PC William Smith

[lynn cates]

fireplace

Hello Jon. I wasn't referring to MJK. But could she not warm her food in the small fireplace?

Cheers.
LC

[Wickerman]

Digestion time for fish, 30 to 60 minutes depending on type of fish.
Potato's, up to 60 minutes, .....no PhD required to obtain commonly available data.

Kelly last ate a meal between 2:00 am & 3:00 am Friday morning.

Regards, Jon S.

[Simon Wood]

Hi Wickerman,

Where did Kelly get the money for her Friday morning fish and potatoes? It certainly wasn't from GH.

And from where did she get the meal? Between 2.00 and 3.00am she was cooched up with Mr. Astrakhan.

Regards,

Simon

[Wickerman]

Hello Jon. I wasn't referring to MJK. But could she not warm her food in the small fireplace?

Cheers.
LC

Lynn, these people lived hour to hour. They had a room sparsly furnished and pretty much all the clothing they had was what they had on their backs.
A room over their head was little more than a shelter from the elements, no kitchen, no toilet, only a fireplace. They eat when they have the money to go to the shop, milk, tea, meat, potato, bread, all bought for immediate consumption. Thats why lunchrooms or what we would call cafeteria's were so popular. For a few pence you get a cooked meal (like Coles) because you have no facilites to either keep or cook food for yourself.

We can always make exceptions if we choose to defend an argument but the fact remains because Kelly was pennyless and borderline destitute she immediately spent any money she earned.
In this case she had a customer at midnight and entertained him possibly for an hour?, and ate her last meal, perhaps with the proceeds, sometime after 2:00 am.

Regards, Jon S.

[Wickerman]

Hi Wickerman,

Where did Kelly get the money for her Friday morning fish and potatoes? It certainly wasn't from GH.

Blotchy.

And from where did she get the meal? Between 2.00 and 3.00am she was cooched up with Mr. Astrakhan.

Regards,

Simon

Well Simon, sadly I suppose this thread has drifted away from P. C. Smith. So gladly I see your question brings us back full circle.

Man seen by P. C. Smith:
"...He had a parcel done up in newspaper in his hand, about 18 inches long and 6 to 8 inches broad."

Man seen by Hutchinson:
"...He also had a kind of a small parcel in his left hand with a kind of strap round it."

What was in those parcels?

Regards, Jon S.

[Simon Wood]

Hi Wickerman,

If PC Smith was right, me laddo was carrying the biggest two penn'orth of cod in history.

Just out of interest, why exactly would these two Ripper suspects have been carrying fish suppers?

Regards,

Simon

[Ben]

Kelly last ate a meal between 2:00 am & 3:00 am Friday morning.

I'm inclined to doubt it.

Various factors can reduce the rate of digestion quite significantly, sleep being one, alcohol being another, both of which were present in Kelly's case. In any case, the time at which she had her last meal doesn't really impact on the issue of whether or not she went out after Blotchy. Even if she did eat at 2.00am, she could easily have been munching on the contents if a food parcel brought in by Blotchy at 11:45pm.

All the best,
Ben

[Wickerman]

Hi Wickerman,

If PC Smith was right, me laddo was carrying the biggest two penn'orth of cod in history.

Cod 'n chips twice, if you please...

Just out of interest, why exactly would these two Ripper suspects have been carrying fish suppers?

I thought it funny Simon, that Kelly's last meal was fish & potato's while an earlier JtR suspect had been seen carrying a newspaper parcel, which is how fish & chips was traditionally bought (as you know).
It was just a matter of making an amusing connection between two pieces of evidence.

What better way of making your victim feel at ease than to offer a cosy little supper for two?

Regards, Jon S.

[lynn cates]

no take out

Hello Jon.

"Kelly last ate a meal between 2:00 am & 3:00 am Friday morning."

Very well. But surely that did not preclude her preparing it at home?

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

Be stll my heart, it's Danny Boy.

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

[lynn cates]

Stand back! It's tea time!

Hello (again) Jon.

"What was in those parcels?"

Ah, I see where you are heading--fish and chips rather than grapes.

Once saw a slightly derogatory cartoon (Sherman and Peabody, if I recall properly) in which an Englishman was enticed to swim the English Channel by means of a tea bag affixed to a pole and dangled before him.

A bit of a stretch?

Cheers.
LC

[Wickerman]

I'm inclined to doubt it.

In any case, the time at which she had her last meal doesn't really impact on the issue of whether or not she went out after Blotchy.

All the best,
Ben

Oh, it most certainly does!

It cannot be claimed that no evidence exists in support of Kelly going out again. We can all have doubts whether she did or not, but it cannot be claimed that no evidence exists.

It all depends on how you choose to interpret the evidence, and of course, how much you prefer to downplay the obvious by special pleading, too much alchohol, too little sleep, etc.

Regards, Jon S.

[Wickerman]

Alcohol does not remain in the digestive system long enough to have any affect on the digestive process of food in the stomach. If you drink alcohol long before your meal the alcohol is absorbed by the body. Only if you drink alcohol with food, or after you have eaten can you claim the potential for a small, miniscule, affect, the reason being alcohol is mostly absorbed in 10-15 minutes after being taken and 10-15 minutes is not sufficient time to break down a meal.

Sleep can slow the digetive period down providing you eat then fall asleep directly afterwards.

Neither can be applied to Kelly's situation between 1:00 am & 3:30 am.

Regards, Jon S.

[Ben]

We can all have doubts whether she did or not, but it cannot be claimed that no evidence exists

Well fortunately I never claimed any such thing. I think the evidence for her remaining indoors after she was last seen by Mary Cox is stronger than the evidence for her venturing out again, yes, but in this case I was simply observing that Kelly's dining time tells us very little about her movements in an out of the court in the small hours. You seem to be suggesting that a 2:00-3.00am food consumption bolsters the suggestion that Kelly "went out after Blotchy" when it absolutely does no such thing, not that I agree that she had her last meal at that time. 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-medical/how-alcohol-slows-down-digestion/

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/12/101214201525.htm

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

Neither can be applied to Kelly's situation between 1:00 am & 3:30 am.

How could you possibly know? How do you know she wasn't eating and drinking during this time frame? How do you know she didn't fall asleep very shortly after this? For all you know both can be "applied to Kelly's situation".

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.

Regards,
Ben

[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.