PC William Smith

[jason_c]

Martha Tabram, Annie Farmer, Frances Coles and Alice Graham spring to mind...

Thank you, John. Mary Ann Connelly also springs to mind. Both Connelly and Tabram were happy enough to drink with their clients. Neither behaved as if it were unusual. Also, wasnt it Stride who reportedly had a gentleman friend hanging off her as they were leaving a pub?

Barnett also picked up Kelly in a pub. These types of things happen in "bawdy" houses.

[Ben]

I said the effect is miniscule, minor, of no major significance, your own article which points out a very simplistic example replaces a 6-8 hr time frame with 7-8 hrs.

The "very simplistic example" uses a glass of beer or a measure of alcohol, so of course it would not have as great an effect as if larger quantities were consumed, but are you seriously suggesting that Kelly only consumed the equivalent of a "measure of alcohol" on the night of her death? The doctor never said that the stomach contents had "begun" to be digested. He described the state of digestion as "partial", which for all any of us know could mean "in an advanced state of". You also seem to have fixed the time of death far more precisely than the evidence allows.

If she had not gone out to find food at this time, and not even left her room since entering with Blotchy then you need to tripple this digestive time period from 1-1.5 hrs to an unbelievable 3.5 hrs.

No, I don't. Blotchy could easily have had food about his person when he returned with Kelly shortly before midnight. She could then have consumed this food later on, possibly when she was alone. In which case, there was no need for her to leave her room.

The whole article is intended to demonstrate that liquor does not aid digestion, not that alcohol remains in the body to slow down digestion

That's precisely what the article demonstrates. That's why it's headed: "How Alcohol Slows Down Digestion", and why the first line reads: "When alcohol is consumed along with food, it slows down the digestion process ".

But I think I'll just repeat the last line of my previous post, and trust that the hint will be received this time: Unless people fancy a long drawn-out off-topic debate about Kelly's dining habits, I'd recommend returning to the original premise of the thread: PC William Smith.

Gosh, can you just imagine if anyone continued with the Kelly/digestion issue after I've made that recommendation. A frightening thought.

[Wickerman]

Hello Jason. 5 minutes, like as not.

On the street Lynn, yes something like a 5-10 minute liason is probably true, and that came with an appropriate price. However, those women who take a client back to her room, I would expect, intend a longer liason and at a higher price.
A room implies 'bed' which surely commands a more intimate coupling at an appropriate price wouldn't you think?

Conjecture..
I would expect Blotchy was with Kelly for anything like 30 minutes to 1 hour. Blotchy will have left when Kelly was heard to be "still singing" about 1:00 am, she had something to sing about, she had money?
Sometime between 1:00 - 2:00 she likely went out to spend her earning on a meal of boiled fish & potato's(?), and was seen (by Kennedy?) outside the Britannia after she had ate.

Regards, Jon S.

[Jon Guy]

Examples? Love to see one. It could be very helpful.
LC

Martha Tabram, Annie Farmer, Frances Coles and Alice Graham spring to mind...

[lynn cates]

timing

Hello Jason. 5 minutes, like as not.

Examples? Love to see one. It could be very helpful.

Cheers.
LC

[jason_c]

Hello Jason. But it was at least intermittent. My real question is, why sing at all?

And if Blotchy were merely hoping, then a freebie? What's in it for MJK?

Cheers.
LC

What's in it for MJK? Perhaps beer, the hope of getting extra payment for sex, or maybe simply company. What I would say is that not all prostitute activity would be a street pick-up immediately followed by a quick 20 minute fumble. We have examples of prostitutes drinking in pubs with clients before having sex with them.

[lynn cates]

Folk music and libido.

Hello Jason. But it was at least intermittent. My real question is, why sing at all?

And if Blotchy were merely hoping, then a freebie? What's in it for MJK?

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

respondeo quod

Hello (again) Red.

"You know I read a book on that a few years back where the author believed the same thing. But like always, I can't remember his name or even the book's title for that matter. I do remember that he was a former police detective though.'

I heard something about that too. I suppose I need to check to see where it is going.

"Have you always felt this way or is this something you have just recently decided?'

It's fairly new. I liked Cream in the '70's. I had a psychological need for closure. What better than a gallows confession? (Except, it never happened.) I recall the news that the case had been solved in the 80's and the villain was PAV. (Except that turned out to be rubbish.) When I came to the boards, I thought D'Onston did it. (Except he was old and had a gammy leg.) Soon, I supported Druitt. (Except there was no evidence against him and if he were using his place of law, then if he killed Kate, why move northeast?)

"And how come?"

By carefully examining the difference of wounds on Polly and Annie on the one hand and Kate's on the other. I also took to heart what Baxter said about Kate's slayer possibly being an imitator.

"What brought you to believe this or is it something that your answer could fill a book?"

As above; and, yes, it COULD fill a book.

Cheers.
LC

[jason_c]

Hello Jon. I have no strong views here whatsoever. But it is difficult to conceive prepared food costing less that home cooked.

Client at midnight? You mean Blotchy with his beer pot? Do you really believe some bloke would pay for an hour of oo-lah-lah only to be regaled by Irish folk music for that time? (Scots, well, yeah, maybe--heh-heh.)

Cheers.
LC

We dont know the singing went on non stop. And a Beer pot indicates some sort of drinking "party". Kelly gets some beer, blotchy gets the company of a pretty girl with the possibility of some oo-lah-lah thrown in.

[lynn cates]

rain

Hello Red. The rain? Well, it was essentially over by 11.30.

Cheers.
LC

[RedBundy13]

[QUOTE=Wickerman;202924]\.

The minor trouble I have with the description given by P. C. Smith is the combination of "morning-coat" with a "deerstalker" hat, it just strikes me as an odd combination for a well-dressed man to wear.

Agreed, an odd combination indeed. Whats a deerstalker hat again???

[RedBundy13]

Hello Red. Thanks.

Do I believe Stride was a ripper victim? Well, to be perfectly honest, I don't believe there ever WAS a "Jack the Ripper." 5 women were killed and their names have been inextricably linked together by theoreticians--but from the beginning it was not so.

Cheers.
LC

Ah, I see. You know I read a book on that a few years back where the author believed the same thing. But like always, I can't remember his name or even the books title for that matter. I do remember that he was a former police detective though.
Have you always felt this way or is this something you have just recently decided? And how come? What brought you to believe this or is it something that your answer could fill a book?

[RedBundy13]

[QUOTE=Tom_Wescott;202694]

Regarding the flower, she may not have been wearing it the entire evening, due to the intermittent rain. And in the case of some witnesses, such as James Brown, who described a man standing in front Stride, partially blocking her body from view, it might not have been possible for them to see the flower.

Hi Tom,
I've always been more partial to Kelly Bundy but thanks for the greeting anyway. Forgive me if i'm wrong but didn't the rain start just after her death? Because when she was removed wasn't it dry underneath her? I mighy be completely off but that's what is coming to mind right now???

Thanks
Bundy

[Wickerman]

My comments with regard to alcohol and sleep are not "special pleading" but physiological realities. Have a look at this:

http://medicalneeds.com/alcohol-and-...own-digestion/

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...1214201525.htm

Not a "small, miniscule, affect (sic)" either.

I suggest you re-read your own source...

"...Blend some meat and bread with gastric juice; put them in a tiny bottle, and place that bottle in a sand-bath, exposed to a slow heat of ninety eight degrees, now and then vigorously agitating the contents to copy the stomach’s actions; you will discover, following 6-8 hours, the entire contents mixed into a single pultaceous mass. If I put in a glass of light beer or a measure of alcohol, to another phial containing gastric juice and food, dealt with in an identical way, after 7-8 hours, or perhaps a few days, the food hardly is acted upon in any way."

I said the effect is miniscule, minor, of no major significance, your own article which points out a very simplistic example replaces a 6-8 hr time frame with 7-8 hrs.
How on earth can you claim this is of any significance, and certainly does not help your claim in any way.
Kelly ate fish & potato's approximately 1-1.5 hrs before her death, the food had only partially begun to be digested.
If she had not gone out to find food at this time, and not even left her room since entering with Blotchy then you need to tripple this digestive time period from 1-1.5 hrs to an unbelievable 3.5 hrs.

How does your article allow for such a prolonged delay?, it doesn't because it cannot, what I explained to you is correct, the effect is very small.

Alcohol is absorbed into the body too quickly to help digest a meal. The example given makes no allowance for absorbtion into the human body (it takes place in a bottle) because the alcohol has no other tissue to absorb itself into except the food it is added to.

The whole article is intended to demonstrate that liquor does not aid digestion, not that alcohol remains in the body to slow down digestion, which is what your argument requires.

Regards, Jon S.

[Wickerman]

.... I would take a suspect description from a sober police officer over that of a intoxicated citizen any day.

Agreed, not that I think Lawende was intoxicated but the couple Lawende saw were not necessarily the killer & Kate, they could just as easily have been another couple.

The minor trouble I have with the description given by P. C. Smith is the combination of "morning-coat" with a "deerstalker" hat, it just strikes me as an odd combination for a well-dressed man to wear.

Regards, Jon S.