MJK3: Is that a knife? or ???

[gnote]

Hi Packers Stem,

Wow! That's now as clear as day.

Picasso was in his Blue Tits period.

Get over yourself.

Regards,

Simon

So this stunning new evidence won't be featured in your latest book?

[packers stem]

Hi Packers Stem,

Wow! That's now as clear as day.

Picasso was in his Blue Tits period.

Get over yourself.

Regards,

Simon

I can't help that it's there when zoomed, don't shoot the messenger Simon, have a look for yourself.Get the original to a lab, maybe I'll be proved wrong.
Someone will have it examined one day I'm sure,if.....it still exists

[Simon Wood]

Hi Packers Stem,

Wow! That's now as clear as day.

Picasso was in his Blue Tits period.

Get over yourself.

Regards,

Simon

[packers stem]

Hi Packers Stem,

Wow!

It looks suspiciously like an Elastoplast or Band Aid.

Regards,

Simon

Treat it like a highlighter pen Simon, did it that way so people could spot it.Fact is its there....smack in the middle of the partition wall in MJK1.... Question is why?
Here's the original minus band aid

[curious4]

Hi Packers Stem,

Wow!

It looks suspiciously like an Elastoplast or Band Aid.

Regards,

Simon

With a dwarfish face behind it!

C4

[Simon Wood]

Hi Packers Stem,

Wow!

It looks suspiciously like an Elastoplast or Band Aid.

Regards,

Simon

[packers stem]

Hi Packers Stem,

I wouldn't get too hung up about MJK1 and MJK2.

They are essentially the same photograph with nothing of interest [except, perhaps, the choice of initials and baphomets] to differentiate them.

Regards,

Simon

Hi Simon
Interesting choice of the word baphomet, yep more than a few of them
Can't dismiss the photos though I'm afraid until I've got a satisfactory explanation set in my own mind as to why the signature of a world famous artist is on MJK1 but not 2. Not any old world famous artist..Noooooo just happened to be this one lol

[Simon Wood]

Hi Spyglass,

I'm not sure that I'm baking a scone book.

Mr. Robinson affords me nights of restful, untroubled sleep.

Regards,

Simon

[spyglass]

Hi Dane_F,

A lot of water has passed under the bridge since I wrote my Enigmas of Millers Court article in December 2005.

Almost ten years on I can tell you two things—

MJK3 is not the obverse of MJK1.

MJK3 was not taken in Room 13 on 9th November 1888.

This and other matters will be discussed in the second edition of "Deconstructing Jack: The Secret History of the Whitechapel Murders."

Regards,

Simon

Hi Simon,
A scone book? Are you not worried that all could be obselete now that Mr Robinson's has hit the stands?

[gnote]

I did some further analysis of the photo and combined that with some outside the boxing thinking and was able to determine it's not a knife, but a machine gun.

[Simon Wood]

Hi Packers Stem,

I wouldn't get too hung up about MJK1 and MJK2.

They are essentially the same photograph with nothing of interest [except, perhaps, the choice of initials and baphomets] to differentiate them.

Regards,

Simon

[packers stem]

Hi Dane_F,

A lot of water has passed under the bridge since I wrote my Enigmas of Millers Court article in December 2005.

Almost ten years on I can tell you two things—

MJK3 is not the obverse of MJK1.

MJK3 was not taken in Room 13 on 9th November 1888.

This and other matters will be discussed in the second edition of "Deconstructing Jack: The Secret History of the Whitechapel Murders."

Regards,

Simon

Seemed that you were leaning that way towards the end of the dissertation anyway Simon with the questions you posed.... Had to be either fake or taken with artificial light possibly well before the discovery?
But where does this leave MJK2? Could that also be 'touched up '? It's either a totally independent photo to MJK1 shown by the flash position on the wall or its been brushed.The digital copy is well brushed, even the creases have gone
Certainly seems to have taken over from MJK1 for no obvious reason.I do hope Donald Rumbelows find is still in existence...

[packers stem]

Never ceases to amaze me how many people put something they don't like down to optical illusion...
I'm so glad I trust my eyesight lol
Good job they didn't bother photographing the GSG, wouldn't be seen by many I suspect lol

[Simon Wood]

Hi Dane_F,

A lot of water has passed under the bridge since I wrote my Enigmas of Millers Court article in December 2005.

Almost ten years on I can tell you two things—

MJK3 is not the obverse of MJK1.

MJK3 was not taken in Room 13 on 9th November 1888.

This and other matters will be discussed in the second edition of "Deconstructing Jack: The Secret History of the Whitechapel Murders."

Regards,

Simon

[Digalittledeeperwatson]

Aaargh...