Bowyer´s inquest testimony

[Robert St Devil]

Hello Pierre.

[Alt #3] you have to extend the line leading from DOOR. The door knob is in the upper left corner. It has a curved reflection of light on it. Currently you just have it pointed at the corner of the wall. Moving from right to left, you can see where the 'white' wall turns into the dark door.

[Pierre]

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.

Hi,

Interesting. But why do you think we see a window?

If you look at this picture, what do you think is the best interpretation of what we see, and why?

I think alternative 1 is OK. Then the knob to the left must be something on the wall to hang things on or perhaps a wardrobe. But we can´t know what it is.

As for alternative 2, there weren´t two doors leading to the court so I don´t think alternative 2 is possible.

Alt 3: The window (small one) wasn´t right beside the door. There was a corner between them. So this alternative isn´t possible either.

Alt 4: The "knob" is one thing that makes me want to favour this alternative, although I have chosen to think that the door is to the right, which I did only because of James Tully´s drawing.

So it must be alternative 1 or 4. But which one?

And for both alternatives, the windows should be to the right in the photograph.

Regards Pierre

[Robert St Devil]

May I ask why?

The only comment I have made on MJK3 is that it does not show the table and bed barricading the door.

Are you saying that you think MJK3 does show the table and bed barricading the door? If so, how are your three questions relevant to that point? If not, why are you interested in my opinion?

David Orsan & MysterySinger.
To answer your question, i have become convinced about the MJK3 photo. Pierre only sees the door. Elamarna may have seen the curtain. So, after our conversation on the Collier thread, i would consider your opinion to be the most unbiased in deciding if I am seeing what I tend to see in MJK3 now.

[MJK1 FRAMEWORK] forget about hidden doors and tables barricading doors. Lets say that the room is how you would expect it to be if you were taking the MJK1 photo. The wall on the opposite side of the bed is the partitioned wall. To your right is her locked door. To your left is the fireplace or oil stove. And directly behind you are the two windows.

[MJK3 ANGLE] in the mjk1 photo, mary kelly has bundle of covers by her right calf. Lets say that you have taken mjk1 and have moved to the opposite sideof the bed. There is a space between the bed and the wall, and you position your camera next to the bed and at a height slightly higher than that bundle of covers. You angle your camera towards the corner between the door and the broken paned window; so now, in your frame, you would be looking across Mary Kellys pelvis, the bedside table AND also see the door and window. I am saying that this how MJK3 was taken.
1. Do you see the knob in the upper left corner? It looks like a dark circle. Thats the door that McCarthy just busted open.
2. That white strip hanging from the top of the photo. Can you see that being the light shining behind the edge of the curtain? The ones that Bowyer pushes aside. In other words, what Pierre is calling the door, im saying its the window.
3. There is some kind of bundle at the bottom of the photo, below her leg. That would be the bundle of covers that i mentioned in mjk1.

*I have bern trying to ascertain wherethe corner of the wall is, but the shading is not that great, so its location is speculative. But the brick measurements were posted on the forum, so ive been 'swagging' it.

[PICTURE #4] MysterySinger posted that mjk3 has a '4' on it. The NY Herald wrote that the photographer took several photos. To me... Mjk3 looks likeit belongs in a series of photos. Im trying to imagine a photographer choosing the mjk3 angle as his next&only option after mjk1. I would think he would have worked his way around her bed, beginning with her face. Then, moved down to the sideof the bed by ber left leg. The Herald states the he also took photos from the Court.

[MysterySinger]

Perhaps if the photographer obtained several negatives the question would be how come we only know of one decent photo plus one that may have been manipulated in some way. MJK3 has a number 4 in the bottom right corner, for example, which may or may not signify anything.

[David Orsam]

In this instance, Mr Orsam, it is your opinion that i am interested in.

May I ask why?

The only comment I have made on MJK3 is that it does not show the table and bed barricading the door.

Are you saying that you think MJK3 does show the table and bed barricading the door? If so, how are your three questions relevant to that point? If not, why are you interested in my opinion?

[Robert St Devil]

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

In this instance, Mr Orsam, it is your opinion that i am interested in.

[Pierre]

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

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

Thanks Sam.

The hypothesis in that one is that we see curtains on MJK. But why does the "curtains" have squares on them?

Regards Pierre

[David Orsam]

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

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

An interesting thread Sam, in which Simon Wood was comprehensively schooled by someone who obviously knew what he was talking about.

[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.

[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

[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]

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.

[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.

[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

[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.