Prater's stairs

[Elamarna]

Dear Wickerman and Richard,

my reading of the photo situation could be that after Phillips, by looking via the window asserted that no help was required, that the photographer was sent for. It has been argued in the past that MJK1 was taken from outside of the room, looking through the larger window, I think this unlikely and that it was taken inside the room.
Approx two hours later the room was entered, a decision was taken to photograph the scene as it stood, before the Doctors started their work. This may have meant that the bed and table were moved from their original discovery positions, indeed as the door hit the table it must have moved some.

With regards to your latest view, I feel you have the partition too far away from the wall, this almost has it in the position on the map, which I feel is for guidance that there were openings on all floors, not the actual positioning.

It is like chess yes, I prefer your slightly earlier version with the distance from the head of the bed to the wall at about half of this. Truth is of course we can never be sure.

It is a wonderful piece of work Richard.

[richardh]

On your measurments Jon - and a bit of a rush job as I'm having to go out - here is what I have so far for the bed / partition positions:





and a superimposed:

Will work more on it tomorrow

looking forward to your thoughts / ideas /suggestions.

Yes, I think your assumptions are valid Richard.

The tentative position of this door may be of concern to some.

If the room, according to the Goad scale was approx. 15ft wide, and the 3ft? wide door is placed central in the wall. The photograph of the bed suggests the headboard was positioned by the architrave , so 18"? west of center. Then the bed (if a Small Double/three-quarter?) is 75" long, minus 18" from center of room, so ends 57" east of center.
(18+57=75)
Which leaves 33" from the foot of the bed to the east wall (fireplace) of the house.

How does that look?
And, does the placement of the bed now contradict anything else we know?

Ah,....we are told that when the police forced open the door, it hit a table that was positioned beside the bed?
Maybe the bed is too far away from that opening door for it to hit a table with a 36" arc of swing?


This is like playing chess...

[Elamarna]

Richardh,



This archway is the same width as the passage under it. So it seems very natural that they used it as a passage to reach the rooms in number 26 and 27.




Regards Pierre

Pierre,

you claim to base your work on science and evidence.

Can I please ask what evidence do you have that this archway was accessible from 26.

You keep stating this time and time again!
You offer no actual evidence, but argue the map shows no entrances in the passageway into 27, so you feel they must have used 26.
That is a fair summary of your position is it not? yes or no will do.

Despite being shown that the map rarely shows external openings; you insist on stating there are no external doors as a fact.
In Addition the map shows no opening from 26 in to either the upper passageway as you see it or the archway.

External doors are rarely shown, internal openings are shown.

That is the Evidence of the Goad map. It is clear and scientific.
The Goad map argues against you.l

By the way I am still awaiting an Apology!

[Wickerman]

While I'm doing this Jon, I assume the bed must have been moved to this position during the investigation because a bed in this position at any other time would not allow the door to open up and hit against the table. Right?

On that thought, which I agree incidentally, I located a press opinion to back it up.
"They made a preliminary examination of the body, and sent for a photographer, who took several photographs of the remains."

So they did enter the room, make a preliminary examination (requiring moving the bed?), and then sent for a photpgrapher. Either that, or after the preliminary exam, the photographer arrived and took photographs before the post-mortem that afternoon, which took about 2 hours.

So yes, the photo may not capture the original position of the bed, as found when the door was opened.

[Pierre]

While I'm doing this Jon, I assume the bed must have been moved to this position during the investigation because a bed in this position at any other time would not allow the door to open up and hit against the table. Right?

That is a very intelligent observation.

Regards Pierre

[richardh]

While I'm doing this Jon, I assume the bed must have been moved to this position during the investigation because a bed in this position at any other time would not allow the door to open up and hit against the table. Right?

Yes, I think your assumptions are valid Richard.

The tentative position of this door may be of concern to some.

If the room, according to the Goad scale was approx. 15ft wide, and the 3ft? wide door is placed central in the wall. The photograph of the bed suggests the headboard was positioned by the architrave , so 18"? west of center. Then the bed (if a Small Double/three-quarter?) is 75" long, minus 18" from center of room, so ends 57" east of center.
(18+57=75)
Which leaves 33" from the foot of the bed to the east wall (fireplace) of the house.

How does that look?
And, does the placement of the bed now contradict anything else we know?

Ah,....we are told that when the police forced open the door, it hit a table that was positioned beside the bed?
Maybe the bed is too far away from that opening door for it to hit a table with a 36" arc of swing?


This is like playing chess...

[Pierre]

Yes Pierre I will certainly construct a modle based on what you've described. I will have to do it tomorrow night (Tuesday) as I'm working all night tonight (Monday) and thus asleep 'tomorrow til tea'.

Although, for the record, I'm dubious as to your assertion about the passageway from 26 to 27.

That is fantastic! I am very grateful.

It is a very interesting model for discussions here, and it will give us many new ideas. We will probably also see new problems or possibilities.

You are a true artist and also a very scientific one.

Thanks a lot Richardh!

Regards Pierre

[Wickerman]

Yes, I think your assumptions are valid Richard.

The tentative position of this door may be of concern to some.

If the room, according to the Goad scale was approx. 15ft wide, and the 3ft? wide door is placed central in the wall. The photograph of the bed suggests the headboard was positioned by the architrave , so 18"? west of center. Then the bed (if a Small Double/three-quarter?) is 75" long, minus 18" from center of room, so ends 57" east of center.
(18+57=75)
Which leaves 33" from the foot of the bed to the east wall (fireplace) of the house.

How does that look?
And, does the placement of the bed now contradict anything else we know?

Ah,....we are told that when the police forced open the door, it hit a table that was positioned beside the bed?
Maybe the bed is too far away from that opening door for it to hit a table with a 36" arc of swing?


This is like playing chess...

[richardh]

Yes Pierre I will certainly construct a modle based on what you've described. I will have to do it tomorrow night (Tuesday) as I'm working all night tonight (Monday) and thus asleep 'tomorrow til tea'.

Although, for the record, I'm dubious as to your assertion about the passageway from 26 to 27.

Richardh,

Could you please try this?

It uses what is already on the Goad´s map including the archway. This archway is the same width as the passage under it. So it seems very natural that they used it as a passage to reach the rooms in number 26 and 27.

There is a window at the end of the upper passage facing Miller´s Court.

There are no other walls or stairs in number 26. The partition around the stairs is separating Amory´s room from the stairs.

Standing on top of the landing, before turning left into the corridor, Prater should have been able to see a light from the top of the door in the doorway between 13 and 26.

Praters stairs are exactly at the entrance door in the passage shown in Goad´s Fire Insurance Plan.

The doorway between 13 and 26 is in the exact place according to the map.

The "store room" is the same as the storage space under the stairs. If there is a doorknob in Kelly´s room, this storage space could explain it.

I think it is the most scientific solution considering the sparse material.

Regards Pierre

[Pierre]

Geez! even more questions.

This is my line of thought....

Looking at the goad's plan (3D): The stairs (Prater's) are ORIGINAL. The 'opening' between #26 and #13 (otherwise known as the partition) is ORIGINAL. The stairs and the opening would therefore never hinder each other - by that I mean the opening could not be 'overlapping' the space given over to the stairs so that 'glimmers of light' could be seen between the solid stairs.

When Prater was ascending the stairs was she seeing glimmers between the stairs (just treads) or was she looking over the Bannister and across to where the partition would be visible as a blocked-up door?

Q: Is Prater's stairs original?
Q: Is Prater's (passageway) door original?
Q: Is the partition a door or more?
Q: are the stairs 'treads and risers' or just steps (treads only)?

Richardh,

Could you please try this?

It uses what is already on the Goad´s map including the archway. This archway is the same width as the passage under it. So it seems very natural that they used it as a passage to reach the rooms in number 26 and 27.

There is a window at the end of the upper passage facing Miller´s Court.

There are no other walls or stairs in number 26. The partition around the stairs is separating Amory´s room from the stairs.

Standing on top of the landing, before turning left into the corridor, Prater should have been able to see a light from the top of the door in the doorway between 13 and 26.

Praters stairs are exactly at the entrance door in the passage shown in Goad´s Fire Insurance Plan.

The doorway between 13 and 26 is in the exact place according to the map.

The "store room" is the same as the storage space under the stairs. If there is a doorknob in Kelly´s room, this storage space could explain it.

I think it is the most scientific solution considering the sparse material.

Regards Pierre

[richardh]

Okay Jon,
In this one I have positioned the partition to be pretty much central on the back wall of #13 (6 ft from the passageway wall). Looking at the MJK image of the bed and wainscoting behind, as you say we have no way of knowing where the corner of the room is in that photo so let's say this image (below) is where that partition is positioned. Now, from Prater's doorway (lower image) this is where the partition is positioned. This is assuming that the stairs are open plan and the hall (from the front door to the partition is like the Hanbury St configuration.

[Wickerman]

Geez! even more questions.

This is my line of thought....

Looking at the goad's plan (3D): The stairs (Prater's) are ORIGINAL. The 'opening' between #26 and #13 (otherwise known as the partition) is ORIGINAL. The stairs and the opening would therefore never hinder each other - by that I mean the opening could not be 'overlapping' the space given over to the stairs so that 'glimmers of light' could be seen between the solid stairs.

Agreed, correct.

When Prater was ascending the stairs was she seeing glimmers between the stairs (just treads) or was she looking over the Bannister and across to where the partition would be visible as a blocked-up door?

That, we may never know.

Q: Is Prater's stairs original?
Q: Is Prater's (passageway) door original?
Q: Is the partition a door or more?
Q: are the stairs 'treads and risers' or just steps (treads only)?

The trial records of the Kate Marshall case in Jan. 1899 at the Old Bailey may still reside in the archives of the London Metropolitan Archives.
The floor plan of No.26 Dorset St. produced at this trial may have been too large to keep (it would have to be large enough for the jury to see across a room).
However, a smaller copy may have been preserved in the records, its a long shot but if anyone is in commuting distance of the L.M.A., it may be worth making an inquiry.

[Wickerman]

Ha! thanks for the feedback.

So.... at this point which plan (discounting my attempt) has the most merit?

Goad or Thomas or is there an alternative?

A reasonable answer would be the interpretation that best suits what we have for evidence.
The purpose of the second stairs, and in consequence the second wall, remains to be addressed for one of the proposals.

Oh! also:
The side door (Prater's); is that an original part of the house?

Options are:
- It could have been original.
- It may have been an addition by a previous owner to McCarthy.
- McCarthy may have had it installed.

For it to appear on a fire insurance map means the change had to be submitted by an architect, and that means officially approved.
I'm inclined that rules out option 3, that McCarthy would incur such costs.

To install an opening in a load-bearing wall is a serious renovation. We know it was load-bearing due to the direction of the apex of the roof.

Another question:
Was the 'partition' a sealed up door or more?

We can only guess.
Although we see 'a door', it may have been a spare door used as a panel to enclose an opening that was wider than a single door.
Much rests on the words of Dr. Phillips, and his profession was medical not architectural, so we shouldn't put all our eggs in his basket for that particular observation.

[richardh]

Geez! even more questions.

This is my line of thought....

Looking at the goad's plan (3D): The stairs (Prater's) are ORIGINAL. The 'opening' between #26 and #13 (otherwise known as the partition) is ORIGINAL. The stairs and the opening would therefore never hinder each other - by that I mean the opening could not be 'overlapping' the space given over to the stairs so that 'glimmers of light' could be seen between the solid stairs.

When Prater was ascending the stairs was she seeing glimmers between the stairs (just treads) or was she looking over the Bannister and across to where the partition would be visible as a blocked-up door?

Q: Is Prater's stairs original?
Q: Is Prater's (passageway) door original?
Q: Is the partition a door or more?
Q: are the stairs 'treads and risers' or just steps (treads only)?

[richardh]

Another question:
Was the 'partition' a sealed up door or more?