MJK1 and MJK3

[Observer]

I have. Or so I believe.

Rob

What kind of condition was it in Rob? Was it faded? Did it look as though it had any age?

Observer

[Observer]

To be fair , there`s nowt wrong with starting a thread pointing out perceived inaccuracies in an item, but demanding provenance !! Especially when it`s our very own hysterical, paranoid poster apparently fighting the good fight for the sake of us all :-)

Say no more Jon, say no more!

[Debra A]

So do I Debra.

That's good to know, Observer.

[Monty]

Absolutely, Observer.
Everyone should (and generally do) reach their own conclusions as to the validity of material.
My only concern is that this hysterical questioning of material may result in someone not making any new finds available to all, and keeping such material to themselves.

That is happening.

Monty

[Observer]

That's good to know, Observer.

I'd go further and say it's the real deal.

[Jon Guy]

That is happening.

Monty

I wouldn't blame them either, Neil.

[Debra A]

I'd go further and say it's the real deal.

It's my top one. An old reconstruction to illustrate the mutilations at a push.

[Rob Clack]

What kind of condition was it in Rob? Was it faded? Did it look as though it had any age?

Observer

The print looked identical to the other Kelly photo but I can't say too much about it as o have my own issues with it. Nothing to do with its authenticity I may add.

Rob

[Observer]

The print looked identical to the other Kelly photo but I can't say too much about it as o have my own issues with it. Nothing to do with its authenticity I may add.

Rob

Ok. Thanks for that.

[Beowulf]

Hi Beowulf,

MJK3 was not in the envelope postmarked Croydon.

It arrived with other stuff from the Millen family.

Regards,

Simon

Was hoping to find out who the Millen family was or is. Can anyone answer this?

[Amanda Sumner]

Was hoping to find out who the Millen family was or is. Can anyone answer this?

This is all I found,

http://www.casebook.org/dissertations/dst-kelly.html

[Daisyhall1]

To be fair , there`s nowt wrong with starting a thread pointing out perceived inaccuracies in an item, but demanding provenance !! Especially when it`s our very own hysterical, paranoid poster apparently fighting the good fight for the sake of us all :-)

Jon,I don't think Amanda is being hysterical or paranoid,she is simply questioning the history of this photograph and saying until there are answers the debate will continue,as it seems to be doing.There seem to be enough people interested in this photograph for the thread to continue.In the scheme of things of course we can be certain a young woman was murdered in Millers Court on that night - that is certain in my view.Who and why is open to discussion.The thread has evolved fron Amanda's legitimate concerns,to some dismissive comments on her thoughts,to Simon's recent comments,and so on.I just worry that some less experienced posters will be put off posting on Casebook because of personal rebuke.I think what we all have in common is a serious interest in all elements of the case or why are we here?

[Wickerman]

In MJK3 there is no human anatomy visible, except a hand. No obvious bone structure, no visible pale skin, no obvious limbs, knee caps, human tissue or debris remotely recognisable as belonging to a human body and where there might be it seems to be covered up with nearly pleated cloth.

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.

[Simon Wood]

Hi Wickerman,

Originally Posted by Amanda Sumner
In MJK3 there is no human anatomy visible, except a hand. No obvious bone structure, no visible pale skin, no obvious limbs, knee caps, human tissue or debris remotely recognisable as belonging to a human body and where there might be it seems to be covered up with nearly pleated cloth.

Amanda is quite correct.

Regards,

Simon

[Monty]

Hi Wickerman,



Amanda is quite correct.

Regards,

Simon

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

Monty