Let there be light!

[David Orsam]

If the cry had come from some other assault then Sarah Lewis and Prater would have heard more, several screams, a male voice, the battering of a door should the victim require assistance.

Erm, but I posted in #682:

"So when you asked me:

"Are we to believe that the single scream as heard by Lewis and Prater was the result of a common assault?"

The answer is: yes we are to believe it.

Have I got that right?"

Your answer was: "By jove he's got it".

Now you are saying the complete opposite, namely that we cannot believe that the single scream as heard by Lewis and Prater was the result of a common assault.

So what is it?

Can we believe it or can't we?

[Phil Carter]

Come off it

1. There is NO officially recorded time of death ( a lawful requirement infact) so having been found to have residue of said foodstuffs in her stomach at the post mortem ..which began in the afternoon. .there is every chance she ate at 7am.

2. Even if you ignore Mrs Maxwell..there is a fine possibility she was alive at that time. It cannot be proven she was not alive at 7am.

3. If we include Mrs Maxwell's testimony..it enhances the possibility of the above.


Phil

[Pierre]

Absolutely it was a rough neighbourhood. And now answer my question. Do you accept that a female crying out "oh murder" at four o clock in the morning is in danger of being assaulted?

What do I see there? "Is"? Not "could have been", "was perhaps", but "is".

What is the evidence for that opinion, David?

[Robert St Devil]

This is if we are applying the modern use of the term "oh murder". We don,t know what context it was being used in when it was overheard. "Murder" seems like generally applied word in those days. Yes, there is the coincidence of the scream and her murder. But we also are left believing she had a sexual encounter that night. It could have been an orgasmic outcry. Mary was being loud and was drunk that nite.

[Pierre]

I don't believe anything. For all I know she was already dead for some hours at 7:00am.

But, if Maxwell's evidence was true, is it possible that she could have eaten fish and chips at 7:00am? Yes, I can't see why not.

I can see why not. The fish and chips should have been in the road. It wasn´t.

[richardnunweek]

Hi.
Inquest.
Mrs Prater in describing the cry she heard''Like awakening from a nightmare''
She Cried ''Oh Murder''
Lottie told Kit Watkins 1891, ''Kelly told me she had a nightmare that she was being murdered''
If this was a recurrence of that dream in the early hours of the 9th, it would explain the cry, it would explain the wording ''Oh Murder'', and explain why she was seen the following morning.
Regards Richard.

[David Orsam]

What do I see there? "Is"? Not "could have been", "was perhaps", but "is".

What is the evidence for that opinion, David?

Why are you quoting a post by Observer and asking ME for evidence for Observer's opinion?

[Observer]

Erm, but I posted in #682:

"So when you asked me:

"Are we to believe that the single scream as heard by Lewis and Prater was the result of a common assault?"

The answer is: yes we are to believe it.

Have I got that right?"

Your answer was: "By jove he's got it".

Now you are saying the complete opposite, namely that we cannot believe that the single scream as heard by Lewis and Prater was the result of a common assault.

So what is it?

Can we believe it or can't we?

Take a look at post #704. Look at the contradiction in terms perpetrated by yourself therein..

[David Orsam]

I can see why not. The fish and chips should have been in the road. It wasn´t.

Tell me Pierre. When a person vomits, do they expel the entire contents of their stomach?

[David Orsam]

Take a look at post #704. Look at the contradiction in terms perpetrated by yourself therein..

Post #704 was by you. How could I perpetrate a contradiction in one of your posts?

[Observer]

Post #704 was by you. How could I perpetrate a contradiction in one of your posts?

Because I quoted one of your posts in post#704

[David Orsam]

Because I quoted one of your posts in post#704

You quoted my post #698. In that post I said:

"Any woman out at four o'clock in the morning in that neighbourhood was in danger of being assaulted.

But I would have thought a woman being assaulted would most likely scream for help.

But hey, if you think that the cry of "oh murder" at that time in the morning was a woman being assaulted then fine, perhaps that's what it was.

Now, what's your point?"

There is no contraction in that post.

Your posts, on the other hand, as so contradictory that they are in danger of exploding the space time continuum.

[Observer]

Try again. I also quoted you in my body of text in post#704

[David Orsam]

Try again. I also quoted you in my body of text in post#704

Okay, you quoted me saying:

"And as I have already asked, does someone faced with a knife cry out "oh murder!" in a faint voice rather than screaming for help? It doesn't seem natural to me nor likely."

Where is the contradiction in this?

[Observer]

Okay, you quoted me saying:

"And as I have already asked, does someone faced with a knife cry out "oh murder!" in a faint voice rather than screaming for help? It doesn't seem natural to me nor likely."

Where is the contradiction in this?

Read what I said following following the above.