Prater's stairs

[Wickerman]

In which case Prater's door will need to be moved back along the passageway to the middle.

That 'Praters Door', if it was moved nearer towards Dorset St., like under the stairs, how are we for height?
I don't see a problem with entering the house under the stairs, if the height is available.

EDIT: Ok, sorry, it doesn't look like we have enough height...

[richardh]

EDIT: Posted before I saw your post above.

What's your opinion on Prater's door position Jon?
At the moment it does not match the Goad plan which has the 'opening' midway down the passage? IF I moved it to that location then I could faff with the stairs config and perhaps reduce that ??? area.

I'm at a loss to explain what that passage could have been for if we leave the floor plan as you had it. Not that this is a problem, but it may be a point of criticism.

[Wickerman]

Richard.
Where did you get the ceiling heights from, and what dims have you used?

[richardh]

Arbitrary 8ft (ish)

Richard.
Where did you get the ceiling heights from, and what dims have you used?

[Wickerman]

Arbitrary 8ft (ish)

Ok, I wonder if 9ft ceilings would help with the stairs, I'm thinking of having Praters Door under the stairs, so this door is more central to the floor plan, what do you think?

I live in a turn of the century house, 9ft ceilings everywhere.

All the doors are 80" too, not sure what you have used.

[richardh]

Sorry, Model's is ruined!
The amount of fiddling and adjusting I've been doing has thrown ALL the measurements out of whack!

Time to start again (again!)

While I post this I might as well ask some measurment related questions just to be certain:

I am having the ceiling height as 8ft
door height 7ft
door width 3ft

Stair height and depth 8" per step
Q: stair width ?

So sorry about this.

Ok, I wonder if 9ft ceilings would help with the stairs, I'm thinking of having Praters Door under the stairs, so this door is more central to the floor plan, what do you think?

I live in a turn of the century house, 9ft ceilings everywhere.

All the doors are 80" too, not sure what you have used.

[Wickerman]

Sorry, Model's is ruined!
The amount of fiddling and adjusting I've been doing has thrown ALL the measurements out of whack!

Time to start again (again!)

While I post this I might as well ask some measurment related questions just to be certain:

I am having the ceiling height as 8ft
door height 7ft
door width 3ft

Stair height and depth 8" per step
Q: stair width ?

So sorry about this.

I know the older houses had high ceilings, ours are 9ft.
Doorways are 80".
Outside doors are 38" wide, inside doors can be anything from 32-36", no fixed standard.
Stairs: Risers 8", Treads 9".
Stair width: ours vary from 30" to 40".

Just offered as an example for turn of the century terrace houses.

No need to be sorry Richard, these things happen.

[richardh]

Thanks Jon.

I know the older houses had high ceilings, ours are 9ft.
Doorways are 80".
Outside doors are 38" wide, inside doors can be anything from 32-36", no fixed standard.
Stairs: Risers 8", Treads 9".
Stair width: ours vary from 30" to 40".

Just offered as an example for turn of the century terrace houses.

No need to be sorry Richard, these things happen.

[Dorian Gray]

Richard,

Your work is fantastic, and there is no need to apologize. You brought me out of lurking for the first time in years. It's good to read an interesting thread during Pierre's Terror. So, thank you for your work.

Regards,

Dorian

[Joshua Rogan]

Sorry to hear it's all gone wrong, Richard. This puzzle is enough to make your brain melt!
If it helps, my Victorian home has 101" ceilings, and the interior door frames are 29" x 78"
Exterior ones are 33" x 77"
Sorry, no stairs!

[richardh]

Another day, another try

This image below has all the right measurements now.

(Black and white blocks are 1ft measures)


Prater's door can only go there because:
I wanted the stairs against the passageway wall and against the original back wall of the house because this seems a logical place.
If they had faced the front door I couldn't get then to finish on the landing in the right place (we established the landing was closer to #20 then to #19), thus the stairs start right by #13 partition.
IF this is the case then the partition which we have 'tentatively' established was about 4ft from the passage wall in #13 will fit exactly (i'm treating it as door sized).
The partition to #13 can be seen when walking up the first part of the stairs.
The stairs, when configured this way will reach the 1st floor (#20) landing at the right position (outside #20)
The stairs on each floor are the exact same configuration and take up the 8ft width of the landing as I think they would have done.
Prater's door sits very close (though not exactly) on the Goad's plan where the opening is positioned in the passage way.
On the 1st floor (#20/#19) I put a partition in the middle of the landing and gave it a door frame shape for easier identification but this could easily have been just a 3ft high balustrade or waist high wooden partition.
The width between #20 & #19 is 8ft
Door to the store room could be positioned anywhere but I figured that the top of the stairs would be the most likely place.
Store is 8ft by 5ft

Everything seems to fit and I think this version has a bit more potential (I hope you agree!).

Can of course be tweaked.

Image 6 you can see two partitions for #13. The one closest the stairs is the 'door' we see in MJK1, the other one is because the partition may extend toward the chimney wall.

The black lines on the floor in image 6 are when I thought there might be a partition separating the shed.

Ceilings 8th high.
Doors 7ft high x 3ft
Stairs are 9" square

Gimme your thoughts please.

[Elamarna]

well Richard, i like it, seems to answer most points.
lets see what others think

Steve

[Pierre]

well Richard, i like it, seems to answer most points.
lets see what others think

Steve

Hi,

I have the greatest respect for Richardhs artistic work.

But I would really like to understand the purpose of Richardh´s work from a scientific point of view. And you, Steve, always seem very interested in source criticism. So I believe you can enlighten me here.

My first question is:

Is the work of Richardh in any way connected to the murder on Kelly?

If it is, there are several problems with it:

1. The descriptions of the interior of this house in Dorset Street are taken
from a source from 1899. The problem is that Kelly was murdered 11
years previously.

2. The source is used as a narrative source. It is a qualitative data source.
The problem is that Richardh is trying to transfer a qualitative source into
a quantitative scale. He is trying to interpret text as mathematics.

3. The narrative is about the first floor and not about the ground floor. The
problem is that there actually might have been differences between the
floors. One of the main reasons to think there was is that there is a shop
(marked S on the map) on the ground floor. There can not have been a
shop on the first floor as well, as there was a room with a tenant there.
So one could not deduce from the plan of the first floor to the ground
floor.

My second question is:

How valid do you think this plan will be when Richardh is finished with it, given all the problems described above?

(But perhaps the work of Richardh is not at all connected to the murder of Kelly. In that case we still have the problems of using a qualitative source for constructing measures.)

Kind regards, Pierre

[Elamarna]

just in case the poster known as Pierre has not understood

I will no longer debate with him, it is pointless. he does not understand the purpose of this site, if he did he would not ask such questions.

Elamarna

[richardh]

Without MJK1 and MJK2 we would never have a visual representation with which to work with to accompany our 'mind's eye' when discussing the investigation. Crime scene photo are crucial to our understanding and unfortunately we have very little of that material available.

But we can attempt to recreate things to give interested people a guide to the environment that was never photographed but exists in the form of notes, testimony and statements.

How accurate it is is debatable (as we know from this Looooong thread!) but I think a model that we can all settle on as being 'close' is better than no model at all.

It's like the facial reconstructions we see of skulls of say King Richard III or the plaster and bone models of the dinosaurs - they are a tangible link to the past and they work together with our mind's eye to fill the gaps missing in the photos and written media.

Here's a 'for instance'

In my model we can visually see room #20. We can stand in it and close the door. We can now consider all that stuff between #20 and the rest of the house and appreciate how far (or near) #13 is. Would it be easy for Prater to hear an 'oh murder' uttered from #13 from this room?

This medium is our Google Street View. It is another tool in the investigators box and when used correctly is invaluable.

I'd like to create a model that, if not wholly accurate, is a damn near fit and satisfies a majority.