May 1996
Finally, the mysterious "F.M." on the wall above the body of Mary Kelly (to see the photo of the body click here. A close-up enhancement of the F.M. can be seen here.) No one we've spoken to can remember anyone ever mentioning it before the release of the Ripper/Maybrick Diary in 1992, and yet a quick look at the photo reveals it is distinctly there. Is this of any importance? Are they really the initials of Florie Maybrick written in blood by her enraged husband? If not, then what?
1.
Date: Tue, 16 Apr 1996 20:30:02 -0700
From: VegAbles
Shirley Harrison's narrative in the Diary is very inviting on its prtrayal of the Kelly slaughter. She points out that most reproductions of the Kelley photograph prior to Stephen Knight's "Jack The Ripper: The Final Solution" were not clear enough to allow any "fool" to notice the initials. I was captivated by the idea that hundreds of Ripperologists and wannabees over the years had been mesmarized by the depravity depicted in the Kelly photo yet never noticed the scrawling "M" on the wall behind. Looking closely at the photo, I think the power of suggestion and Harrison's fine tuned prose easily lures the viewer to see an "F" as well. The best question posed by Casebook is "If not, then what?" Like you, I've stared long and hard at various reproductions of that Kelly photo and can't figure out the lines on the door Harrison claims are initials. The apparent water or photoprocessing damage to the prints from the Public Record Office in Kew might serve as a partial explanation.
2.
Date: Wed, 17 Apr 1996 01:01:52 -0500
From: Andrew J. Spallek
The infamous "F.M." does not appear on all photos in print. I believe it is distinctly missing from the print in "The Lodger." It looks to me like some writing on a copy of the original photo. It is perhaps the initials of the owner of this copy. That would explain why sometimes it's there and sometimes it's not, and also why it was not mentioned in the original investigation.
3.
Date: Fri, 19 Apr 1996 10:04:03 -0500
From: Andrew J. Spallek
After looking at the Kelly photo in "The Lodger" once more, I'll have to retract my earlier statement. The "FM" is there very faintly. But on the blowups, it looks to me like the writing is on the photograph itself rather than on the wall/door of the room.
The idea that Maybrick would write his wife's initials is indeed rather proposterous. If it were "JM" one might possibly see a connection. Anyway, the whole Maybrick theory dies now that the diary is established as being a forgery (see Sudgen, pp 8-11).
4.
Date: Fri, 19 Apr 1996 19:23:40 -0700 (MST)
From: mrhappy@azstarnet.com
In "The Diary of Jack the Ripper" and on your page there is mention of the initials "FM" having been written on the wall of one of the murder sites. Of course, the author of "The Diary" suspects that this was meant to indicate Florence Maybrick. I have read some books on the subject and none of them ever mentioned any initials. Are there any comtemporaneous accounts of this or is this just the result of an overactive imagination on the part of modern researchers? I've seen the photo, but the "FM" isn't as clear to me as it seems to be to some others. Is the power of suggestion at work?
5.
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 1996 15:02:35 -0400
From: Michael Rogers
The FM on the wall is a puzzler, there's no doubt about it. The initials, if that's what they are, are quite clear in the photo appearing in the Maybrick Diary, but not so clear in the photo appearing on other books. In some other titles you can barely see the FM, if you can see it at all. There seems to be blood on the wall next to MK's bed. The alleged "initials" could be just splashes of blood. Even though I don't put any credence in the Maybrick Diary no one can deny that it's a hell of a coincidence though.
6.
Date: Wed, 01 May 96 01:28:15 -0700
From: Stephanie Richey
The F.M. on the wall above the body of Mary Jane Kelly is a very curious piece of evidence.It has been surmised it is the initials of Florie Maybrick. Other theories say it is police identification markings. But could it stop there? Could it give credence to Stephen Knight's theory about (F)ree (M)asons? Where does it all end?
7.
From: wolvie@sprynet.com
Date: Fri, 24 May 1996 21:31:35 -0700
Just for the reord; the "door" mentioned is actually part of the texture of the wall. The actual door to no. 13 Miller's court is not visible in this photo, it can be seen quite clearly in the more recent photo.(the one taken from the foot of the bed and showing the table and contents) For a map of the room's layout (the only one I have seen) see "The complete History of Jack the Ripper" by Phillip Sugden on page 312. (This is, by the way, the best text on the that I have read.) But in any event I agree that the "FM" that suposedly apears on the wall is the product of distortion of the original print.
8.
Date: Fri, 24 May 1996 22:31:36 +0000
From: Tom Krailing
If anyone signs his work or leaves a mark behind, we think he would do this in a much more obviously way than it "appears" on the photograph. The police surgeon from A Division mentions in his report: "The wall by right side of the bed an in a line with the neck was marked by blood which had struck it in a number of seperate splashes". Note, that he did not mention any initials written in blood or other similiar marks.
Back to Previous Topics for Debate
Back to the Conference Main Page
