Author: Robeer
Thursday, 04 April 2002 - 02:18 am |        |
A "blotchy faced man" is mentioned more than once by witnesses. In one case a prostitute runs to a PC because of a frightening encounter with a blotchy faced man only to be informed that he doesn't fit the description of the suspect provided by the police. Her complaint is brushed off and the PC continues on his patrol. Question: who provided this description to the police and why were they so sure it was accurate?
Supposedly MJK had a customer who was described as a blotchy faced man on the night of her murder. Could he have come back later after casing out her apartment?
Profilers claim serial killers often have facial deformities. Does 'blotchy faced man' deserve more scrutiny than he has received so far?
Robeer |
Author: Jack Traisson
Thursday, 04 April 2002 - 04:28 am | |
Hi Robeer,
You may want to check out this thread.
Ripper Suspects: General Discussion : Local Suspects The Answer?.
http://forum.casebook.org/messages/2/839.html?ThursdayFebruary1720000557
Cheers,
John |
Author: Robeer
Thursday, 04 April 2002 - 05:37 am | |
Jack,
Many thanks. I searched for this topic before starting this thread but missed the postings you mention. Thanks for the help. It was an energetic discussion on this very topic. Those who participated in that lively exchange are welcome to continue here.
Webster defines blotch as: imperfection, blemish. A spot or mark especially when irregular.
Blotchy face man could be the result of any number of causes. He could have had severe birthmarks on his face. He could have been burned in an accident or been injured in the military. The marks could be the symptoms any number of skin conditions or allergies. He could have been in a serious barroom brawl. As mentioned before he may have been sunburned.
I wish I could remember where I read about the incident of the prostitute who felt BFM was menacing and dangerous. That story is interesting for three reasons:
First, the reaction to BFM by the prostitute. Second, where did the police description come from that influenced the PC to disregard the BFM? Third, how casually the PC dismissed this complaint and walked away from the situation.
This is certainly odd given the hysteria at the time. What this indicates is the police were pretty darn convinced their description of the suspect was accurate. Why were they so convinced? Which witness had the credibility to make such a convincing description?
One has to think it must be the mysterious City PC who 'saw' the suspect at Mitre Square. This incident is mentioned by Smith, Anderson, and Macnaghten. The only problem is no City PC claims to have seen the suspect at Mitre Square. So where did this story originate?
The sightings of BFM indicate he was seeking prostitutes, if it is the same man. The next question is how many BFM's were roaming Whitechapel? Could be more than one. MJK seemed to not have a problem going home with her BFM. Maybe he was a regular. Maybe he was JtR. Maybe he had nothing to do with any murder.
In a possible letter from JtR he bragged about being 'invisible'. This is ceratinly not the case with BFM. However, if the letter was a press hoax then BFM should remain on the list of suspects. Modern profilers might even place him high on the list of potential suspects. |
Author: Robeer
Friday, 05 April 2002 - 10:28 pm | |
These two interesting messages are from another topic. They are obviously germane to this new thread:
______________________________________________________________
Author: Jeff D
Friday, 18 January 2002 - 05:44 am
Hello all !
As a brief tester, I would like to describe one very minor aspect of a theory, I have been working on for some time now. I hope to explain and go into further depth on these boards in future posts. I have greatly missed and really do welcome the criticisms and opinions of learned friends I have made here on these boards and anyway, I think it’s about time I started to expose myself :-)
On the 28th March, Ada Wilson – 39, machinist of Mile End, became a victim of what appeared to be an attempted robbery. At the door of her home, an unknown man with a “clasp knife” stabbed her twice in the throat.
The police were given a description of her attacker. He was about 5’6” tall, approximately 30 years old, had a sunburnt complexion and a fair moustache. He wore a dark coat, light trousers and a wide-awake hat.
At 11:45 on the eve of Thursday November 8th Mary Cox saw Mary Kelly return home in the company of a stout, shabby blotchy-faced man, in his 30’s with a carroty moustache and a billycock hat. He carried a quart pail of ale.
These descriptions are not much to go on, however I believe these two separate events are describing the same man. Witnesses, as we know can be notoriously unreliable and might easily describe a noticeable characteristic in different terms. Sunburnt/Blotchy faced, fair/carroty moustache. Are these not similarities worthy of further consideration? Different lighting conditions could easily explain the differences in terms used to describe the man. Regardless, we have 2-seperate incidents that describe an outstanding characteristic of the mans face.
If Mr. Blotchy face, ¼ pail-of-ale were the same person who attacked Ada Wilson, would this not put a whole new set of circumstances on the events of Nov. 8/9th ? Any police investigation would focus on the last person to have seen the victim alive. Other than Mr. Astrahkan, (who’s very existence sounds extremely suspicious, doubtful, even) Mr. Blotchy-face does appear to be the last person to have seen Mary Kelly alive.
I have only tried to think a little “outside the box” here and I would welcome your comments and even criticisms. I am certain people could rip this particular part of my theory apart. I have seen scenarios built up by authors and investigators using much flimsier evidence, however I would welcome constructive comments.
Regards
Jeff D
______________________________________________________________
Author: Monty
Friday, 18 January 2002 - 08:05 am
Jeff D,
I have no suspect as of yet but if I was pushed then the chap you have mentioned would be the one.
I too, am fascinated by the fellow. Was the Wilson attack one of the first by Jack ?
I have tried to check out any news reports with his description, in and around not just the East End but London at that period of time.
Your idea seems logical to me but I fear that finding out who is was is going to be very difficult.
Monty
________________________________________________________ |
Author: Jeff D
Saturday, 06 April 2002 - 02:32 pm | |
Hello Monty !
And thank-you for taking notice of this post. I had hoped it might lead to further discussion and give me a few more things to think about, however noone took the lead at the time. I have been reading these boards for a while now, and had made a considerable number of posts in the past, however I just don't seem to be able to keep in step with other threads that are currently being discussed.
A main point with Mr. Blotchy face, (and I am convinced he was the killer of MJK), is that just considering him as a suspect could open up a whole new way of looking at the events of Nov. 9th.
If Mr. B were the killer he could either have manipulated Mary Kelly into singing "violets...." or he could have actually been singing himself as a means of disguising other ghastly noises. He may simply have been enjoying himself that much it caused him to break into song? The song itself is a very melancholy one and it has always stayed in the back of my mind as a clue to what was going on inside 13 Millers Court that night.
I do believe that the man who was Jack the Ripper had attacked someone long before the attack on Mary Ann Nichols. The attacks on Annie Millwood and Ada Wilson fit perfectly within a series of ever increasing violence and mutilation. I am also of the opinion that Martha Tabram met her end at the same hand. It would have to be a far stretch of the imagination to consider that each attack went perfectly as planned by the killer, or that he had such experience at subduing his victim so effectively as Polly Nichols without any kind of rehearsal, trial run, botched attempt, or whatever.
In considering Mr. Blotchy face and Mr. Suntanned face, I had to think about what kind of conditions would cause such a noticeable effect. Any English person knows the lilly-white complexion of most natives, which undoubtedly goes deep red at the first exposure to a little sun. In my time living in Jamaica, I could spot an English person who had just arrived on the island a mile away. Lilly-white flesh, usually with bright red shoulders. I hope that this light-hearted post is read without offense to anyone.
It has caused me to consider the exploits of Thomas Sadler, a ships fireman. Could this facial anomolly be due to continuous exposure to the fire of a ships boiler, I think is a useful question? Mr. Sadler had also bought Ms. Coles a nice new bonnet the eve of her murder. That Mary Nichols was in reasonable spirits at the joys of having a new bonnet is just another one of those incredible coincidences in the Ripper saga?
Being a ships fireman could explain the pattern of murder dates and I just can't help but think that a check of the Fez's schedule of voyages throughout the Autumn of terror might prove to be worthwhile. I would be sure that the police would have investigated the movements of the Fez after the Francis Coles murder, however I cannot locate any reference. Does anyone know anything further about the Fez and whether or not its movements prove to implicate/exonerate Sadler in the 1888 murders?
The description of a man approximately 5'7" red/reddish/or fair hair with a fair moustache (under a variety of lighting conditions) does appear quite a number of times according to the various witness sightings. Mr. Blotchy face and Mr. Suntan do have similar physical descriptions so I think it reasonable to consider them as suspects to the Ripper series. With or without a suntan I am convinced that this is a description of Jack the Ripper. Mr. Sadler had never previously been on my list of credible suspects, however I do not have a proper description of him. Joseph Barnett could very well fit the description and if he had died/got locked-up/went nuts a few days after Kelly's murder I would definitely say "here's your man" and forget the suntan.
I don't feel I have to reveal a specific name for a suspect at this time (the last thing this study needs is another silly name thrown into the ring without proper research) though I "do" have one and it's not Sadler or Barnett. Any suspect argument to satisfy me, however, must have a similar physical (shabby genteel) description.
Many Regards (Please excuse the lengthy post)
Jeff D |
Author: Monty
Monday, 08 April 2002 - 07:59 am | |
Jeff D, All,
BFM is always interested me. He keeps cropping up.
As for why he was blotchy/sunburnt, well that has interested me even more.
From what I can gather, that summer wasnt a hot one (I may be wrong, so put me straight folks) So I would plump for a disfigurement as such. Psoriasis perhaps ??
As a point of interest Philip C Dowe came up with a profile that gave a reason for his drive during the murders as a possible disfigurement (he stated that it could have been a hare lip). He may be posting it again on the profile thread later this week.
Tumblety is the only one that resembles this man that I can think of, but He is just too tall.
Monty
 |
Author: graziano
Monday, 08 April 2002 - 08:06 am | |
Monty,
if Tumblety was too tall, why was he amongst the suspects in 1888 ?
Thank you. Graziano. |
Author: Monty
Monday, 08 April 2002 - 08:10 am | |
Graz,
I meant too tall to match the blotchy faced man, not to be a suspect.
My pleasure,
Monty
|
Author: graziano
Monday, 08 April 2002 - 08:25 am | |
| Sorry. |
Author: Jim Leen
Monday, 08 April 2002 - 08:55 am | |
Hello Everybody,
I believe this topic was discussed in the dim and distant past, possibly on the MJK board.
A blotchy face, if memory serves, may be caused by TB. And didn't a PC, possibly even Walter Dew, claim to have apprehended JTR. His suspect susbsequently died with...TB.
Thanking you
Jim Leen |
Author: Rosemary O'Ryan
Monday, 08 April 2002 - 03:39 pm | |
Dear Graziano,
The case of the Red-Nosed Robber...the witness
descriptions were of a most singular character,
much to the amusement of the police. "He had a red nose. Thats all I remember."
Rosey Nose :-) |
Author: Robeer
Monday, 08 April 2002 - 04:57 pm | |
Jim,
Can you tell us more about Walter Dew claiming to have arrested JtR or where we can read about this episode?
Robeer |
Author: R.J. Palmer
Monday, 08 April 2002 - 11:33 pm | |
Monty: In reference to Tumblety being the blotchy-faced man, the following quote might interest you:
"For twenty years he has been widely known as the manufacturer of Twomblety's pimple banisher, from which he professed to gain a livelihood. His own face is covered with pimples, and, although his features are otherwise regular, his appearance on this account is somewhat repusive." --New York World.
Which is interesting. The trouble, though, is that this description of Tumblety runs counter to almost all others--- which uniformly describe him as uncommonly attractive, even dashing. In his younger days as the Great Indian Herb doctor seems to have artificially tanned his face with some sort of die, and might have used hair coloring. But who knows? Perhaps time wasn't good to Dr. T, and mixing up his various noxious remedies ruined his complexion. Still, I would agree that Blotchy seems a bit of a stretch. Cheers, RP |
Author: Monty
Tuesday, 09 April 2002 - 07:55 am | |
Rp,Jim, Graz,
Interest me it does. I have seen many a chap with such faces, brought on by the Devils brew.
TB gives you a blotchy face??...interesting. Also the suspect died, could we check the records ?
Graz,
Dont be sorry, I should have been clearer.
Monty
|
Author: Jeff D
Wednesday, 10 April 2002 - 07:51 am | |
Hello all !
Quite a few years ago my Father worked in a steelworks and he said that the men who worked at stoking the furnaces (to a man) all had red/burnt-type faces. A ships fireman such as Thomas Sadler for example could very well have a red blotchy face, caused by continued exposure to extreme heat and open flames while shovelling coal/coke into the furnace. Health & Safety practices were (of course) not like they are today and in Victorian times (certainly in the UK right up to the 1950's/60's) many worked in such precarious conditions. I didn't know that the effects of TB could also cause this type of inflamation to the face and I find this an interesting point.
Noone ever found out what happened to Mr. Blotchy face after the events of Nov. 9th., and I am convinced, that this man was Mary Jane's killer. The FBI Psychological profile mentions a good possibility that the man who we know as Jack had some sort of physical deformity or disability. That this facial feature was mentioned at all must mean that the condition was quite noticeable, which in my mind does make Mr. Blotchy face a very credible suspect.
Many Regards
Jeff D |
Author: Monty
Wednesday, 10 April 2002 - 08:12 am | |
Jeff,
He would have been very distinctive. I have the same feeling. Like I have mentioned before, he keeps cropping up throughout that autumn and he cannot, has not, been explained away.
I hope he crops up again soon.
Monty
|
Author: Jeff D
Wednesday, 10 April 2002 - 11:06 am | |
HeYa !
I just think it's a coincidence worthy of further consideration. A man attacks Ada Wilson and is described as having a sunburnt face. I don't know about the original report, however I have read it as sun"burnt" not sun-tanned, so sunburnt does, (to me) indicate redness.
Then, who could have possibly been the last man known to have seen Mary Kelly alive is described as having a red-blotchy face.
Other characteristics describe the man as having a fair or reddish moustache. I think any difference in colour or shade can be easily explained by lighting conditions. He is about 5'6 or 7" tall. Dark coat, light trousers, etc., "Shabby genteel", even. The only real difference are the various hats worn by men last seen with the victim. This is an aspect I would like to consider further sometime, actually.
People do actually remember hats. The shape and type can be determined regardless of lighting conditions and I think the Ripper, who was a clever man knew this, though I am delving into the realms of speculation. People did own more than one hat in those days, depending upon affluence of course.
I also firmly believe that Serial killers, such as Jack the Ripper stalk only their own kind. People feel out of place and very uncomfortable when they are with people outside of their particular class structure and this was ever more so in Victorian times. You will find Jack the Ripper amongst the native peoples of Whitechapel and nowhere else, I reckons !!!!!
Kind Regards
Jeff D |
Author: Robeer
Wednesday, 17 April 2002 - 10:58 pm | |
Jeff,
If memory serves, witnesses described a man with a carroty or reddish moustache talking to Liz Stride shortly before her murder and witnesses on Duke Street described a man with a "fair" moustache talking to Kate Eddowes. Is it possible that BFM was seen talking to 3 of the C/5 on the night of their murders? Is it possible that JtR wore disguises?
Robeer |
Author: Monty
Thursday, 18 April 2002 - 08:24 am | |
Robeer, Jeff,
Robeer..Are you talking about Brown and Lewande ??
Its like I have said before, he just keeps cropping up and I cannot believe that its coincidence.
As for disguises, why not ? Zodiac claims to have done and Bundy always changed his appearance.
Monty
|
Author: Robeer
Thursday, 18 April 2002 - 11:15 pm | |
Monty,
And keep in mind that Long only saw the back of the suspect on Hanbury Street so we don´t know what color his moustache was exactly, or do we? She did say he looked "foreign" which translates to either dark complexion or dark hair. That comment would insinuate she might have seen his profile, enough for a partial view of his moustache. On the other hand, was it not still dark and he was in the shadows so she may have had no idea what color his moustache was.
Robeer |
Author: P. Ingerson
Friday, 19 April 2002 - 10:25 am | |
Hi, everyone.
I'm still new to all this, so sorry if I'm asking an obvious question that everyone's already discussed before, but...
Do you think our blotchy-faced man could also be the florid-faced man who harrassed Lusk's son for details of the Vigilance Committee's patrols? (Ok, so the FFM had a beard while the BFM didn't, but it could have been false, right..?)
Cheers. |
Author: Richard P. Dewar
Friday, 19 April 2002 - 02:54 pm | |
P.
That is plausible but like most items in the Ripper case unknowable.
Rich |
Author: P. Ingerson
Friday, 19 April 2002 - 03:31 pm | |
Hi, Rich.
Yeah, we'll never know for sure.  I guess it all depends on the difference (if there IS one) between a florid face and a blotchy one. Do we know if anyone made a connection at the time?
eg. Did Lusk jnr. ever read the description of the BFM and go "That's the man who hassled me"? Are there any surviving minutes of Vigilance Committee meetings where something like might've been discussed?
If FFM and BFM were the same person, it makes him more likely to have been the killer. OTOH there's something too silly about the idea of JtR wearing a false beard to be true (even if was only to help hide those blotches!) |
Author: Richard P. Dewar
Friday, 19 April 2002 - 03:57 pm | |
P.
That is perhaps true. But even that cannot be proven. That assumes that the man Ms. Long saw was the killer and that the man who Lusk jnr saw was that same person.
Rich |
Author: Diana
Saturday, 20 April 2002 - 11:22 am | |
Fascinating stuff. I would think that blotchiness would stand out more in one whose natural skin tone would be pale. Although visible it would be less observable in one who was swarthy especially in dim light.
We have to keep in mind that the meaning of words changes with relationship to time and place. I would like to know exactly what "blotchy" meant in 1888 Whitechapel. I am leery of this because I am a Yankee and the British and American people have been laughingly described as one great people divided by a common language! |
Author: Caroline Anne Morris
Sunday, 21 April 2002 - 09:47 am | |
Hi All,
'Florid' often describes the typically English fair skin when it is flushed with red. 'Blotchy' describes irregular patches of colour, obviously more noticeable on a similarly fair skin.
Such colouration, or discolouration, is very common and can be caused by all manner of things: exposure to the elements and extremes of climate; changes in bodily temperature; extremes of emotion, such as rage, shame or mirth; adverse reactions to anything from external lotions to internal potions, food and drink, drugs or alcohol etc; temporary illness/disease, recurring health problems, or incurable or permanent skin conditions.
(I wonder if the writer of the Maybrick diary knew that our Jim was described as having 'a florid complexion', when he/she selected him for their prospective ripper?)
Love,
Caz |
Author: John Omlor
Sunday, 21 April 2002 - 10:01 am | |
Caz,
In response to your parenthetical question...
Apparently not, since it's never mentioned. Apparently they didn't know half of what they should or could have, making me wonder if they were very good researchers at all.
--John |
Author: Caroline Anne Morris
Sunday, 21 April 2002 - 12:55 pm | |
Hi John,
Doesn't take much to get you scampering to the keyboard! 
Considering we know nothing about the author of the diary, what he knew, and what drove him to write what he did, and when, you make some surprising assumptions.
You assume, do you not, that your forger was working on the diary in the late 1980s; you make corresponding assumptions about what Maybrick material was therefore available/unavailable to your forger; you decide for your forger which specific information he would include if he knew about it; you assume that if any of these things aren't reflected in the diary, your forger didn't known about them; and finally, you conclude from the missing items that the diary was written - by a forger working in the late 1980s.
And I was merely making a small observation in passing, that here we have another potential reason for someone to frame James as Jack, that appears to have escaped the attention and exploitation of the one person we know wanted to do so.
I wonder how your forger would have made good use of Jim's florid complexion had he known about the description. 'Aren't I a clever fellow, walking straight past the fools with my face as red as brick ha ha', perhaps?
Handing the floor back to the real Mr. Blotchy face...
Love,
Caz |
Author: Peter Wood
Sunday, 21 April 2002 - 06:57 pm | |
(I wonder if the writer of the Maybrick diary knew that our Jim was described as having 'a florid complexion', when he/she selected him for their prospective ripper?)
Of course he did. He saw himself in the mirror every morning.
Peter. |
Author: John Omlor
Sunday, 21 April 2002 - 07:22 pm | |
Caz,
You write:
"You assume, do you not, that your forger was working on the diary in the late 1980s."
No, I don't. I simply said that had the forgers known many of the things others have since pointed out (Maybrick's allegedly significant Whitechapel connections, the phrase "Sir James" rather than the forger's "Sir Jim," or even your little speculation about James's complexion), whenever they were writing, they could have used them. They didn't. So it seems possible that they did not find any of this stuff out in their research, suggesting that perhaps they weren't all that thorough.
I could easily see the forger having his James reading the witness accounts in the paper and making a stupid joke about his complexion being described, the way he does about other stuff, the goofy "clues" and everything.
But I'll get off this board and apologize for responding in an off-topic way.
All the best,
--John |
Author: Monty
Tuesday, 23 April 2002 - 07:48 am | |
Robeer,
I always start typing your name as "Robber" ! Why is that ?? Sorry.
Anyway, I had a lazy weekend and I was pondering our posts about BFM. As I pondered (I was flicking through my A-Z) when WALLOP ! something jumped out at me.
Edward Mckenna. Arrested on suspicion. Fitted a description of a man given by a Miss Lyons and the potman of the Ten Bells that, according to local rumour, called Chapman out of the pub on the night she was despatched. Sandyish hair, 5'7" and described as "ugly". Why "ugly" ? A derformity ? or is it because of a skin complaint ??
Then it got me a pondering more. So I riled through the A-Z trying to find any descriptions of anyone that match BFM. Not much success. Got my other books out and in one (Faircloughs Ripper and the Royals) was an alledged picture of George Hutchinson.
Unfortunately it was black and white and of an old George circa 1938. But underneath was a photo of his son, black and white again, but you could make out his crowes feet which were really obvious because of his tan or sunburnt face. Like father like son ?? I dont know but its enough to make you ponder even more. I swear that his hair had a ginger tinge to it as well !
Im going BFM MAD..I see him everywhere...help me spomeone...heeeelllllpppp mmmeeeee !
Monty
 |
Author: Caroline Anne Morris
Tuesday, 23 April 2002 - 12:00 pm | |
Hi John,
Well, we're making progress.
Your 'Apparently not, since it's never mentioned', referring to whether the diary author had certain information about Maybrick, has now subtly changed from an argument that no mention means no knowledge into 'had the forgers known..., they could have...' and 'So it seems possible that they did not find any of this stuff out...'.
Much better.
Back to all sorts of other BFMs.
Love,
Caz |
Author: Chris Jd
Wednesday, 24 April 2002 - 03:47 am | |
Monty,
you mentioned a picture of Hutchinson (ca. 1938) in a book.
Is it also anywhere on the web or could you post it here?
Thanks
Christian |
Author: Monty
Wednesday, 24 April 2002 - 07:40 am | |
Chris,
I do not know if it exists out there and alas, my technical expertise is non-expertise.
I must stress that it is a photo of the a George Hutchinson but not necessary the George Hutchinson. Bob Hinton feels that it isnt our Georgy, wrong age for him.
Its worth a thought though.
Monty
|
Author: Jeff D
Thursday, 25 April 2002 - 06:42 am | |
Hello all !!!
FBI psycholigical profiling has indicated that the murderer would probably have had some sort of physical handicap or feature that he would have been extremely self-conscious about. Could it even be possible that blotchy faced man was pitied by those who came into contact with him, and this is why he was never suspected as having any involvement in the crimes? Of course all we know is that he had a blotchy face that was noticeable enough to mention though we don't know the extent of this facial feature.
It would make sense that people wouldn't feel comfortable in his presence for any length of time, causing him to launch his attack at the very first opportunity. We know that the killer spent very little time on idle chit-chat. BFM has to be a credible suspect and it seems to make more sense to me that this man was Mary Jane Kelly's killer.
Even discounting BFM as a suspect, why would she sing to him? Why would she say to her neighbour that she was going to sing for a while? Would a prostitutes' customer (alleged customer in the case of BFM) normally expect a cabaret act before/during/after sex? Am I the only one who finds the actions of Mary Kelly while in the presence of BFM slightly bizaar?
Did the song "a violet I picked from Mother's grave" have any signifigance and is this the only song she sang for well over an hour? What other sort of acts could he possibly have forced Mary Jane to perform in the last moments of her life I wonder?
I do think that the time Mary Kelly had BFM as a guest in her humble home is relevant to the horrific discovery that was made the following morning and welcome any further comments.
Many Regards
Jeff D |
Author: Monty
Thursday, 25 April 2002 - 07:52 am | |
Jeff,
Would it be possible that BFM was a buddy as opposed to a client ?? Or even both ??
If a client then I do find it odd, if a friend then not so odd.
I believe that a mutilated face is a sign that the killer knew the victim.
Curiouser and curiouser
Monty
|
Author: Michael Conlon
Thursday, 25 April 2002 - 02:02 pm | |
On another thread, I believe Scott Medine mentioned that it would not be unlikely that the killer might have scratch marks, abrasions or contusions on his face, inflicted by his victims. While it is patently obvious that this must all remain speculation, might not such facial wounds, seen at a distance, account for a reddened or 'blotchy' face?
Regards,
Mike |
Author: Diana
Thursday, 25 April 2002 - 08:08 pm | |
| I think I have just exhonerated blotchy face in my mind. From what we know of JTR, I think it extremely unlikely he would sit around for over an hour listening to Mary sing. He would have executed a blitz type attack the minute the door closed. |
Author: Monty
Friday, 26 April 2002 - 08:28 am | |
Diana,
A decent point but, as we know, Mrs Cox saw BFM and Mary returning to Miller Court. She even spoke to her.
Do you think he would attack her as soon as the door is shut knowing someone was right outside the same door ?
Of course, this throws up other problems.
Monty
|
Author: Peter Wood
Saturday, 27 April 2002 - 06:15 am | |
It's all very interesting, but MJK was seen entering her room in Miller's court with another client (Hutchinson's suspect) after Mr Blotchy Face left her company.
So why the preoccupation with Blotchy Faced Man? And given that he was carrying a quart can of ale, wouldn't his "ruddy" complexion be accounted for by the fact that he was probably an alcoholic?
Peter. |
