MJK2/MJK3 Hand comparison

[Hunter]

I knowed all that Latin I took in first grade was going to be impodent some day.

E Pubus Uranus

[MrBarnett]

Gents,

Why didn't you say that in first place? It's clear as day now.

MrB

[Monty]

Ah yes, deep joyum indeed.

Writing verbally thrips oratory I always find, when answering questihoes, may be unclearben and to can write for a month of Sunday but no. Take a beadyeyebold of the picturehoes and don't underestimatum the effect of the anglelode and kissum deep joyfold. Seeing faces in the cloudus doesn't helpus, no, but when you adjust the focusmost, new modlo you know, again deep joylode. Fuzzy corns don't help but can't be avoid, no. But peoploes will always be peoploes and see what we findlode.

Musicum to the eardrobes. I concury with your oritoriness on the subjecti, most perfectlode summatorium.


Monty

[Stewart P Evans]

Ah yes,

Deep joy Stewart
Monty

Ah yes, deep joyum indeed.

Writing verbally thrips oratory I always find, when answering questihoes, may be unclearben and to can write for a month of Sunday but no. Take a beadyeyebold of the picturehoes and don't underestimatum the effect of the anglelode and kissum deep joyfold. Seeing faces in the cloudus doesn't helpus, no, but when you adjust the focusmost, new modlo you know, again deep joylode. Fuzzy corns don't help but can't be avoid, no. But peoploes will always be peoploes and see what we findlode.

[Monty]

Ah, but if you take into account the anglemode of the specifically placed camera standymode seen from the viewseypoint of the photograph resultingly obtainedum we may see the lightymode. - SU

Deep joy Stewart

Monty

[Stewart P Evans]

Ah...

...
Re the photos, I have to say that what I first saw as a thumb I now see as a little finger. However, I still have a problem with the oblong table in 3 that doesn't seem to correspond to the square one in 1. No doubt all will become clear in the fullness of time.
MrB

Ah, but if you take into account the anglemode of the specifically placed camera standymode seen from the viewseypoint of the photograph resultingly obtainedum we may see the lightymode. - SU

[MrBarnett]

Hi Natasha,

I think it's all to do with the titles. If I had called mine, 'Jack The Geo-omniscient? - your avin' a laff!', it might have attracted a more appreciative audience.

Re the photos, I have to say that what I first saw as a thumb I now see as a little finger. However, I still have a problem with the oblong table in 3 that doesn't seem to correspond to the square one in 1. No doubt all will become clear in the fullness of time.


MrB

[Amanda Sumner]

Thanks to both of you, MrB and Natasha.

I should think that anything in this case is possible Natasha. Why not a severed finger?
However, I would have thought that Bond would have noticed it and reported it, but as you say it was not an exhaustive report.

Regards,

Amanda

[Natasha]

Amanda ,

For confirmation of how well you did, take a look at my 'How Well Did Jack Know The East End ' thread. It fell flat as a pancake. Yours rose like a Victoria sponge. Well done you!

MrB

Hi MrB

Don't worry about it, so did my post: who else should have been investigated.

There are a lot of people who keep going on about the same things, and some start arguments on threads, and this causes some posts within threads to be overlooked.

[Natasha]

Hi All

Amanda: I think it's great that you started this thread, because it has made everyone look close at the pics, and question elements about it. Although I don't see why the picture would have been forged, unless someone made a pic to pretend Kelly was dead, and to be honest as I've said before I'm not 100% on my theory concerning this.

I wanted to thank you for drawing my attention to the pic, because I have a another theory concerning the pic. It has been noted that Kelly may have worked as a seamstress. Of course it was used as a job description for prostitutes. But I think that she really did.
The lack of definition to the finger, makes it harder to ascertain from the pic, weather it's a thumb or little finger.

I think Kelly did work as a seamstress maybe even in the lace and silk trade. I think she may have lost part of her little finger.
I know it's not noted in Bond's report, but it's not an exhaustive report.

If Kelly's finger is indeed missing this could help narrow down who she was. Also in Bond's report he noted that there was nodules on kelly's lungs. It is known in the lace and silk etc trades that many workers suffered from white lung; problems with the lungs, ie; acute respiratory distress syndrome.

What do you lot think about the possibility that kelly had part of her little finger cut off?

[MrBarnett]

Amanda ,

For confirmation of how well you did, take a look at my 'How Well Did Jack Know The East End ' thread. It fell flat as a pancake. Yours rose like a Victoria sponge. Well done you!

MrB

[Amanda Sumner]

Hi Amanda,
try not to get discouraged. Your input is appreciated.

I did want to thank you for coming on here and asking the questions that you did and for surviving the comments and such...because you did this, I was able to find out some real answers to questions I've always had about that photo but was afraid to ask. I'm too sensitive to be a Ripper researcher! Well, the questions I've had in the past WERE asked, but no real answers were given, just that we should accept the photo at face value because we just should! I have a much better grasp on the history behind it now because of these threads.

But seriously, for me and a lot of others, hopping a plane and heading to London to do our own research is just a pipe dream. I realize there are people out there that will piggy-back off of others' hard work and try to claim glory for themselves, but a lot of us are just hobbyists hoping one day the answer to "Jack" will be found. I am very appreciative of those who have shared their knowledge with us.

Yes, indeed, and thank you for your kind words.
I appreciate it too, and despite what people have said I was petrified coming on here which is why I was so adamant.
I still believe what I believe, but I think I shall leave it to others to get to the bottom of it.
I've learnt a lot too, as you say, but I'm just a hobbyist, like you.
I've met some good people along the way, and some really put themselves out to help me. They know who they are.

For a debate that was considered "invalid" I don't think we did too badly, do you?

Kind regards,

Amanda

[Brenda]

.

Hi Amanda,
try not to get discouraged. Your input is appreciated.

I did want to thank you for coming on here and asking the questions that you did and for surviving the comments and such...because you did this, I was able to find out some real answers to questions I've always had about that photo but was afraid to ask. I'm too sensitive to be a Ripper researcher! Well, the questions I've had in the past WERE asked, but no real answers were given, just that we should accept the photo at face value because we just should! I have a much better grasp on the history behind it now because of these threads.

But seriously, for me and a lot of others, hopping a plane and heading to London to do our own research is just a pipe dream. I realize there are people out there that will piggy-back off of others' hard work and try to claim glory for themselves, but a lot of us are just hobbyists hoping one day the answer to "Jack" will be found. I am very appreciative of those who have shared their knowledge with us.

[Amanda Sumner]

Amanda.

If you care to look back at your introductory post on the subject..

http://forum.casebook.org/showpost.php?p=303260&postcount=1

You might see what we saw, that is someone with little knowledge of all the facts yet quite prepared to jump in to the ring with boxing gloves at the ready.
You had no intention of debating the subject, indeed you made it abundantly clear that your interpretation was correct, and in future posts that 'nothing will change your mind'.

As a consequence your reception was quite deserved, so why do you complain? You set the atmosphere to start with.

Ah the ever charming Wickerman,

I was not complaining and actually I think overall my thread was well received, certainly got a reasonably long debate about it.
Strangely, most people seemed to have little knowledge of all the facts too, which is why it went on for as long as it did, and is, as far as I'm aware, still going on.
What you see as a complaint is in fact just an observation, an opinion, that I have formed over the last few days how people respond to each other on here. Courtesy and respect would go a long way to improving the site and would be far more welcoming to any new inspired enthusiasts.
With you, being a prime and excellent example of what I'm talking about, I dare say many newcomers would not want to stay too long.

Have a nice day.

Amanda

[Wickerman]

Amanda.

If you care to look back at your introductory post on the subject..

http://forum.casebook.org/showpost.php?p=303260&postcount=1

You might see what we saw, that is someone with little knowledge of all the facts yet quite prepared to jump in to the ring with boxing gloves at the ready.
You had no intention of debating the subject, indeed you made it abundantly clear that your interpretation was correct, and in future posts that 'nothing will change your mind'.

As a consequence your reception was quite deserved, so why do you complain? You set the atmosphere to start with.