skin?
Is it a waste of time to discuss these things with you because you are unable to explain the inexplicable?
I think I am in a position to claim anything I want. It's up to others to either agree or disagree.
You disagree. Fine.
I think I can live with that.

[Simon Wood]

Hi Monty,

I don't make up this stuff.

Through a mortician I know, I was able to show a copy of MJK1 and MJK3 to three doctors at the Cedars-Sinai Emergency Room in Los Angeles.

They unanimously agreed that the two photos do not match.

They also declared that MJK3 contained the oddest assortment of non-human detritus they had ever encountered.

Regards,

Simon