Bowyer´s inquest testimony

[Pierre]

Hi,

At the inquest, Bowyer testified:

" There was a curtain. I put my hand through the broken pane and lifted the curtain.

I saw two pieces of flesh lying on the table.

[Coroner] Where was this table ? - In front of the bed, close to it.

The second time I looked I saw a body on this bed, and blood on the floor.

Why did Bowyer not see the body on the bed the first time he looked in through the window?

Can this be the reason why he did not see the body the first time? The table was "in front of the bed" if you were trying to enter the room:

[GUT]

Or as simple as that when he saw the lumps of bloody flesh he pulled back, before he even looked at anything else in the room.

But then the simplest answer is usually the closest to the facts.

[Wickerman]

It takes time for your eyes to adjust to a dark room, when its light outside.
At his first glance he saw what was directly in front of him, he had to take a second look to appreciate the context of what he saw on the table.

There's no mystery here Pierre.

[Pierre]

It takes time for your eyes to adjust to a dark room, when its light outside.
At his first glance he saw what was directly in front of him, he had to take a second look to appreciate the context of what he saw on the table.

There's no mystery here Pierre.

But how could he see that it was flesh lying on the table, then?

Since MJK3 is showing the table and bed barricading the door the testimony of Bowyer becomes easier to understand.

But I don´t think peole want to see that. They want to see what the believe instead of believing what they see.

Regards Pierre

[David Orsam]

Since MJK3 is showing the table and bed barricading the door

Sorry Pierre, but it is not showing that. Please stop misrepresenting the evidence.

[GUT]

Sorry Pierre, but it is not showing that. Please stop misrepresenting the evidence.

Why not most people with a pet theory twist the facts to suit the theory rather than twisting the theory to suit the facts, Pierre may as well too, at least it makes it easy to spot the theories that are dead wrong.

[Pierre]

Why not most people with a pet theory twist the facts to suit the theory rather than twisting the theory to suit the facts, Pierre may as well too, at least it makes it easy to spot the theories that are dead wrong.

I prefer trying new thoughts. The old ones haven´t led to solving this case.

Regards Pierre

[David Orsam]

I prefer trying new thoughts.

There's nothing wrong with that, but saying, without qualification, "MJK3 is showing the table and bed barricading the door" is not a "new thought" it is a false statement.

[Michael W Richards]

Should start clarifying what table we are talking about. The night table, the one that was on the left side of Marys bed as you enter the room...and the main table, under the front window against the wall. Bowyer likely saw the night table contents, and then pulled the curtains back further to see the bed and Mary.

[IchabodCrane]

Hi Pierre,
this was already on the other thread, the one with the suggestion.
Surely Bowyer would have answered 'next to the bed' if the table had been between the door and bed as was suggested by you on the other thread. In fact Bowyer's statement can be taken as a solid backup of the table and bed having been in the position shown on MJK1.
There is nothing whatsoever in either the witness statements nor the photographs that supports the bed and tables having been in any other position than shown on MJK1.
Regards,
IchabodCrane

[Wickerman]

But how could he see that it was flesh lying on the table, then?

It will have been a pile of something flesh colour but bloody, and although he didn't mention it, there was likely an odor, or a smell that was not usual for her room.

Since MJK3 is showing the table and bed barricading the door the testimony of Bowyer becomes easier to understand.

Well, I don't see it the way you see it.
I have no doubt that when the outside door was forced, it was pushed open and banged against a table, the table piled with flesh. That however, does not mean the table was pushed up against the door, it could have been 2ft away.
The way you describe the arrangement of furniture is speculation.

We do have contemporary sketches in the press which show a table under one window, another table at the left side of the bed, as confirmed by a photo. The right side of the bed was adjacent to the partition (with that ghost door), and something like a washstand behind the head of the bed, at the back of the door, once opened.

I think you have picked on a subject that has already been established.

[Sam Flynn]

I have no doubt that when the outside door was forced, it was pushed open and banged against a table, the table piled with flesh. That however, does not mean the table was pushed up against the door, it could have been 2ft away.

Indeed, Jon, the table would have to have been some distance away for the door to have "banged" against it at all. If it had been put against the door as a barricade, then the table would not have been "banged into", rather pushed across the floorboards and/or toppled over. It was rather a small table, after all - so small, in fact, that its effectiveness as a barricade would have been negligible.

[Robert St Devil]

Sorry Pierre, but it is not showing that. Please stop misrepresenting the evidence.

Regardless, David, im still going to ask:

1. Do you see the doorknob in the upper left corner of MJK3?
2. Can you see the thin white strip in MJK3 being a ray of light shining between the edge of the broken pane window and the curtain?
3. Do you see the bundle of covers at the bottom of the picture of MJK3?

My thoughts...
That door opened inward, and struck that table. Bowyer pushed aside that curtain, and saw that table between ("in front of") him and the bed. He saw those lumps of flesh on that table. That table sits up a little higher than the bed, so he had to look over it to see Kelly.

[Sam Flynn]

Useful old thread on the Kelly photos

There's an old thread with excellent plans/drawings showing potential camera angles (etc) here:

http://forum.casebook.org/showthread.php?t=2480

[David Orsam]

Regardless, David, im still going to ask:

1. Do you see the doorknob in the upper left corner of MJK3?
2. Can you see the thin white strip in MJK3 being a ray of light shining between the edge of the broken pane window and the curtain?
3. Do you see the bundle of covers at the bottom of the picture of MJK3?

I assume those questions are addressed to Pierre, not me, Mr St Devil.