Elizabeth Prater

[Stewart P Evans]

Conjecture

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.

However, much will remain conjecture, but some like it that way, I believe.

[sdreid]

Hi Philip,

I've forgotten who did them but I also remember those anaglyph 3D enhanced pictures on here. I'm afraid they were lost in the crash.

At least I still have 3D Hondo on Beta.

[richardnunweek]

Hello Stewart,
I have never addressed you personally on this case , although I have posted on Casebook for many years and known amongst .
Simply one question If I may.
In your opinion, was the cry witnessed by several court dwellers on the morning of the 9th November 88, that of Mary Jane Kellys demise, or could there be alternative explanations?.
I appreciate you response.
Regards Richard.

[perrymason]

Stewart if I may say that I think its one of the shortcomings of this study, in that truly knowledgable people on the subject cannot in good conscience eliminate some possibilities, and in many cases, there is insufficient or contradictory evidence to weight one opinion over another.

I feel thats what I can provide here,.. I can take the risk, and actually choose which account I personally believe. And if I ask one of my theoretical scenario questions, the resulting discussion should only add to someones knowledge.

I think this is one case where Im willing to choose... a courtyard window, because it better fits the events and statements over all.

Now before I add that I believe Marys door was open at the time, she was inside, and she willingly let her killer in after an annoyed awakening....Ill shut up.

My best regards.

[Tom_Wescott]

Seeing Perry Mason giving Stewart Evans advice on how to research the Ripper case may just be the most Twilight Zoney thing I've ever seen on the Casebook, and that's really saying something. It's akin to Ernest Borgnine giving Johnny Depp advice on how to attract women.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[perrymason]

Seeing Perry Mason giving Stewart Evans advice on how to research the Ripper case may just be the most Twilight Zoney thing I've ever seen on the Casebook, and that's really saying something. It's akin to Ernest Borgnine giving Johnny Depp advice on how to attract women.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

How you read me as giving Mr Evans advice is beyond me Tom...if anything it was expressing angst at the fact that even the best in the field dont have enough evidence or facts to make firm conclusions with...and validating the role of the lesser uninformed people like me who take risky chances with ideas...because it draws out the education from people like Mr Evans.

You must have missed the many times Ive referred to him as a mentor and leader I guess...or like trying to stir up things....I think its #2 actually.

Regards Tom.


Sorry...I neglected to mention the value of information like Jake and Sam and others provided as well.
...

[Tom_Wescott]

Michael,

You've never needed my help stirring things up. And as for 'firm conclusions', I'd say we have one here. I'm not even sure why there's a debate in the first place. Prater was pretty clear in stating where she lived. I think us Ripperheads more often than not like to see controversy where there is none just to have something to debate. And what I got from your post to Stewart was that he's afraid to take risks whereas you're not, obviously forgetting (or not appreciating) that it was Stewart who put his name on a new suspect, was the first major author to propose that Mary Kelly was not a Ripper victim, and endorsed the then-unpopular theory that Stride was not a Ripper victim. And he did this in the 'real world' of literature, not on a message board like us anoraks.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Sam Flynn]

Hi Tom,

And as for 'firm conclusions', I'd say we have one here.

I reckon we have two. Bargain!

[George Hutchinson]

Can we have a new collective term for Ripperologists? Can we call it a bitch of Ripperologists, because that's what I keep seeing?

Year in, year out, people whom I generally respect just taking out their dislike of other people with childish, vicious little digs. God, I hate it. The worst thing is that some of the posters here mix their slanging matches in with the intelligent reasoning of their posts, so you have to read it. It's like having to walk through lush green grass peppered with masses of dog turds sometimes.

Stewart - fret not. These cases always end with you being right. Remarkable, really, for someone without an original Tom Robinson.

*expects abusive phone call of the type Don Rumbelow gives*

Stan - thankfully, I can say for sure that the anaglyphs on the crashed forum were a RE-POST from one of the earlier extant closed forums and they are still accessible. I know whoever did them not only posted the standard green and red anaglyphs but also did stereoviews of the same (I guess that would be easy to do by just overlaying the two stereoview images and saturating the colours to red and green to make the anaglyph). I only saw the anaglyphs as I had 3D glasses then, but didn't own stereoscopic glasses at the time, so I'd love to see them as they SHOULD be done.

Sorry, everyone else, for the digression.

Prater lived at the back.

There.

PHILIP

[Cap'n Jack]

Michael, I found your discussion very sound, polite and to the point.
I can't see any possible danger of the manner of things that Tom mentions at all, and am at a loss to explain the comments directed against you, or Sam.
I think we come to a place where folks have lengthy and protracted points of view, usually fuelled by the fact that they have published works in this direction, which they either wish to protect or disseminate in a wider fashion.
But that has nothing to do with the fact of the matter.
I must say that I have found all the discussion here, apart from Stewart and Tom, to have been based entirely around the facts of the matter... and then ego has broken through. The 'I am right and you are wrong' just because posters have some kind of vested and selfish interest in the matter.
It is a discussion board, and I can find no fault in your discussion, or Sam's.
In fact I was enjoying it, until the petticoats started fluffing.
Ah well.
Keep it up, my good chap, you have much to say, and you must say it.

[perrymason]

Michael,

You've never needed my help stirring things up. And as for 'firm conclusions', I'd say we have one here. I'm not even sure why there's a debate in the first place. Prater was pretty clear in stating where she lived. I think us Ripperheads more often than not like to see controversy where there is none just to have something to debate. And what I got from your post to Stewart was that he's afraid to take risks whereas you're not, obviously forgetting (or not appreciating) that it was Stewart who put his name on a new suspect, was the first major author to propose that Mary Kelly was not a Ripper victim, and endorsed the then-unpopular theory that Stride was not a Ripper victim. And he did this in the 'real world' of literature, not on a message board like us anoraks.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

Just so you can see how badly you read my comments, or how badly I conveyed my thoughts,... the comment was actually to affirm Sams right as a serious member of this study to assert his belief despite the evidence that Stewart and others, I among them, read a certain way. Because there are "contrary" quotes...over the shed is not over Marys room...and as long as we have one quote like that even the best in the field often have difficulty dismissing it entirely. Its a lament that there is little hope that we could all talk on the same page about these cases...everyone can interpret much of the data we have..as it is inconclusive. Or as in this case, contradictory.

But when nobodies like me say ...Marys door was open when she uttered "oh-murder"... all sorts of information becomes available from experts...and maybe someone will see something that others dont. But at least someone will learn something. More than just me.

Clear? Its part of my role here....push the envelope and get corrected by experts....win/win...because most of the experts are teachers by virtue of their knowledge..teachers teach, and I throw chalk from the back row....or rather get chalk hurled at me.

Cheers.

[Cap'n Jack]

Hey Tom, are not these two items related?

'that it was Stewart who put his name on a new suspect, was the first major author to propose that Mary Kelly was not a Ripper victim'

[Stewart P Evans]

Here We Go Again

Hey Tom, are not these two items related?

'that it was Stewart who put his name on a new suspect, was the first major author to propose that Mary Kelly was not a Ripper victim'

Here we go again. No, I can assure you, and I AM NOT LYING, I had first thought that Kelly might not be a Ripper victim around the time of the centenary, when I gave the subject up for a while, and long before I ever heard of Tumblety. I simply didn't, and do not, know if she was. I have a completely open mind on the matter. However, I am not alone and Bernard Davies, whose grandfather was a retired police inspector, was told by his grandfather that whilst attached to the Kelly murder enquiry some of the investigating detectives told him that they didn't think she was a Ripper victim.

There's a good argument for her inclusion and, perhaps, the argument that she wasn't is weaker. But no one knows for certain. Now I don't know what it is with you A.P., you say it's drink, it sounds like jealousy, it may be pique because you haven't had your book re-published commercially. Who knows what the hell it is. But I didn't think that it would take long for you to zero in on me again. I personally think that you talk a lot of crap much of the time, but that's just my opinion and I'm sure that you'll disagree. I have been reading your Vagabond book and think that you are a talented and entertaining writer. Certainly better than I am. But what has that got to do with anything? You are very eaten up by something. If I 'fluff my petticoats' then I am doing no more than most do around here. And I think that I was doing no more or less than Gareth.

Anyway I'd better let you get back to your captive audience and your weird ideas.

[Simon Wood]

Hi All,

This has been an informative thread. I've certainly learned a lot about the layout of Millers Court and its relative position to Crossingham's.

Here's my two-bob's worth.

Here is part of Prater's statement taken on 9 November.

"I did not take much notice of the cries as I frequently hear such cries from the back of the lodging-house where the windows look into Millers Court. From 1 a.m. to 1.30 am, no one passed up the court if they did I should have seen them."

Alter her words slightly to "I frequently hear such cries from the back of [my] lodging house where [my] windows look into Millers Court", and we may have our answer.

Regards,

Simon

[perrymason]

Hi All,

This has been an informative thread. I've certainly learned a lot about the layout of Millers Court and its relative position to Crossingham's.

Here's my two-bob's worth.

Here is part of Prater's statement taken on 9 November.

"I did not take much notice of the cries as I frequently hear such cries from the back of the lodging-house where the windows look into Millers Court. From 1 a.m. to 1.30 am, no one passed up the court if they did I should have seen them."

Alter her words slightly to "I frequently hear such cries from the back of [my] lodging house where [my] windows look into Millers Court", and we may have our answer.

Regards,

Simon

I could care less who said that first Simon, but that was my take on it too.....back of the "lodging house"...she lived in.

Great minds and all that....

Cheers Simon.