Oh, murder!

[GUT]

[QUOTE=Abby Normal;361358

This thread is devolving into pure and utter nonsense.[/QUOTE]

as most seem to lately.

[RockySullivan]

The low cry of 'oh murder' is likely to be an exclamation of discovery
Can't for a second imagine the victim shouting that....human beings can scream for a reason

The cry of Murder was described as screaming

I would source this for you but it appears casebook has become entirely void of any all information on the witness pages

[MysterySinger]

The body of Kelly was "identified" as such by McCarthy, Barnett and Hutchinson wasn't it?

[MysterySinger]

Um - only just noticed I'm now a Constable. Yay - a pay rise!

[Robert St Devil]

DHello MWR.

KNIFED. I have to resolve the aspect of the ecchymosis about her neck before I could accept her being slashed first. Ecchy. or bruising doesnt typically occur postmortem. I dont know how the doctor employed the word "ecchymosis"; although The condition has its own medical specification, it has been used interchangeably with the term "bruising, -es".

DR BONDS MATH. Rigor mortis typically sets in within two to four hours of death, and has a variable duration depending, amongst other factors, on the external temperature. Colder climates have longer durations of rigor mortis. I dont know how cold weather affects the onset of rigor mortis, so i will double it to: Rigor mortis sets in within eight hours. If Bond says that Her rigor was setting in at 2p, then she dies between 6a to 12p. So 6a until she is discovered, in reality

FIREpLACE. There was a large fire in the place. When Dr Bond says she was "comparatively cooler", was he meaning that the room had a higher ambient temperature than her body? Warmer temperatures have faster rates of rigor mortis.

RIGOR. Tthe killer cut most of the places associated with rigor mortis - the eyelids, the neck, the abdomen, the limbs.

[Robert St Devil]

The cry of Murder was described as screaming

I would source this for you but it appears casebook has become entirely void of any all information on the witness pages

You hVe to click on the RELATED PAGE link at the bottom.

[curious]

I have always thought it strange , that the very bed, Kelly had a dream that she was being murdered, was the place she actually was, leading me to suspect that this had been relayed to her Killer, and he/she, made her dream come true[ so to speak].
Regards Richard.

Hi, Richard,

This is an interesting thought. Any ideas on how the dream was relayed?

Did Mary tell him herself? . . . If Mary told him, they were either fairly good friends already or exploring possibilities. Would she had told a client something like that?

I am interested in hearing your thoughts.

Thanks,

curious

[RockySullivan]

You hVe to click on the RELATED PAGE link at the bottom.

Oh thats right, thank you Mr. Devil!

[packers stem]

Hi packer
Lying about the body being Kelly?

Sorry packer. The common sense answer is that it was the body of Kelly and Barnett had a preexisting condition that made him appear nervous Or that he was nervous because he was just at an inquest or that he was devasted because her death, or that, just possibly he was nervouse because he was her killer.

This thread is devolving into pure and utter nonsense.

Hi Abby
From The Times on November 10th
It will be remembered that in the case of the woman Chapman, murdered in Mitre Square, the face was so disfigured as to make identification very difficult...
Leaving the name mix up aside, it's clear that John Kelly struggled to identify Eddowes.
Why on earth should anyone be convinced about Barnett's identification of Kelly.
If the body was found on the street would there still be no argument??
People believe it purely because it was her room despite the evidence of others staying in the room
There is more evidence to suggest that Kelly was alive and well, apart from the vomiting, in the morning.
Yes,there is a lot of nonsense written but this belief is not in that category. This is a sensible supposition based on the available evidence and eye witness testimony

[richardnunweek]

Hi Curious..
The nightmare scenario, derives from Praters account at the inquest, in which she described ''Like awakening from a nightmare''..it also takes into account Kit Watkins interview with court resident Lottie in 1891, who described Kelly as making light of a dream she had, that she was being murdered..''I may be next she laughed''.
If one takes both witnesses accounts, and we have no evidence that either was telling porkies.then Kelly awakening from a dream shouting out ''Oh Murder '' could lead one to speculate,that the scenario , I put is possible..
It is entirely likely that as she informed a court resident of that dream, she would have at least informed Barnett, and maybe the other Joe [ who ill used her?].
She also would have likely told some of her associates in the pubs,so many may have been familiar with her tale.
I am suggesting that to a person with a murderous/unsound mind, he may have wished to make her dream come true, butchering her on the very bed she had that dream, and not in the streets as the others.
Regards Richard.

[richardnunweek]

Hi Abby.
If one takes all the knowledge we have, we have a T.O.D. anytime between 2.30 am Friday 9th, till 9 am the 9th.
That takes into account the statements of Hutchinson and Maxwell, and we have no information that either was lying.
We have Mrs Pickett, knocking at Kelly's door, and receiving no reply close to 8 am, we have Bowyer stating he saw Kelly leave her room around 8 am , and return shortly after, which ties in with Maxwell.
Again we have no information either was not telling the truth, infact, by Bowyer admitting he was playing an illegal game [ pitch] and Maxwell's account being verified, we have conformation of truth.
As for the fire, it is likely either the killer lit it to destroy evidence, or Kelly lit it before 8.am. the blazing fire in the night, to give the killer light, never washed with me.
You are correct, that she wanted to go to the Lord Mayors show, Mrs Picketts knock, and the fact she needed to get up early, resulted in Mrs Maxwell saying''What brings you up this early?''.
We have the same witness saying she was talking to a man, around 8.45 am, we know that Mary returned to her room. so it is possible that this man called on her whilst Kelly was getting dressed into her best clothes , and the jacket and bonnet were on her bed, ready to wear..
Police stated that the Killer acted in daylight[ Times Nov 12th] and burnt a velvet jacket, and bonnet, because they were bloodstained.
Why?
If the items were on the bed, when she was murdered, they would have become bloodstained, and that would tell the police , that the murder happened in daylight, something the killer may have wanted to avoid. as it would be unlikely that the victim would , go to sleep at night with jacket and bonnet in close proximity.
I am sorry you believe this is all ''Silly stuff''..I am merely using information available, and interpreting it, which is all any of us can do.
Regards Richard.

[Pierre]

Pierre says
"Donīt you think this leaves us with a space of three hours, from 1.30 to 4.30, where the killer could have murderer Kelly, lit the fire and performed the mutilations?

And if you think so, then we do have a problem with the hypothesis of the victim screaming "Oh, murder!" at 3.30/3.45, donīt we?"

- I'm not following the argument I'm afraid. I don't see anything there that rules out a victim shouting "oh, murder!" at 3:30/3:45 - quite the opposite really.

Hi MysterySinger,

But if the murder occured at 3.30/3.45 there would have been a large fire in the room during the morning hours. There would have been the risk of Prater and the other neighbours becoming curious.

And if he choose to murder in the morning instead of in the night, he would have to get out from the murder site and into the streets in the morning hours when there was more people around.

What is your perspective on this and how would you like to argument for a murder taking place from 3.30/3.45?

Very thankful for your opinions.

Regards Pierre

[Pierre]

[QUOTE=Abby Normal;361346]

also, The fire may have already been lit earlier in the night and had burned down and then restoked and made large by the killer later.

Hi Abby,

I like this argument. Who knows, it might lead somewhere if we think about it.

Regards Pierre

[Rosella]

^ That's a large amount of fuel being consumed! I'm like a voice crying in the wilderness about this fire in Mary Kelly's small fireplace that night/morning, but I am genuinely curious about it!

Did Mary have a large bundle of kindling and a large coal shuttle abrim with lumps of coal sitting beside the fireplace then, ready for roaring fires to consume evidence and clothing at all hours of the day and night? This was a woman (and previously her boyfriend) who had lived from hand to mouth.

[Pierre]

^ That's a large amount of fuel being consumed! I'm like a voice crying in the wilderness about this fire in Mary Kelly's small fireplace that night/morning, but I am genuinely curious about it!

Did Mary have a large bundle of kindling and a large coal shuttle abrim with lumps of coal sitting beside the fireplace then, ready for roaring fires to consume evidence and clothing at all hours of the day and night? This was a woman (and previously her boyfriend) who had lived from hand to mouth.

How about a large fire in a small fireplace?

Regards Pierre