Dear Maurelius,

So sorry to be bearor of bad news, but stain was there when she stepped out on the ledge. It was high up on the right side near the wide lapels of her coat. It was there as she crossed the street as she entered the elevator and as she stepped out of the door on top of building.

Also as she fell from the roof she was heard to say as she passed each floor window the people heard her say "Well, so far so good." On her way to the bottom.

Thank you so much.

Ken

P.S. Again, it was wonderful meeting in chat room and discussing very nice movie with Honorable Charlie Chan.

This is so odd, Ken. I looked at the ledge sequence two or three times, and although there is one shot where I conceed a slightly, slightly darker "spot" it could have been either: stain, or shadow due to irregularity of cloth's surface--and in other shots (intercut with eyeball and people below, etc) the stain "area" seems free of stain.

Mine is a Chanthology DVD copy.

You did re-watch sequence, to make your reply here, yes? I am at work so can't check MB again till future--maybe this week (also same with DVD).

Maurelius

Honorable Sir,

I would never ever say anything for arguments sake at all. I only make a statement so that perhaps you might look back at the same. Confusious should have said, "Man who argue with friend over trivial matter should first use introspection to see if it is worth the loss of a friend or if you are absolutely correst."

Yes, I did review both my tape version (which I had reviewed earlier in the day) before our meeting together, and my DVD is what we watched for the meeting (for me). I went back with the VHS tape which is an original and very good tape and it had what I stated. The DVD I watch the pertainent parts and although right now it is not as easy as the tape to "rewind" and review, I watched the sequence twice and each time (although not a Chantology version), it showed the stain as well in each place I mentioned. Thank you so much.

My only explanation is that since it was black and white maybe what you saw looked like something else, but it was real strong on my movies and even looked like it was placed there to really show all shiny and bright, not like any regular stain I have seen. Also did you notice she was wearing a light colored coat so the stain would show more.

Hope this helps. If I can figure out how to take it from my DVD and capture it on my computer, I will. Thank you so much.

Ken

Okay, you two! Now you both have ME going on this issue of the stain! I'll try to take a look at that moment of the movie tonight and see what my feeble eyes tell me...

Sincerely,
Rush

Well, my friends, I watched the rooftop jumping scene again last night. I believe that you actually can see the stain on Mrs. Bonner's coat, BUT this could just as easily be a shadow. As the stain is on her right side, and as she is most of the time turned three-quarters in that direction, that part of her coat is not readily visible enough to make a definite decision.

Again, I thought that I saw the stain for a moment right at the start of that scene, but, as I mentioned also, the dark spot could have also been a shadow. In the end, Mrs. Bonner's position makes it such that, even if we have a "continuity error" here, it is tough to prove either way.

Sincerely,
Rush

So Sorry. Most humbly ask you forgive this humble person who should probably just drop this subject, because it will seem like I am being argumentative and that is just not the case. I wished I could show you what I saw on both copies. There is no if's ands or buts, the stain is very visible on both copies. If someone can tell me how to reproduce a picture from this I would show you from this movie. The stain is very visible from the street, to the elevator, to the entrance from the door on the roof top to the walk to the ledge and on the ledge.

Now having said that, I want you guys to realize I am not pushing this issue for any personal reason, nor as a way to "get my way" on something as benign as this. Sorry, but it is the detective in me and what is before my eyes or in an investigation, if I am right after that investigation is complete, I cannot help but give my findings. After 38 years of being a police officer (still am licensed in the state of Texas for life) and a very good investigator, it is impossible for me not to investigate to the max. I work just as hard to prove my own theroies wrong if I see that. I remember I solved a very nasty robbery and found who I believed to be the person and was picked out by every witness we had and I got the warrant and arrested him, who had no alibi and could not prove where he was. But something was wrong and I reinvestigated. My Chief told me I had 48 hours to prove the guy I had setting in jail was not the right one. He said I had done a great job and why would I want to undo a great investigation (took two weeks to get him) and I said because I don't believe he is guilty and so I had 48 hours. I proved it and got the right man just before the 48 hours was up. He now sits in prison.

Anyway, that is why. So Sorry. Thanks for listening.

Thank you so much.

Ken

Dear Ken,

What a GREAT story in the second half of your post! Truly worthy of Charlie Chan himself, and, I'll bet that whenever you watch "Charlie Chan in London," when he had 63 hours, I believe, to clear someone from a murder charge, that you know how Mr. Chan felt.

Now, as for that pesky stain, if you saw it, I will agree it was probably there. It shows in all of the other appropriate scenes, and I did think that I saw it, too, though briefly, on the rooftop scene. So, I have no problem agreeing that it is indeed there. Please feel free to note any other details that you pick up while watching Charlie Chan films!

Again, wonderful story that you added to your post, Ken! "Thank you so much." Also, i would like to hear more about that Charlie Chan play that you are involved with ("Charlie Chan in Texas").

Sincerely,
Rush