Bowyer´s inquest testimony

[Elamarna]

Pierre

Definition of oblique in English:
adjective
1Neither parallel nor at right angles to a specified or implied line; slanting: we sat on the settee oblique to the fireplace

That Is has in Richards plans and has been suggested by others, it is not barricading the door

but of course you not reading this are you

[Pierre]

Pierre

Definition of oblique in English:
adjective
1Neither parallel nor at right angles to a specified or implied line; slanting: we sat on the settee oblique to the fireplace

That Is has in Richards plans and has been suggested by others, it is not barricading the door

but of course you not reading this are you

Definition of "was drawn obliquely": It is describing how, in what way, the bed was moved. Not how it was standing in the room.

"On the bed, which was drawn obliquely across the small room..." (Dew)

Thus:

[Elamarna]

Definition of "was drawn obliquely": It is describing how, in what way, the bed was moved. Not how it was standing in the room.

"On the bed, which was drawn obliquely across the small room..." (Dew)

Thus:

Pierre
"Definition of "was drawn obliquely": It is describing how, in what way, the bed was moved. Not how it was standing in the room". Where does this definition come from, as it is so specific it more like a personal view of what it means, not a definition

Sorry that is nonsense, if it was drawn obliquely across the room, it means it was moved from from where it started, parallel to the side wall from head to foot to a position that is at an angle to this. putting it parallel to the door, also moves it to a right angle to the side wall.

drawing little beds on a image of an oblique angle does nothing.

you have your view, so be it.

[Elamarna]

Just one simple question.

you do know that Dew wrote that account 50 years after the event don't you?

[Pierre]

Just one simple question.

you do know that Dew wrote that account 50 years after the event don't you?

Naturally.

[Pcdunn]

I will admit that Dew's description of the bed being oblique has been niggling at me, because it does not agree with the position seen in the photograph called MJK1.
This also means the arguments that the bed was against the partition (with what appeared to be a door-- either functioning or non-functioning-- set into it) are no longer valid.
I think we should take Dew's description as meaning it is how he first saw the bed when he looked into the room, as the interpretation of "drawn across the room" not meaning as it was standing there displays a misunderstanding of his phrasing of the period.
Very well. How should we reconcile Dew's statement with what the MJK1 photograph shows? Or for that matter, the remark that the door from the Court "knocked against the table"?
1) The killer must have moved the bed into an oblique position so he could more easily move around it and reach the corpse from all directions.
2) If this is the case, then the investigating officials must have been responsible for shifting the bed back against the partition for the photographer's ease of working-- hence the position seen in MJK1.
3) The above seems sensible, and fits with the inquest question about a witness hearing any sounds of furniture being moved around in the night.
4) However, given that Dew's memoir was written many years later, perhaps his memory of the bed's oblique position came from movements to it by the investigating parties AFTER the room was entered (sensible enough, maybe, if the photographer needed to get around it to take the picture called MJK3).

So-- our mental exercise hasn't really gotten us very far, I'm afraid. Dew either recalled the scene perfectly, or got some details wrong-- in any case, the bed was AT SOME POINT, in an oblique position at odds with MJK1.

[Elamarna]

Pcdunn,

nice interpretation

however you missed that the doctors could have moved it during their examination

don’t see a problem myself, it fits ok with richardh's plan in post 614 on praters stairs thread.'s

Robert st Devil has also suggested the bed at an oblique angle in the past.

Believe I may have suggest that the bed was moved to allow Jack to work

As you say, its how we interoperate an account written 50 years after the account , by some one whos part in the investigation has been disputed in the past.

i think we can say however that he is not suggesting the bed is barricading the door.

[Elamarna]

Naturally.

And that doesn’t cause you any problems ?
There have been plenty of investigations into witness recall which suggest that memory can alter after only a few weeks, let alone 50 years.

People don't lie; but they can misremember.

The same is often said of Anderson, writing about 20 years after the events and Swanson, unknown when he wrote the marginalia but at least 20 years.

elamarna

[Pierre]

I will admit that Dew's description of the bed being oblique has been niggling at me, because it does not agree with the position seen in the photograph called MJK1.
This also means the arguments that the bed was against the partition (with what appeared to be a door-- either functioning or non-functioning-- set into it) are no longer valid.

Well, I think Dew´s description is not enough for drawing the conclusion that the bed was not positioned as in MJK1. But together with MJK3 and the coroner´s question about beds or tables being pulled around I agree that the argument that the bed was positioned as in MJK1 when the police arrived at the crime scene is no longer valid.

I think we should take Dew's description as meaning it is how he first saw the bed when he looked into the room, as the interpretation of "drawn across the room" not meaning as it was standing there displays a misunderstanding of his phrasing of the period.
Very well. How should we reconcile Dew's statement with what the MJK1 photograph shows? Or for that matter, the remark that the door from the Court "knocked against the table"?

1) The killer must have moved the bed into an oblique position so he could more easily move around it and reach the corpse from all directions.

It is a reasonable thought. But if the door was easy to open, why would the killer not have drawn the bed obliquely across the room until it reached the position in front of the door to block it so no one could get in and disturb him?

2) If this is the case, then the investigating officials must have been responsible for shifting the bed back against the partition for the photographer's ease of working-- hence the position seen in MJK1.

I agree. And the leg also seem to have fallen down in MJK1, if I am not mistaken, something that should have it´s explanation from the moving of the bed back into the position were it used to be (the position known to McCarthy).

3) The above seems sensible, and fits with the inquest question about a witness hearing any sounds of furniture being moved around in the night.

4) However, given that Dew's memoir was written many years later, perhaps his memory of the bed's oblique position came from movements to it by the investigating parties AFTER the room was entered (sensible enough, maybe, if the photographer needed to get around it to take the picture called MJK3).

I don´t think so, since Walter Dew writes that he first tried the door, which would not yield, and after that he looked through the window. If he had seen the bed and table blocking the door, or even being in any way positioned so the door could not be opened, he would not have been trying to get in since the murderer could have been in the room.

So-- our mental exercise hasn't really gotten us very far, I'm afraid. Dew either recalled the scene perfectly, or got some details wrong-- in any case, the bed was AT SOME POINT, in an oblique position at odds with MJK1.

I don´t think it is a purely mental exercise, but we are interpreting the MJK3 photo, the coroner´s statement and Dew´s description.

What Phillips said can be used as a mental exercise though: his description could fit both MJK3 and MJK1. And that is interesting.

Regards Pierre

[Rosella]

I wouldn't be taking anything that Dew wrote in his memoirs as gospel. His memoirs contain several errors on the cases he investigated, (as do other published reminiscences of retired police officers.) He was inclined to self-aggrandisement (why would he be the one who first tried Mary's door?) and lived too long on his reputation as the man who nabbed Crippen. I doubt that he would have kept notes on his Ripper-hunting days.

[MysterySinger]

In MJK1 I see a bed that is at a slight angle to the partition wall (oblique). It isn't flush with the partition but the head of the bed is almost against it whereas the foot of the bed has to be away from it.

[Elamarna]

That seems very reasonable MysterySinger.

I think most of us are of same opinion on this one.

[Pierre]

That seems very reasonable MysterySinger.

I think most of us are of same opinion on this one.

Good logic. Let the majority rule. As in good old times when the earth was flat.

Regards Pierre

[Elamarna]

know I said I had finished for the day but just saw you last post here.
there is a lack of known evidence here to back your view as far as most of us are aware

In your undisclosed sources, is there anything to back up your claims about barricading the door and leaving via the partition.

you should be able to answer that one Pierre in one word

[Pierre]

know I said I had finished for the day but just saw you last post here.
there is a lack of known evidence here to back your view as far as most of us are aware

In your undisclosed sources, is there anything to back up your claims about barricading the door and leaving via the partition.

you should be able to answer that one Pierre in one word

Hi Steve,

I know that you will do anything to claim that the bed was not moved by the killer to barricade the door to the yard, notwithstanding that 1) the coroner asked Prater if she had heard any beds or tables being pulled around, 2) that the police could not open the door and 3) that Dew stated in his Memoirs that the bed was drawn across the room.

Regards, Pierre