Elizabeth Prater

[Stephen Thomas]

Hi Michael and Sam,
You both mention the two window scenario, one in the Court, one in Dorset St. would either of you be able to post a rough drawing of how this would work out? I'm having trouble imagining it.

Hi Debra

The two window scenario isn't really viable as it would involve Prater occupying the entire first floor of #26 (USA second floor) which was comprised of three rooms like so....


And here's another dodgy sketch of mine from the lost boards...


A bit of precision here with a graphic by Sam Flynn from the lost boards, which I'm sure he won't mind me re-posting, showing (in red) Kelly's room and by extension Room #19 DIRECTLY above, where several Ripperological geniouses here claim Prater resided despite what the good lady said herself.

[Tom_Wescott]

Fisherman,

Thank you for those kind words. They do indeed describe myself, Stewart, Dan, Rob, and Philip, aka The Infallible Four.

Stephen,

That was a quick turnaround! Thanks for bothering to read. I got the impression you weren't a Ripper Notes reader.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Fisherman]

Tom Wescott writes:
"No, it takes at least three of the four of us to agree before your suggestion is officially deemed useless."

Yes, it is silly, is it not? The earth being flat and all that...

I have no problems at all to bow to great knowledge. Nor does it bother me that there are people around who are extremely good at combining such knowledge with the gift of drawing useful conclusions from it. Furthermore, it is a joy to recognize those who add values as honesty, a will to share and a friendly attitude to it all. I bow to them!

...and if they include a true will to stay openminded at all times, and never let themselves be deceived into believing that their superiority comes with a guarantee of being unfallable, I bow even deeper. They represent all that Casebook should be about.

The best,
Fisherman

[Stephen Thomas]

what's your beef?

Illogicality, Tom. The weight of evidence shows Prater was not living DIRECTLY over Kelly full stop (or period to the woodens). While I'm here may I congratulate you on your Berner Street work. Excellent stuff.

[Fisherman]

Ally writes:

"so far I haven't seen ONE piece of evidence that points to Prater living anywhere but above Kelly"

...and I think that those who post on the thread will all agree on that, for live above Kelly she did, no doubt. The question at hand, though, is whether she lived exactly above her or not, and since we are not speaking proof but evidence here, the various reports on Prater living "almost above" Kelly, living "above the shed" and in "the first floor front room" are useful.

One of the things that have perhaps not been discussed enough here is the very obvious possibility that at least some of the newspapers will have recognized the extra spice added to the story if they reported Prater as living "above" Kelly in a manner that lent itself to interpreting it as if Prater in fact lived exactly above her. Few papers would have had the self respect to look away from the possibility that offered itself, if I am correct. I am a newspaper man myself, and though heaps of water has passed under heaps of bridges since 1888, that would be a common trait between journalists of now and then.
In consequence with this, my feeling is that IF Prater had really lived exactly above Kelly, much more would have been elaborated on the thing; "She was killed right under my very feet", "her bed was exactly under mine" and that sort of thing. The fact that there are no such sensations mentioned bears silent witness to the fact that Praters room was NOT above Kellys, at least in my opinion.

The best!
Fisherman

PS. Stephen - thanks for your kind words! DS.

[Tom_Wescott]

If my judgment is at fault, so be it - although I reiterate that I don't think it is, in this context - but I hope I've conducted myself with even-handedness and decorum. That's all I have to say.

You threw a bit fo sexiness into the mix as well, which is always appreciated.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Sam Flynn]

If my judgment is at fault, so be it - although I reiterate that I don't think it is, in this context - but I hope I've conducted myself with even-handedness and decorum. That's all I have to say.

[Ally]

Me neither Dan. But I would imagine that a historian writing the history of your life in 120 years time faced with 10 pieces of evidence that you lived in Knoxville and one that you lived in Memphis would go with the former.

I may be nuts here, but so far I haven't seen ONE piece of evidence that points to Prater living anywhere but above Kelly. I've seen speculation, but not evidence.

[Stewart P Evans]

The Last Word

This appears to be one of those debates where more than one participant wants to have the last word. The evidence presented here is often ambiguous and a great deal of weight is being placed on what may be an erroneous press report. The Daily Telegraph report has patent errors in it, as do many of the press reports.

I do not wish to sway anybody to my opinions if they do not agree with me. I am no better than the next man and I have made errors (doesn't everyone?). This debate appears to have descended to a childish level and I have certainly been given cause to re-think my past assessment of certain posters. Having admitted that I am fallible and not wishing to participate in circular arguments I shall merely post the written statement of Elizabeth Prater taken on 9th November, three days before the inquest. And, yes, we are all well aware that it gives the address as 27 Dorset Street, not 26, but that is probably to be expected as McCarthy owned the joint address of 26/27 Dorset Street.

I am not going to make any comment on this statement and have no doubt that the various combatants will make their own interpretation of it. I shall not be posting on this thread again.

[Stephen Thomas]

I would have thought that since most of the presented evidence on the thread points in the direction of Praters room NOT being directly over Kellys, one ought perhaps lend an ear to that fact. Like I said before, there seems to be every option to semantically question the former established truth when examining the texts at hand, whereas no such possibility readily offers itself when it comes to the bits pointing to Prater living over, but not EXACTLY over Kelly.

Thanks Fisherman for that most graceful exposition of my thoughts on this.

[Sam Flynn]

Therefore, since Sam has married himself to an idea that so many others think is not the right answer, it should at least give him cause to doubt his veracity.

It gives me cause, right enough, Tom - and the same should apply in reverse, which I'm sure it does.

PS: I've not married myself to this idea, it's more like it reached up and hit me between the eyes. It stung a bit to start with, but the more I pondered it, the more I came to conclude that it had knocked some sense into me

(I mean that)

[Stephen Thomas]

I honestly don't know what's wrong with some people.

Me neither Dan. But I would imagine that a historian writing the history of your life in 120 years time faced with 10 pieces of evidence that you lived in Knoxville and one that you lived in Memphis would go with the former.

[Tom_Wescott]

Is this how the boards work; no matter how much value and weight a suggestion carries, if one of the presented "respected" researchers does not agree, your suggestion is rendered useless?

No, it takes at least three of the four of us to agree before your suggestion is officially deemed useless.

f so, what happens if two of the esteemed high judges at the lofty top should disagree? Is there a hierarchy that functions up there too? And how does it look? Wescott over Evans? Evans over Clack? Hutchinson over Wescott?

Real simple. We ask Perry Mason what he thinks and bet the opposite way.

Seriously, Fish. I think what Dan means is that, if you wore a new tie, and everyone you saw commented on how awesome your tie was, you'd probably wear it more often, right? Well, if the same people said another tie sucked and just wasn't working for you, you'd probably drawer it. Therefore, since Sam has married himself to an idea that so many others think is not the right answer, it should at least give him cause to doubt his veracity. I hope that makes sense.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

P.S. Debra Arif is a "respected researcher", I'm just a bottom-feeding hack.

[Sam Flynn]

Hi Michael and Sam,
You both mention the two window scenario, one in the Court, one in Dorset St. would either of you be able to post a rough drawing of how this would work out? I'm having trouble imagining it.

Personally, Debs, I'm happy to say that I now chime with your observation that such an arrangement would have been too long - almost outrageously so - for a doss of 4/6 per week (or whatever Prater paid).

[Debra A]

Hi Michael and Sam,
You both mention the two window scenario, one in the Court, one in Dorset St. would either of you be able to post a rough drawing of how this would work out? I'm having trouble imagining it.