Bowyer´s inquest testimony

[Elamarna]

[QUOTE=Pierre;368682]

Hi Steve,

This is not his favourite song. Listen to the song and you may understand the killer.

Regards, Pierre

one could ask why you posted it in that thread, but thank you for your help.
just confirms

[Pierre]

[QUOTE=Elamarna;368571]

On a separate note, I see we both posted in Jacks song thread, my choice is obvious, especially the version with gas light.

What was the reason for yours?

regards

Hi Steve,

This is not his favourite song. Listen to the song and you may understand the killer.

Regards, Pierre

[Elamarna]

[QUOTE=Pierre;368566]Steve,

"I did not need your help to find it, I already had it and had made an interpretation of it. But I had not explicitly understood the full meaning of the source. Your question made me ask a question to the source explicitly and it was a very good help. So thanks again. "


No need for thanks, if you have the info, how would my question of :


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

allow you to fully understand the source better than before.
Either the data source says the door was barricaded or it does not?
Unless its not in plain Enlish of course!


"Steve - I do get email from people giving me all sorts of suggestions for who my so called "suspect" would be. And they are wrong. But perhaps you have better suggestions."


Sorry Pierre, I wasn't clear, I didn't email, in a post on 23/12, Said believe I know who it is. Considering the sparing I just thought you might have checked with me, no problem.

I have circulated my belief to some other people, not necessarily on the forum, but people I trust,to be held secret until you name.
if I am wrong, so be it.

However I will follow your course and not name someone, particularity when I have no evidence whatsoever to believe it yet.

If I'm right I will have the personal satisfaction of know it, and of the flaws I can see in the theory. Of course if what you have is convincing those flaws may fall away.

On a separate note, I see we both posted in Jacks song thread, my choice is obvious, especially the version with gas light.

What was the reason for yours?

regards

[Pierre]

Shame on you, if it was the evidence there, you would not need me to help you find it. you are so transparent, it is not even a challenge anymore.

I notice that you never took me up on the point that I told you some weeks back, way before xmas 23/12/2016, that I believe i know who you are going to name.

Steve,

I did not need your help to find it, I already had it and had made an interpretation of it. But I had not explicitly understood the full meaning of the source. Your question made me ask a question to the source explicitly and it was a very good help. So thanks again.

Steve - I do get email from people giving me all sorts of suggestions for who my so called "suspect" would be. And they are wrong. But perhaps you have better suggestions.

Kind regards, Pierre

[Elamarna]

Dear Steve,

Thank you so much for asking me this question. You are helping me to get forward in my research.

YES, there is.

Kind regards, Pierre

Shame on you, if it was the evidence there, you would not need me to help you find it. you are so transparent, it is not even a challenge anymore.

I notice that you never took me up on the point that I told you some weeks back, way before xmas 23/12/2016, that I believe i know who you are going to name.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by Elamarna View Post

"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:

"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"


I note you don't answer the question i asked.
However you ask the same ones you have asked before, which I have answered before.
Do you do this because you think my view will change? or do you do it to avoid answering the question?

Dear Steve,

Thank you so much for asking me this question. You are helping me to get forward with my research.

YES, there is.

Kind regards, Pierre

[Elamarna]

Originally Posted by Elamarna View Post

"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:

"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"


I note you don't answer the question i asked.
However you ask the same ones you have asked before, which I have answered before.
Do you do this because you think my view will change? or do you do it to avoid answering the question?

[Elamarna]

[QUOTE=Pierre;368544][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.



1. We do not know why that question was asked, it does not prove your point

2.The police did not attempt to open the door for several hours, they then did open it.

3. Dew, firstly made several mistakes in his memoirs,
he did not say it was drawn across the room, he said:
"which was drawn obliquely across the small room"
this very different as you well know.
Finally his memoirs were published many decades later and memory is a funny thing as we all know.

I will not do anything to claim the bed was not moved, if the evidence supported such I would also.
However I am not making a claim, I am maintaining the status quo, it is YOU who are claiming the bed was moved
we will not agree on this that is obvious.

[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

[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]

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]

That seems very reasonable MysterySinger.

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

[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.

[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.

[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