Casebook: Jack the Ripper - Main
   

Introduction
Victims
Suspects
Witnesses
Ripper Letters
Police Officials
Official Documents
Press Reports
Victorian London
Message Boards
Ripper Media
Authors
Dissertations
Timelines
Games & Diversions
Photo Archive
Ripper Wiki
Casebook Examiner
Ripper Podcast
About the Casebook

Most Recent Posts:
Elizabeth Stride: For what reason do we include Stride? - by Varqm 50 minutes ago.
General Discussion: The Weapon - by Ginger 4 hours ago.
General Discussion: The Weapon - by Damaso Marte 6 hours ago.
General Suspect Discussion: Kansas Physician Confirms Howard Report - by TradeName 7 hours ago.
General Suspect Discussion: Kansas Physician Confirms Howard Report - by TradeName 8 hours ago.
General Suspect Discussion: Kansas Physician Confirms Howard Report - by TradeName 8 hours ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Hutchinson, George: Any updates, or opinions on this witness. - (8 posts)
General Discussion: The Weapon - (4 posts)
General Suspect Discussion: Kansas Physician Confirms Howard Report - (3 posts)
Elizabeth Stride: For what reason do we include Stride? - (2 posts)
Ripper Notes: Status of Ripper Notes? - (1 posts)

Wiki Updates:
Robert Sagar
Edit: Chris
May 9, 2015, 12:32 am
Online newspaper archives
Edit: Chris
Nov 26, 2014, 10:25 am
Joseph Lawende
Edit: Chris
Mar 9, 2014, 10:12 am
Miscellaneous research resources
Edit: Chris
Feb 13, 2014, 9:28 am
Charles Cross
Edit: John Bennett
Sep 4, 2013, 8:20 pm

Most Recent Blogs:
Mike Covell: A DECADE IN THE MAKING.
February 19, 2016, 11:12 am.
Chris George: RipperCon in Baltimore, April 8-10, 2016
February 10, 2016, 2:55 pm.
Mike Covell: Hull Prison Visit
October 10, 2015, 8:04 am.
Mike Covell: NEW ADVENTURES IN RESEARCH
August 9, 2015, 3:10 am.
Mike Covell: UPDDATES FOR THE PAST 11 MONTHS
November 14, 2014, 10:02 am.
Mike Covell: Mike’s Book Releases
March 17, 2014, 3:18 am.

Go Back   Casebook Forums > Ripper Discussions > Victims > Mary Jane Kelly

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #591  
Old 12-22-2015, 09:14 AM
Wickerman Wickerman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 9,645
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Elamarna View Post

I prefer the time line:

initial viewing,
door opened.
maybe quick check of scene, but not essential.
photos taken, maybe 2.30 to 3.
post mortem conducted.
The press reported the post-mortem that afternoon began about 2:00pm, and wrapped up at 4:00pm. So it is unlikely the photographer would be in the room between 2-4, in my opinion.
__________________
Regards, Jon S.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #592  
Old 12-22-2015, 09:14 AM
Pierre Pierre is offline
Inactive
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 4,407
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Azarna View Post
I have been thinking about the position of the bed.

My first thoughts were that it would be rather odd to have a bed in the middle of the room like this. Usually one puts the head against a wall. Therefore I was assuming that the bed must have been moved from its normal position.

Then I wondered if perhaps this actually is the original location of the bed. Maybe the headboard is against the wall during summer months, but when it gets cold Mary moves it towards the fire. Just a thought.

For taking the photograph, surely it would be useful to have as great a distance between the photographer and the subject as possible. It is a tiny room afterall.

So having the bed tucked into one corner, and the photographer in the diagonally opposite corner of the room would be the best possible positioning for taking photos, no?

Pulling the bed towards the middle of the room would surely hinder taking pictures, not help it.

So if the bed is not flush with the walls for the photo, perhaps the logical reason is that this is the actual location of the bed when discovered?
Hi,

The bed was in this position when Mary used her room since there is blood on the door. The reason why she had moved the bed from the wall beside the door should have been people the running up and down the stairs on the other side of the wall.

The bed and table must have been moved from a position in front of the door if the door knocked against the table when the police tried to open it and, above all, because we see the bed and table standing in front of the door on MJK3.

The police must have entered the room at about 12 since there is light in the room. There may be artificial light added to it.

Just because earlier ripperologists have had other ideas about this murder site doesn´t mean they were right. It could mean they were wrong.

And just because Abberline didn´t describe what he saw in this room (except from the grate, a candle and a clay pipe) doesn´t mean he was lying.

Regards Pierre
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #593  
Old 12-22-2015, 09:16 AM
Michael W Richards Michael W Richards is offline
Assistant Commissioner
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 3,280
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Elamarna View Post
Wickerman,

if you are right that the photos were taken 4pm ish then we can almost certainly count out the light source as being natural light. By 9th November, the light would be fading fast in London.

I prefer the time line:

initial viewing,
door opened.
maybe quick check of scene, but not essential.
photos taken, maybe 2.30 to 3.
post mortem conducted.

Truth is could be either or something else.

Saw you mentioned making the gap maybe 3 or 4 foot, I would be tempted to go say 2ft 6 to 3 foot, that would allow for proposed wash stand. However 3 foot to 4 foot still looks ok.
I believe Mary was taken out of the room at around 4:30, so I suspect the photos were taken some time between the "forced" entry around 1:30 and the time of her remains removal in a simple box.

Although, since police were on the scene from just after 11, we have only their word that they waited 2 hours...for bloodhounds that were not in London.
__________________
Michael Richards
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #594  
Old 12-22-2015, 09:20 AM
Elamarna Elamarna is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: South london
Posts: 4,261
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wickerman View Post
The press reported the post-mortem that afternoon began about 2:00pm, and wrapped up at 4:00pm. So it is unlikely the photographer would be in the room between 2-4, in my opinion.
what if they counted the photos as part of the procedure, I know it would be one of the very first crime scene photos, but it is just possible or am I being unrealistic.

by the way i am not convinced it is natural light in the photos.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #595  
Old 12-22-2015, 09:24 AM
Pierre Pierre is offline
Inactive
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 4,407
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wickerman View Post
The press reported the post-mortem that afternoon began about 2:00pm, and wrapped up at 4:00pm. So it is unlikely the photographer would be in the room between 2-4, in my opinion.
Hi,

Everybody and especially Steve: Read what Wickerman is writing here.

Regards Pierre
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #596  
Old 12-22-2015, 09:34 AM
Sam Flynn Sam Flynn is offline
Casebook Supporter
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Wales
Posts: 10,451
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Elamarna View Post
by the way i am not convinced it is natural light in the photos.
There's a lot of detail and contrast (in the "close-up" photo at least) that suggests to me a longer exposure than normal in natural light.
__________________
Kind regards, Sam Flynn

"Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #597  
Old 12-22-2015, 09:42 AM
Pierre Pierre is offline
Inactive
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 4,407
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wickerman View Post
Thankyou Richard.

When we view it to scale the bed does look too far away from the right side, and clearly a table placed by the side of the bed is not going to impede the passage door as it was forced open.
Sorry to trouble you, but perhaps 6ft from the right was too great, unless anyone else has any ideas maybe 3-4ft should be the working hypothesis?
Hi Richardh,

According to Goad´s Fire Insurance Plan the distance from the wall to the right to the top of the beadsted (the distance you show in this picture) is 5,11 inches or 182 centimeters. So it is very accurate.

Regards, Pierre
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #598  
Old 12-22-2015, 09:42 AM
Elamarna Elamarna is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: South london
Posts: 4,261
Default

Pierre
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre View Post
Hi,

The bed was in this position when Mary used her room since there is blood on the door. The reason why she had moved the bed from the wall beside the door should have been people the running up and down the stairs on the other side of the wall.

That's an opinion, you may be right, you could say the bed "may" have been in this position; but you insist on "was" that donates a definite fact. You don’t know that do you Pierre? You believe it .

The Actual position of the "door" is not fixed from what I can tell

The bed and table must have been moved from a position in front of the door if the door knocked against the table when the police tried to open it and, above all, because we see the bed and table standing in front of the door on MJK3.

No we don't see the bed in front of the door ! that is your opinion, which you are entitled to, but Please stop stating it is a fact. it is not!

The police must have entered the room at about 12 since there is light in the room. There may be artificial light added to it.

What do you base this time on? There would be light until at least 3.30 if not 4pm.

The available evidence does not support your view!

Just because earlier ripperologists have had other ideas about this murder site doesn´t mean they were right. It could mean they were wrong.

How could it MEAN they were wrong?
yes they could be wrong in their interpretation, as could you be in yours


And just because Abberline didn´t describe what he saw in this room (except from the grate, a candle and a clay pipe) doesn´t mean he was lying.

Stop playing semantics, he was under oath. Do you have evidence to support your view that he withheld information?
Regards Pierre
regards elamarna
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #599  
Old 12-22-2015, 09:45 AM
Pierre Pierre is offline
Inactive
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 4,407
Default

It´s OK Steve. Think what you want. There are people with new ideas here. They are intelligent and can calculate.

Regards Pierre
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #600  
Old 12-22-2015, 09:49 AM
Elamarna Elamarna is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: South london
Posts: 4,261
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre View Post
Hi,

Everybody and especially Steve: Read what Wickerman is writing here.

Regards Pierre
I have,,
that is Wickermans opinion, the times are probably correct, but the photos could have been taken at the start of the post mortem.
Even if they were taken after 4pm, all that means is that artificial light was used, a position i have been constant on.

Sorry Pierre, you don't know what light was used, unless of course you have some documentation to say it was natural light.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:37 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.