Elizabeth Prater

[Sam Flynn]

Jake,

Our posts crossed, but happily there's not too much overlap in what we said!

PS: I don't want any jokes about "Goading", OK? This is a civilised discussion.

[perrymason]

Pursuant to Jake's and Sam's posts, exactly whom other than Elizabeth and Mary do we know was registered there? Was that floor.. at that time, hers alone? Maybe connected rooms with doors one could leave open if the room was unrented? The plot thickens....

Best regards.

[Tom_Wescott]

Goadonya, Sam, goadonya!

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Jake L]

Sam,

I too hear the voice of Goad, brother.

I'm beginning to think that they used "front room" not in the traditional sense, but rather meaning "the room that comes first once you go up the stairs". This would have been the room directly above nr 13, methinks.

But that doesn't really explain the lights. There must have been gaps in the wainscotting (<- desperate theorising)

[Sam Flynn]

Goadonya, Sam, goadonya!

Hadn't thought of that one!

10/10

[Stewart P Evans]

I Tell You What

Jake,
Our posts crossed, but happily there's not too much overlap in what we said!
PS: I don't want any jokes about "Goading", OK? This is a civilised discussion.

I tell you what Gareth, you and Jake believe just whatever you like. For me the words "...the back of the lodging house where the windows look into Millers Court" sound pretty plain to me.

I do not need the Goad plan pointing out to me, I have had a copy of that since 1994 when Jon Ogan obtained a set during our research. I have also had a copy of the new book for two weeks and am aware of that rendering also. I think I'll stay with the likes of Phil Sugden and the authors of the A-Z who all seem to make the same interpretation that I do.

I think one of the others pointed out that the rear of the lodging house at 30 Dorset Street, just two doors away from Miller's court, would be visible from Prater's room above Kelly's, especially a light shining there. This is a long building which stretches almost as far back as the whole of Miller's Court.

It is one of those cases where there is an impasse and you are not going to change my mind, I simply think that you are wrong, no matter how you argue the semantics of it all. Of course, if you produce rock solid evidence rather than speculation, then that's a different matter.

[Rob Clack]

Elizabeth Prater in her Inquest statement said "I frequently hear such cries from the back of the lodging house where the windows look into Millers Court". I don't think there's much doubt that Prater was referring to 30 Dorset Street, a four storied building building overlooking the two storied dwellings of Millers Court. Prater didn't say she saw the lodging house from her room but the lights shone on the court.

Sam, there's a Crossingham Lodging House at 8 Whites Row, South side and I think that is the one being reffered to in The Times report.

Rob

[Tom_Wescott]

Stewart,

Fear not. I went through this with Sam some time back on the Diemschitz/Diemschutz issue. He refused to listen to reason, but after some months went by, he was able to see the error of his ways and apologized for his obstinance. I'm sure he'll come around here as well.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Stewart P Evans]

Thank You

Elizabeth Prater in her Inquest statement said "I frequently hear such cries from the back of the lodging house where the windows look into Millers Court". I don't think there's much doubt that Prater was referring to 30 Dorset Street, a four storied building building overlooking the two storied dwellings of Millers Court. Prater didn't say she saw the lodging house from her room but the lights shone on the court.
Sam, there's a Crossingham Lodging House at 8 Whites Row, South side and I think that is the one being reffered to in The Times report.
Rob

Rob,
Thank you very much for that, dare I say, common sense. But if people wish to make their own interpretations, hey that's fine, and I shall be accused of all sorts of things if I push this any further.

[Sam Flynn]

If anyone can elucidate on the internal layout of number 26 Dorset Street, I'd be eternally grateful as I just can't work out how the building was divided up in 1888.

Hello Fiona,

We don't really know, but from the dreaded Telegraph report of 10th November there were 7 rooms above Kelly's - which, on the surface, is quite neat if we consider that Kelly lived in #13 and Prater in #20 (13 + 7 = 20). The site of the Kate Marshall murder, as we've seen, was in room #19, was also located (somewhere) above where Kelly used to live.

Whilst these were tough times, it's unlikely that rooms 14-20 were all crammed onto the first floor, which strongly suggests that rooms 14-?? (where "??" equals any number less than 19) were located on floors further up. Rob Clack earlier suggested a sensible distribution of rooms.

I tried a while back to offer a tentative reconstruction based, which was lost during the Casebook "crash". I've just found an earlier version on my hard drive, which ought to help us visualise roughly what the ground and first floors may have looked like at least:



The first floor front need not necessarily have been a single room - it may have been split down the middle to give the tenants one window each, so to speak. If so, and the first floor contained rooms 18-20, then it may well have been the case that rooms 14-17 were split between the floors above.

I should clarify that my labelling the first floor front as #20 is purely in line with my contention (call it conjecture, whatever) that this may have been Prater's room, and is in no way to be seen as an assertion on my part that this was how it really was.

[Jake L]

Ahem,
Lest I'm accused of "believing" something, I want to point out I tried look at it from from both sides - considering the general vagueness of MRS P's statement.

In fact, the Ronan trial transcripts make a very good case for the room overlooking the court being the "front room".

/jake

[Stewart P Evans]

Remind Me

Somebody remind me never to start a thread like this again. In fact...

[perrymason]

Stewart do press on, this is a great thread so far. Having you conclude what Ive surmised is frankly pleasing, but I see Sam and Jakes contention, and I understand the gap that exists there.

I would be delighted though if a consensus agreed that Elizabeth referred to sounds that she heard from a courtyard facing window...because Marys proximity to her door or window, or the state of them at that moment are I think very important to the volume her voice would have in that court. And from what side of the door it was likely uttered.

If as has been pointed out to me, that Mary was on her bed for example, somewhere approx 6 feet inside the main structure, then the acoustics might be affected. Thicker walls?...Im guessing.

If the voice was heard through a window that faced the courtyard, which it appears to me it was, then it probably was Mary...for no woman that we know of in that court was out of their room, or stated that they made the sound themselves.

Best regards.

[Jake L]

Stewart,

Still, I think it was worth it.

/Jake

[Sam Flynn]

I'm sure he'll come around here as well.

I will, of course do so, Tom, provided I find evidence sufficient to refute the bald statement made by Prater that "I live in 20 room Miller's-court above the shed" (Telegraph, 13th November). I'll only say that the underlined bit clinches it for me, and it is not a semantic argument. It may only have been reported in one newspaper, but that strikes me as a detail that cannot be explained away by a mis-hearing, and I can't see why anyone would wish to invent it.

This is purely my perception, of course. Other esteemed colleagues are, of course, of course, of course, free to politely dissent or make up their own minds. That's what we're here for.