|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Maria Giordano
Inspector
Username: Mariag
Post Number: 392
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, May 15, 2005 - 10:33 am: | 
|
No, I didn't mean that at all, How.
I'm sure the fecal matter was from Eddowes intestines.
I don't see Jack as the sort of man who would be frightened into soiling himself.
Mags
|
Howard Brown
Inspector
Username: Howard
Post Number: 389
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, May 15, 2005 - 10:38 am: |
|
Me either,Mags...but I gave it a shot.
Please elaborate further...
See you in chat.
How..a friend to all womankind. |
Jennifer D. Pegg
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 2423
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, May 15, 2005 - 10:42 am: |
|
Hi,
my understanding of things is as follows, victorian women would have boiled up rags to use for such an occasion. the same rags, each time. Not new rags. Esp. women as poor as Eddowes.
Jenni
ps I don't think 46 is that old and HRT hadn't exactly been invented anyway had it?!!! |
Jennifer D. Pegg
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 2424
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, May 15, 2005 - 10:59 am: |
|
http://casebook.org/police_officials/po-edward_watkins.html
just looking at this and trying to work out when Watkins would have been in various places in terms of the ripper making there escape. Saying the ripper left via St james passage.
Any ideas? |
Maria Giordano
Inspector
Username: Mariag
Post Number: 393
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, May 15, 2005 - 11:10 am: |
|
ITA, Jenni, they would have used the same rags and (one hopes) cleaned them between times.
In the case of Lizzie Borden she claimed that blood on her clothing was menstrual and some rags were indeed found soaking in a basin in her basement.
Mags
|
Jennifer D. Pegg
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 2427
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, May 15, 2005 - 3:19 pm: |
|
Mags
Still don't fancy it myself!
Jenni |
Suzi Hanney
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Suzi
Post Number: 2503
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, May 15, 2005 - 5:53 pm: |
|
Hi all
The idea re the menstrual blood has been chugging around for some time...... I doubt whether the 'apron' was used for this but the 12 pieces of cloth some blood stained in poor Kates' effects could have some bearing on this.......
Suzi
|
Maria Giordano
Inspector
Username: Mariag
Post Number: 394
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, May 15, 2005 - 8:45 pm: |
|
Undoubtedly, you're right Suzi.
And the idea that she would wantonly cut up her apron (no pun intended please) is just silly.
Mags
|
Monty
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Monty
Post Number: 1638
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Monday, May 16, 2005 - 3:48 am: |
|
Morning Chaps & Chapesses,
Don and Dave,
Re Halse and Long. I think its important to bare in mind that their times would have been estimations. If you note (and Im sure you all know this already) the times that are rounded off to the 5 min mark are a great indicator that the officer is approximating his time. Its something I do if Im too busy actually working to note a precise time, then again I have the luxury of a watch. So I just round it off to the nearest 5 mins. If Halse and Long did the same, and I suspect Halse would as he was on the move and more involved with his chase, then this could mean that these two officers just missed each other at 2.20am. Whilst Halse had knowledge of a murder Long had not (not till 1.55am) so Long may have heard Halse but would not be suspicious of hearing footsteps, of which Im sure he had heard many many times that night.
Chris T,
Why come out and plant the apron in an area that would be increasingly teeming with Police and their movements?
Diana,
Lets not forget that Eddowes was killed near a "hoarding". Research reveals that a hoarding is a fence. He could have killed her, hidden behind the fence when he heard Watkins coming, and exited while Watkins was inside K&T.
The fence you mention was a fence belonging to a yard, to which the gate was locked.
He couldnt have hid behind the fence unless he climbed over. An act which Im sure Morris would have noted.....but then again.
And as for Mr Marriotts suggestion, is this true? I havent had the pleasure of reading Mr Marriotts book so please, someone clarify this.
If this is true then has he not taken note of the urinals dotted around the area? or the baths in Goulston st?
Surely y'all yanking my chain on this one !
Laters,
Monty
"You got very nice eyes, DeeDee. Never noticed them before. They real?"
|
Carolyn
Detective Sergeant
Username: Carolyn
Post Number: 98
Registered: 2-2005
| | Posted on Monday, May 16, 2005 - 4:21 am: |
|
Monty,
We are not yanking your chain on this one!!!
He did NOT take notice of the urinals etc. He speculates that Kate used the doorway as a bathroom and wiped herself with her apron. 
Also that she used said apron as a sanitary device..Enough said.
You can see for yourself under the thread "Jack The Ripper The 21st Century Investigation" here on the boards.
Happy reading!
Cheers,
Carolyn 
|
Monty
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Monty
Post Number: 1640
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Monday, May 16, 2005 - 4:29 am: |
|
Carolyn,
You're an Angel...I shall check it out and return !
Thanks,
Monty
"You got very nice eyes, DeeDee. Never noticed them before. They real?"
|
Jennifer D. Pegg
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 2428
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, May 16, 2005 - 5:00 am: |
|
Here is where the casebook interview is
http://casebook.org/authors/interviews/int-tm.html
note the distinct lack of him kidding!
|
Christopher T George
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Chrisg
Post Number: 1461
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, May 16, 2005 - 1:29 pm: |
|
Hi Jenn
Is it possible that Mr. Marriott is a relative of by Scott E. Fahlman who invented the Internet smiley? See Smiley Lore :-) by Scott E. Fahlman.
Scott E. Fahlman
Christopher T. George
North American Editor
Ripperologist
http://www.ripperologist.info
|
Suzi Hanney
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Suzi
Post Number: 2504
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Monday, May 16, 2005 - 3:41 pm: |
|
Goah I hope not!! ....Hmmmmmmmmm theres a lot of shall we say 'womens stuff' going on here!!!! Well shall we look back at a thread that I recall chatting with Caz about ages ago,I could argue this menstrual thing for an age but have to be realistic and think that it probably was from the 'hands of the ripper'.........can't think of another serious reason really why it would be there but as to the accompanying graffito...............hmmmmmmmmmmmmm
Suzi |
Suzi Hanney
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Suzi
Post Number: 2505
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Monday, May 16, 2005 - 3:45 pm: |
|
We'll close on Gosh! there I think!!!!
The idea that kate 'used' that doorway shall we say is a very probable one and I cant help but think that the 'graffito' had maybe been there prior to this how long prior to discovery will of course never be known
Suzi |
Donald Souden
Chief Inspector
Username: Supe
Post Number: 555
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Monday, May 16, 2005 - 4:11 pm: |
|
Monty,
Your points are well-taken and noted, especially about the rounding off to the fives. By that reckoning, they could have missed each other by five minutes.
Still, as you probably know from previous threads, I am very dubious about PC Long's veracity. Reading his inquest testimony, you are not really sure if he had heard there had been a murder or not. He says he didn't and yet at another point he seems to say he had heard.
As for Mr. Marriott, the picture of him reminds me of the old actor Gene Barry.
Don.
"He was so bad at foreign languages he needed subtitles to watch Marcel Marceau."
|
Jennifer D. Pegg
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 2434
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, May 16, 2005 - 4:28 pm: |
|
all the police beats intrigue me.
I mean surely they should not be at the same point at the same time in theory?
Or should they?
Jenni |
Jennifer D. Pegg
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 2435
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, May 16, 2005 - 4:29 pm: |
|
ps Chris TG
thats scary, don't do that again!! |
David O'Flaherty
Chief Inspector
Username: Oberlin
Post Number: 879
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, May 16, 2005 - 4:41 pm: |
|
Hi Monty and Don,
Monty, what you wrote about time estimation is sensible, but it seems weird to me that both Long and Halse would estimate the same time, even if they were rounding by fives. But I'm a cynic
It's too bad we don't hear from 190H. I know Long was drafted to assist H division, but it's not clear to me if Long called 190H (who Keith Skinner has identified as Willie Bettles), or if Long and Bettles were sharing a single beat (I'm guessing that since they had to draft Long from A division, there would have been no doubling up).
By the way, Monty: were you ever able to learn the details of Constable Bettles's beat?
Thanks for the info on public urinals and baths; hadn't even occurred to me.
Cheers,
Dave |
Caroline Anne Morris
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Caz
Post Number: 1753
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 17, 2005 - 4:13 am: |
|
Hi All,
I think it's quite possible that Jack dived into the Goulston Street Public Baths to clean up properly, explaining the time lapse before the incriminating apron piece was dropped.
I just need someone to assure me that no one would have got access to the baths at that time of night, and I can forget this particular idea. 
Love,
Caz
X |
Carolyn
Detective Sergeant
Username: Carolyn
Post Number: 104
Registered: 2-2005
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 17, 2005 - 5:01 am: |
|
Caz,
The answer you may be looking for, is covered in General Discussion under "A Little Question RE. Plumbing". I would give you a direct address but alas I don't know how!
Hope this helps, 
CArolyn |
Monty
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Monty
Post Number: 1643
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 17, 2005 - 5:05 am: |
|
Caz,
The baths closed around 11pm.
Monty
"You got very nice eyes, DeeDee. Never noticed them before. They real?"
|
Harry Mann
Detective Sergeant
Username: Harry
Post Number: 84
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 17, 2005 - 5:24 am: |
|
What would Jack have to clean?.His clothing surely,at least the cuffs and sleeves of his jacket,but the only part of his anatomy that was liable to have bloodstains,was his hands.Maybe there were splashes to the face,but these would be minimal.
Why go to a public place like a baths to clean clothes?.They would take time to dry,and any delay might place him in the open with a chance of being picked up and taken to a police station,where the dampness of his clothes might raise suspicion,while he didn't need a bathhouse to wash hands.
Just speculation.He went out to commit murder,in a way that would bloody the hands,so he might have gone prepared with cleaning material.Having used that after killing Stride,he cut the apron of Eddowes to clean after her murder.I like simplicity,being a simple person myself,and what would be more simple than for Jack,to have taken with him,a large men's red handkerchef.
|
Monty
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Monty
Post Number: 1644
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 17, 2005 - 5:26 am: |
|
Dave and Don,
I think its important to remember that it was Longs first night on that beat. He was in the process of learning his duties and beat and also getting to know people. This may also explain why his beat between 2.20am and 2.55am took him around 30 mins. If not, and if his beat really took 30 minutes, then I find this a very odd and long beat to give to a new bloke.
Put yourself in Longs boots. Learning a new beat in an area markedly different from his Whitehall patch, in the heart of Whitechapel, which is hard enough at the best of times but when you throw in the fact that a Serial killer is on the loose….
Hell he didn’t even know his brother officers name on the adjoining beat (190H Bettles). I think we sometimes ask too much of Long.
Dave, as for Bettles, no I haven’t managed to find out his beat…anyone?
I do not think Long and Bettles doubled up because Long states that he called an office from the next beat. This would indicate the two were not together yet I suspect that their paths must cross at some stage and not long before Long (that was hard to type) entered Goulston street, else how would he know PC 190 H was not far away?
These beat PCs had a bloody hard job to do and the expectancy of them, IMHO, is a tad to heavy at times.
Later,
Monty
"You got very nice eyes, DeeDee. Never noticed them before. They real?"
|
Jeff Hamm
Chief Inspector
Username: Jeffhamm
Post Number: 668
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 17, 2005 - 6:35 pm: |
|
Hi,
Out of curiosity, do we have the details of Long's beat anywhere? I've not seen it listed before. I have Harvey and Watkin's routes, and Long's beat would be an interesting one to include in some simulations I've run. Basically, I'm curious about trying to determine roughly where Long was (or, more cautiously put, where he might have been) at the time Jack could be estimated to have passed the apron's location.
If, for example, Long had just passed this area when Jack passes through, and it takes Long 30-35 minutes to complete his patrol, that would account for some of the delay in finding the apron.
I suspect, however, this will come to nothing, but the only guarentee is, if you don't look you won't see.
- Jeff |
Monty
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Monty
Post Number: 1645
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 18, 2005 - 4:29 am: |
|
Jeff,
I dont know Longs route but using my limited maths, Long would be at the dwelling entrance at 1.50am.
Again, my estimation, Jacks departure from Mitre Square (at the latest and going on Watkins timing) would have been 1.44am. I took around 4 mins to get to Goulston st at a brisk walk. Assuming Jack did the same and went directly to Goulston Street, his arrival at the dwellings would have been around 1.48/49am.
Basically, Long and Jack may have hit Goulston street at the same time !
Laters,
Monty
"You got very nice eyes, DeeDee. Never noticed them before. They real?"
|
Jennifer D. Pegg
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 2442
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 18, 2005 - 6:55 am: |
|
Hi,
you know we are always talking about if Jack got lucky or if he planned it. being as how Longs beat was new, or rather he was new to the beat, might that have thrown any plans?
Yes I see what you mean about timing Monty. But hey we know Long didn't find the apron at that point, maybe Jack took a little longer than you to walk it, would that explain it?
Jenni
"Stay away from that trap door,
Cos' there's somethin' down there"
|
David O'Flaherty
Chief Inspector
Username: Oberlin
Post Number: 883
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 18, 2005 - 8:42 am: |
|
Monty,
Wow, you made that trip in four minutes, walking? That would seem to contradict Collard's possible route of three-quarters of a mile taking 12-15 minutes. Is the layout of streets still the same as in 1888?
Dave |
Monty
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Monty
Post Number: 1647
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 18, 2005 - 8:43 am: |
|
Jenn,
Yep, you're right. He may have taken longer. He may have noted Long and waited around the corner in New Goulston st.
All plausible and all supposition.
Monty
"You got very nice eyes, DeeDee. Never noticed them before. They real?"
|
Monty
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Monty
Post Number: 1648
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 18, 2005 - 8:47 am: |
|
Dave,
12-15 mins? You sure thats not from Berner st to Mitre sq?? Thats around that time.
No, the layout from Mitre sq to Goulston street is not exactly the same but the time difference between the route then and now is seconds.
Of course, the route I took is one of a few.
Monty
"You got very nice eyes, DeeDee. Never noticed them before. They real?"
|
David O'Flaherty
Chief Inspector
Username: Oberlin
Post Number: 884
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 18, 2005 - 8:54 am: |
|
Just smother me with a pillow; you're absolutely right, Monty--sorry. I've been walking around thinking it took a quarter of an hour for him to get to Goulston street. You've shown it can be done in about four minutes. Thanks!
Cheers,
Dave |
Jane Coram
Inspector
Username: Jcoram
Post Number: 429
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 18, 2005 - 9:54 am: |
|
HI All,
Bit late on on this one, but can I put the feminine hygiene/apron theory to bed once and for all?
The ladies of that time with Kate's background would not wear drawers of any kind......ever.
During a monthly cycle she would have worn rags, kept specially for the purpose, and folded into a wad, held up with a piece of string around the waist. The ladies would sew loops on them for the thread to do through. They were kept specifically for this purpose and rinsed out obviously,
There is no way on earth that she cut a lump from her apron for this purpose, even more so in those circumstance. Utter nonesense.
The chances are with her state of health, age and malnutrition she would not be having periods anymore anyway.
If anyone wants to know the nickname used for these do it yourself pads just e-mail me, Rather to gross for the boards! (quite amusing though)
So there.
Love Jane
xxxxxxxx
(Message edited by jcoram on May 18, 2005) |
Jeff Hamm
Chief Inspector
Username: Jeffhamm
Post Number: 669
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 18, 2005 - 4:19 pm: |
|
Hi Monty,
Well, the calculations are good enough. And, it appears that the time frame is about right for Jack's appearance and Long's passing of Goulston Street. Since we're estimating things, we need to include some error variability, which allows for Long to have passed first and Jack was just on his tail (as Jennifer has suggested).
Also, Jack may have seen Long, waited for him to pass, then walked along behind him (a ways behind, not close). So, he drops the apron (cop near by), and writes the graffito to pass the time (waiting for Long to put distance between them), then heads along his way. One more cop dodged, and the whole process takes about 1 minute max.
What say you to such nonsense as I spread?
- Jeff |
Jennifer D. Pegg
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 2446
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 18, 2005 - 5:17 pm: |
|
Monty,
I don't suppose he did it much quicker than you did. Equally, what Long says about the apron shouldn't be discounted. all very possible as you say.
David,
smoother you with a pillow, you're being a little harsh I don;t think that is necessary!! Ever!
Jenni
ps you know what would be useful..? Ok Ok i'm kidding!
"Stay away from that trap door,
Cos' there's somethin' down there"
|
Donald Souden
Chief Inspector
Username: Supe
Post Number: 560
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 18, 2005 - 9:07 pm: |
|
Monty, Dave, Jenni, et al.,
I continue to be confused (what a surprise, eh?) by the testimony (especially Long's) in regard to the apron.
But first, Long's beat according to him was actually 35 minutes, not 30. So, if you want to work backward to estimate the previous time Long was by the Goulston Street site it would have been about 1:45, allowing a somewhat greater opportunity for JtR and Long to miss each other -- if, indeed, JtR moved with all deliberate speed from Mitre Square to Goulston Street.
Another point from the testimony. Halse explicitly states he was through Goulston Street a 2:20. Now I know we can get caught up with words and I quite understand why he would later say he passed the apron site at "about 2:20" but it sounds to me as if he was darn sure he'd been somewhere on Goulston at 2:20. I also understand about time approximations and that Halse was in a hurry, but it still seems to me that if Long were anywhere near Goulston Halse would have seen or heard him coming or going. And if he had he certainly would have spoken to the PC on the beat.
I know he was new to the beat and doubtless felt something of a stranger in a strange land so I won't suggest he was derelict -- just confused -- but I do think he was supposed to be at Goulston Street at 2:20 and wasn't anywhere near.
I realize it seems like "pile on Long" day, but again reading the inquest testimony you do get a real sense the jurors were not impressed by PC Long. He was taken to task for what the jury felt were mistakes and his testimony sounds like that of someone quite confused even after he had nearly two weeks in which to sort things out.
Jenni suggested that once again JtR was lucky that the man on the Goulston Street beat was new to the area (and just possibly not the brightest farthing in the sack). An American philosopher once opined that "Luck is the residue of design" but in this particular case I think it was nothing but pure dumb luck for Jack and darned bad luck for all of us.
Anyway, given that Halse testified he might well not have seen the apron (if it were there) when he was on Goulston Street (he was looking for people, not objects) and that Long was confused (and remains confusing) it would seem there was a nearly hour-long window for the apron-half to be dropped.
Don.
"He was so bad at foreign languages he needed subtitles to watch Marcel Marceau."
|
Suzi Hanney
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Suzi
Post Number: 2517
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, May 19, 2005 - 1:35 pm: |
|
Hi all
Right.the 2.20 timing must always be in some doubt!
This apron........ is soooooo interesting it seems that it was Kates but can we be sure?
Contenscious I know be back later!
Suzi x
|
Donald Souden
Chief Inspector
Username: Supe
Post Number: 561
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, May 19, 2005 - 1:58 pm: |
|
Suzi,
Yes, for once something seems to be certain about the JtR murders. The two pieces of the apron not only fit together perfectly, but the rip ran across a repair patch and both sides of the patch mated exactly. The apron-half found on Goulston Street was from Catharine Eddowes.
Don.
"He was so bad at foreign languages he needed subtitles to watch Marcel Marceau."
|
Karen
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 17, 2005 - 3:35 am: |
|
Hi
Pardon if I jump in?
I've had a theory about this for a while.
I felt that she was heading back towards the outhouse to use it for obvious reasons; Jack was hiding in there or near there possibly, hoping for just such an event (sort of like waiting near a watering hole for the game to come by).
Since she was er, full of fecal matter, I think when Jack cut into her, it got into his hands and knife, and he didn't like that. Control freak, etc. So he wiped his hands/knife onto her apron, and that's the source of it.
I thought of this when I saw the extra footage from that latest movie (with Johnny Depp) where the directors tour the rebuilt Whitechapel area. Maybe prostitutes/street people often used that outhouse for that or even other purposes. Not that privacy for the latter might matter to a Whitechapel lady of the night.
I wish someone would rebuild the Whitechapel area on computer, or they could've filmed that set more extensively before they tore it down. Never know what brainstorm might come to light, by just spending time walking through there. Maybe not who but maybe more about how? |
Gareth W
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Monday, May 16, 2005 - 3:27 pm: |
|
Re. Eddowes' rags. Isn't it possible that these could simply have been used for - ahem - "handkerchiefs". Not necessarily for blowing her nose either - remember she was on the streets to make money.
Besides, she already had at least two conventional handkerchiefs on her person and seems to have been well-stocked with other pieces of cloth. Thus equipped, she would hardly have resorted to tearing her apron even if she'd been struck with simultaneous menorrhagia and acute dysentery.
My suspicion is simply that JTR needed something with which to bundle his trophies. He returned the piece of apron to Goulston St after he had stashed (or otherwise jettisoned) his booty. The faecal matter found on the apron could have contaminated one or both of the stolen organs (most likely the uterus) during the "dissection" process.
BTW, where was Scott Fahlman during the Autumn of 1888? There is definitely more than a hint of the "carroty moustache" about him ;o) |
turnip
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Friday, May 13, 2005 - 7:25 pm: |
|
Something I haven't seen mentioned on this site, let alone discussed. I was reading my old copy of 'Trial of George Chapman' the other day and it contains the following sentence. 'As it happened that the police were that morning closely watching people entering the square in twos, it was surmised that the murderer and Eddowes entered separately and met inside'. That's all. |
David Cartwright
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Friday, May 13, 2005 - 3:19 pm: |
|
Hi Chris.
I agree absolutely with the main theme of your message. I've always believed that the Ripper was driven in the direction that he DIDN'T want to go, by Watkins' approach. I believe that he formed his escape plan while on the move, bearing the piece of apron with which he cleaned up.
Philip Sugden asserts that the killer must have loitered in the area for between 36 & 71 minutes, depending on whether the apron was there, but missed by Long, or whether it was deposited between his visits. I believe that it WAS deliberately planted there, along with the graffito.
I believe that the Ripper was concealed somewhere nearby, knew that the discovery would bring the whole focus of the police investigation onto Goulston St, then doubled back to escape across the City boundary. This of course is only a personal opinion, based on my belief that the killer resided on the other side of the tracks, and not in Whitechapel.
The Ripper has always been credited with being swift, silent, & ruthlessly efficient. Therefore we cannot rule out his ability to have hatched such a plan of escape. As I said, all this is only a personal belief.
Best wishes Chris.
DAVID C. |
Gareth H Williams
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 17, 2005 - 1:07 pm: |
|
Dr Brown's inquest testimony mentions that the Goulston St apron fragment was "spotted with blood" but neither he, nor PC Long, mentions any smears of blood, which you'd expect if JTR had wiped his hands on the apron. Neither do the witness reports mention anything resembling hand prints - which I'm sure would have been there and noted, had they been there at the time.
My view is that either JTR took the piece of apron to lay a false trail, or - more practically - he used it to bundle Eddowes' organs, possibly to protect his clothing from the residual blood.
If the latter (feasible, given the size of the piece of apron) then he could have abandoned or stashed the uterus and kidney somewhere near Goulston St, before disposing of the "parcel" in which he'd smuggled the organs away.
Using the apron as a parcel could explain the 30-70 minute gap between Eddowes' murder and the discovery of the apron fragment and the chalked "Juwes" message:
1. JTR takes organs home bundled in the apron;
2. JTR empties apron of its contents;
3. If necessary, JTR gets changed and cleans himself up;
4. JTR leaves home with apron and piece of chalk (why would he have carried chalk on his person earlier?);
5. JTR scuttles back to Goulston St to deposit the apron and chalk his deliberately distracting graffito on the wall.
If someone could put indicative timings on steps 1-3 we might get an idea how far from Goulston St JTR lived. |
Phil Hill
Chief Inspector
Username: Phil
Post Number: 568
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Friday, May 20, 2005 - 8:33 am: |
|
Karen wrote (above):
I've had a theory about this for a while... I felt that she was heading back towards the outhouse to use it for obvious reasons; Jack was hiding in there or near there possibly, hoping for just such an event (sort of like waiting near a watering hole for the game to come by). [My emphasis]
Outhouse? What outhouse? Do you mean the locked gates?
Gareth, I'm afraid your logic escapes me.
My view is that either JTR took the piece of apron to lay a false trail, or - more practically - he used it to bundle Eddowes' organs, possibly to protect his clothing from the residual blood.
Why run the risk of "laying a false trail" by carrying something clearly identifiable with the victim unnecesasarily, Surely the main thing is to get home and clean up?
...then he could have abandoned or stashed the uterus and kidney somewhere near Goulston St, before disposing of the "parcel" in which he'd smuggled the organs away.
So what were the stashed innards enclosed in now?
Using the apron as a parcel could explain the 30-70 minute gap between Eddowes' murder and the discovery of the apron fragment and the chalked "Juwes" message
The JUWES graffito is not conclusively linked to the murderer.
Why and how can it explain a gap that almost certainly didn't exist. Occam's razor (simplest explanation) says there was no gay. Jack simply removed the material, walked off cleaning himself up with it and disposed of it in the first convenient opening. That explains everything.
JTR takes organs home bundled in the apron...
This assumes he lived locally, which (while not unreasonable) is unproven.
If necessary, JTR gets changed and cleans himself up... JTR leaves home with apron and piece of chalk ... scuttles back to Goulston St to deposit the apron and chalk his deliberately distracting graffito on the wall.
he would have to have been an idiot!! Why on earth should Jack, having got home safely, then leave carrying incriminating evidence, for no obvious purpose. Again this assumes the graffito to be Jack's work. And as for the chalk, why should have have any at home? If he later decided to leave a mesage, why not assume he made the decision BEFORE setting out to kill and talk materials with him?
If someone could put indicative timings on steps 1-3 we might get an idea how far from Goulston St JTR lived.
this has been the subject of endless debate. But the crucial point, IMHO, is simply that it took a very brief time - see Monty's post above - to walk from the Square to the dwellings, wiping his hands. No other timings required.
Phil
|
David Cartwright
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Friday, May 20, 2005 - 10:30 am: |
|
Hi All.
Gareth, I'm afraid that Phil's got good points here. It would have been plain lunacy that, having reached his base safely, the killer would venture out again to play games with the police, by planting the piece of apron for no apparent advantage to himself.
As for using the piece of apron to carry the extracted organs, he didn't take any part of Annie Chapman's attire for this purpose, so why Eddowes'?? More likely, as Phil said, he used it to clean up while on the move. If it was used for secreting the organs, he would surely have taken it home with him.
The only thing that makes me suspicious of some motive, is that having NOT left a single clue at all the other murder sites, he should be so seemingly careless as to leave such an obvious one on Goulston St., unless it was by design for some reason. Again as Phil said, the graffito can't be positively tied to the Ripper, so only the apron is a sure clue.
Phil, what do you think about the apron being left?? Carelessness?? Sheer contempt for the police?? Or a distraction to aid his escape in some way??
The latter I include, because I've never believed that he lived in the vicinity of his crimes.
Best wishes.
DAVID C. |
Phil Hill
Chief Inspector
Username: Phil
Post Number: 570
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Friday, May 20, 2005 - 11:07 am: |
|
David, I don't think he gave it a moment's thought!! His hands were fouled, his took a piece of handy cloth to clean his fingers and perhaps knife. he wiped and rubbed as he walked, and tossed it into the first opening he passed - Wentworth Dwellings.
In the days before modern forensics, I doubt whether it occurred to him for a moment that it might be any type of clue.
Simple enough? No loose ends?
Phil |
Christopher T George
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Chrisg
Post Number: 1475
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, May 20, 2005 - 1:28 pm: |
|
Hi Phil
You wrote: "David, I don't think he gave it a moment's thought!! His hands were fouled, his took a piece of handy cloth to clean his fingers and perhaps knife. he wiped and rubbed as he walked, and tossed it into the first opening he passed - Wentworth Dwellings. . . . Simple enough? No loose ends?"
Yes a big loose end. This was not, as you put it, a "handy piece of cloth" that he just picked up quickly. This was a large, something like three feet by two feet swathe of cloth that had to be cut longways downwards leaving the other half of apron on Eddowes' body. It would have taken time and thought to have cut off the body. See again the picture of the women in Dorset Street below.
If he had only wanted to wipe his hands he could have wiped his hands and knife on the same cloth then and there without cutting off the body of the victim. Therefore it seems to me the apron was taken for a purpose.
Because the apron was left below the message in Goulston Street, it would seem the apron and the Graffito are linked and that is the reason the apron was taken.
Wentworth Model Dwellings, while relatively close to Mitre Square, is still some streets away, a sufficient distance that he could have dropped the cloth somewhere closer, say in one of the passages leading away from Mitre Square. The existence of the cloth in the entranceway specifically to a building inhabited by Jews ("Juwes" or "Jewes" in the inscription) may therefore mean something.
Another thing that I have stated over and over: This was a relatively short series of crimes, five murders in most peoples' views. Therefore it is really absurd to make sweeping statements on the basis of such a sort series that the murderer would not have done this or that. We need to leave all possibilities open.
All my best
Chris
Christopher T. George
North American Editor
Ripperologist
http://www.ripperologist.info
See "Jack--The Musical" by Chris George & Erik Sitbon
The Drama of Jack the Ripper Weekend
Charlotte, NC, September 16-18, 2005
http://www.actorssceneunseen.com/ripper.asp
|
Phil Hill
Chief Inspector
Username: Phil
Post Number: 577
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Friday, May 20, 2005 - 1:57 pm: |
|
I know it was suggested above that the apron fragment was as large as one of HM Victory's mainsails - but is there actual evidence for this?
The picture above apart, even in 1888 aprons came in different styles and sizes.
I have never seen the actual dimensions recorded, but perhaps you have? If so, can you please provide me with a reference.
As for distance, he discarded it when, and not before, his hands were clean. Otherwise, if he saw a policeman coming.
Phil |
David O'Flaherty
Chief Inspector
Username: Oberlin
Post Number: 885
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, May 20, 2005 - 2:22 pm: |
|
Hi all,
I think the fact that material was found in Goulston Street as opposed to Mitre Square tells us that while the killer had time to complete his mutilations (based on Brown), the roughly ten-minute time frame he was working in did not allow him to clean up (it's a fact that this was the purpose of the apron, unless you disregard Brown's testimony). It would seem to me that he was interrupted by either Morris at work in K.& T. or the sound of P.C. Watkins approaching. I think it's a reasonable conclusion to draw, regardless of whether you think the graffiti is a bona fide clue or not.
However large the apron was (and I believe it was large since it seems to have been a key feature for witnesses like Hutt), I don't think it would have presented much of a problem for the knife used in the mutilations. I don't think we know what type of cloth the apron was made of anyway, so I'm not sure we can say it was difficult to cut. Muslin, for example, tears straight down the grain very easily. There's no evidence that Eddowes' apron was made of that, though.
Dave |
Christopher T George
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Chrisg
Post Number: 1477
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, May 20, 2005 - 2:56 pm: |
|
Hi Phil and Dave
Jon Smyth in his dissertation "A Piece of Apron, Some Chalk Graffiti and a Lost Hour" addresses the size of the piece of apron found in Goulston Street:
"Any contemporary photographs showing East end women of the period clearly show that the type of apron was large, with a bib from the waist to the neck, with the bulk of it extending from the waist down to the ankles.
"This type of apron was wrapped around the body, from the waist to the ankles, almost meeting at the back. Taking a measure from the waist down, we have 30-36" and to wrap around at the back at ankle level, would be something like 36" wide. This lower section (from the waist, down) of apron was in the order of 9 square feet of material, not including the bib portion.
"So, how big was this portion of apron found in Goulston Street?
"We happen to have one account of a statement by Detective Sergeant Halse:
"'When I saw the dead woman at the mortuary I noticed that a piece of her apron was missing. About half of it. It had been cut with a clean cut. When I got back to Mitre Square I heard that a piece of apron had been found in Goulston Street. I went there with Detective Hunt to the spot where the apron had been discovered. There I saw some chalk writing on the wall. I stayed there and I sent Hunt to find Mr McWilliam.'
- (Jones & Lloyd, The Ripper File - pg 126)
"Also, Sir Henry Smith, though heavily critisized for being inaccurate in some statements, was at least known to be present for this report:
"'By this time the stretcher had arrived, and when we got the body to the mortuary, the first discovery we made was that about one-half of the apron was missing. It had been severed by a clean cut'.
- (Sir Henry Smith, From Constable to Commissioner - pg 152)
"P.C. Long had found 'about half of it' or, if we allow for a little error in judgement on the high side we have 5-6 square feet, and if we allow for error on the low side, something in the order of 3-4 square feet. That is a sizable piece of cloth."
Thanks to Jon Smyth for his interesting and well researched article.
Chris
(Message edited by chrisg on May 20, 2005)
Christopher T. George
North American Editor
Ripperologist
http://www.ripperologist.info
See "Jack--The Musical" by Chris George & Erik Sitbon
The Drama of Jack the Ripper Weekend
Charlotte, NC, September 16-18, 2005
http://www.actorssceneunseen.com/ripper.asp
|
Phil Hill
Chief Inspector
Username: Phil
Post Number: 578
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Friday, May 20, 2005 - 3:03 pm: |
|
But it is based on the assumption that the apron was large. The fact is that we do NOT seem to know what size the apron worn by Eddowes was - so we?
Phil |
|
Use of these
message boards implies agreement and consent to our Terms of Use.
The views expressed here in no way reflect the views of the owners and
operators of Casebook: Jack the Ripper.
Our old message board content (45,000+ messages) is no longer available online, but a complete archive
is available on the Casebook At Home Edition, for 19.99 (US) plus shipping.
The "At Home" Edition works just like the real web site, but with absolutely no advertisements.
You can browse it anywhere - in the car, on the plane, on your front porch - without ever needing to hook up to
an internet connection. Click here to buy the Casebook At Home Edition.
|
|
|
|
