Elizabeth Prater

[Tom_Wescott]

Not blasphemy, Sam. It seems your ideas have been given the due consideration you feel they warrant, but that in the face of better evidence, the argument fails to convince everyone but yourself and AP Wolf. Consider that for a moment - yourself and AP Wolf. When those are your odds, a smart man would be sure to bet the other way.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Sam Flynn]

One gets the impression you're just saving face by continually beating this particular horse

Well, if that's what is coming across, it's the wrong impression, Tom.

I believe that most of the evidence - which I hope I have presented reasonably, and without prejudice - points in a direction that should warrant a serious reconsideration of the matter. I have done so, and I have to say that I about as certain as I can reasonably be that Prater did not occupy the room traditionally allocated to her on the night of Kelly's death.

If that's perceived as blasphemy, then feel free to stone me

[Tom_Wescott]

Sam,

One gets the impression you're just saving face by continually beating this particular horse (a corpse is a corpse, of course, of course). You lost this debate a long, long time ago. No worries, old friend, you're correct on your feelings about 80% of the time. Those are pretty darn good odds compared to most of us. Just let this one go, there's too much data putting her over Kelly's room.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Chava]

Sam, whoever lived in the room above Kelly--and we know there is a room because we can see the window clearly--would have been asked to the inquest. Prater isn't there just to say she heard a cry of 'murder' because Lewis heard that cry as well and reports it. She's there to testify as to what she heard because, I believe, she was living closest to Kelly. She heard nothing and saw nothing. This might be evidence to suggest that Kelly was alive at 1.00 am when Cox heard her singing, and dead by 1.30 am when Prater turns in for the night. I'm no supporter of the Blotchy Face theory, but I have to recognize that this is evidence for that theory.

[Sam Flynn]

True, but they also asked her if she heard the bed or other furniture being moved around in Kelly's room, which would be a pretty odd question to ask if she didn't live above her.

Hi Dan,

If Prater had indeed lived at the front of #26, then all that separated her from Kelly's room was a thin partition, a stairwell and around nine feet of landing. The sound of a table or bed being scraped across some bare floorboards a "knight's move away" (think chess) would have been audible to someone listening under such circumstances. The question was asked, after all, to coincide with Prater's reportedly having been provoked into alertness by the cat and her having heard the scream.

[Dan Norder]

Hi Sam,

True, but they also asked her if she heard the bed or other furniture being moved around in Kelly's room, which would be a pretty odd question to ask if she didn't live above her.

[Sam Flynn]

Hi Chava,

Sam, I still think she lived right above Mary. Otherwise why does she appear at the inquest? She had nothing to say beyond the fact that she didn't see Kelly that night.

Far from it - she says she heard a scream. She was also up and about at a time when Kelly might also have been, and passed her room in the early hours when she reports not having seen any light - that's important evidence, whichever way one takes it.

There were other residents of Miller's Court who weren't called to the inquest, presumably because they had nothing of material value to contribute to the proceedings.

[Chava]

Sam, I still think she lived right above Mary. Otherwise why does she appear at the inquest? She had nothing to say beyond the fact that she didn't see Kelly that night. And since this is apparently true of all the other denizens of the court except for Cox, there has to be a reason she's there and that is IMHO that she lived right above and heard nothing.

[Sam Flynn]

Hi Chava,

Lizzie says she could see lights from Kelly's room under her floorboards, doesn't she?

Prater only mentions being able to see a light in connection with her ascending to bed, when any light leeching through chinks in Kelly's partition (i.e. on Prater's left as she climbed the stairs) might have been visible.

[Sam Flynn]

Hi Chava,

So it's a 'back' room in absolute terms but a 'front' room in terms of Millers Court as it looks onto the court.

The problem is that, if you apply that reasoning, every room that faced into Miller's Court - which was almost all of them - was somehow in the "front"? I really don't think such an interpretation stands up to scrutiny. Quite simply - if someone is reported as "occupying the first floor front", or is reported as saying that they live there, then the meaning is quite clear.

[Chava]

Thanks Sam. But I think I didn't make myself clear. I know that the front always looks onto the street. The window above and slightly to the onlooker's left of Kelly's crib faces onto the court. So it's a 'back' room in absolute terms but a 'front' room in terms of Millers Court as it looks onto the court.

Suzi, that looks right to me as a floor layout for upstairs Millers Court, except that Lizzie says she could see lights from Kelly's room under her floorboards, doesn't she? Which she wouldn't be able to in the position you've given her. I am prepared to believe that Lizzie did in fact occupy a room right above Mary's. Because clearly someone did. And clearly that someone would be very much interviewed by the police as having possibly heard or seen something. Lizzie appears at the inquest but really doesn't say much except she didn't see or hear Kelly on the night in question. So I believe the only reason she was there was because she was directly above Kelly and had the room with the large window that we see clearly in the pix Stewart so kindly posted...

[Suzi]

Sorry am re scribbling this...I cant quite get my head around Mrs P's actual residence although ... I'm convinced she went up from behind that partition ...as usual -to her room ..that I suspect was above Mary's..... no doubt noting...in a rather nosey way that there was a light on or that there was some light or movement or whatever.. ....more than likely with a kitten under her arm! I can't quite get it out of my head that Mrs P may have had the luxury of a room that looked out onto Dorset St !!!! and into Millers Ct!

[Suzi]

I think this is how the layout went -Thanks to Sam here but surely this ties in with what Mrs P said re seeing the cracks of light through the boards etc on her way upstairs etc etc..Hmmmmmmmmmmm p/c not working at the mo....give me a minute.. will post when it is.....but I imagine that Mrs P came into the building behind said partition and saw the light between those stair lining/partition boards on her way upstairs...I doubt she saw anything through her floorboards!!..... If so.... What was she doing there anyway!!!

Hi all,

I think its safe to asume that the staircase was directly ahead through the door in the archway. There would have been a narrow hallway on the left, where one doorway led to the parlour...Marys room,...and I believe at one time there may have been a kitchen on that floor along that hallway somewhere. The pump in the courtyard had to be for wash and drinking, or cooking, and Im sure not every room had its own hearth like Marys in her converted quarters. I think there must have been a communal kitchen in that house at some point.

Best regards.

[Sam Flynn]

Where was the staircase leading to the upstairs rooms? That might make some difference to the location of the 'front' and 'back' rooms.

Hi Chava,

The terms "front" and "back" would have had very little to do with where the staircase was positioned or, indeed, have been influenced by any putative renumbering of the rooms. Then, as now, "front" must simply have meant "that which faced the main road" - in this case, Dorset Street - and "back" meant "that which faced away from the main road".