Author: Papa Jon
Sunday, 16 January 2000 - 01:29 pm |        |
| Has anyone ever considered that Stride and Eddowes were killed by two different people. |
Author: Jon
Sunday, 16 January 2000 - 02:21 pm | |
Papa-Jon, Researchers have been basically split over that very issue for some time.
Regards, Jon |
Author: Thomas Ind
Monday, 17 January 2000 - 01:46 pm | |
Papa-Jon
Strides throat wounds were very dfferent from the others. Even failed to cut the carotids properly on both sides. |
Author: Bob Hinton
Monday, 17 January 2000 - 02:36 pm | |
Dear Everyone,
I've just read Jon Smyths dissertation on the Eddowes apron and its set me to thinking.
How sure are we that the piece of cloth found was actually part of an apron?
The reason I ask this is reading the list of Eddowes effects there doesn't seem to be any mention of her wearing an apron.
Help required!
Bob Hinton |
Author: Jon
Monday, 17 January 2000 - 06:01 pm | |
Bob
The portion found in Goulston St. had a repair patch on it which had been cut through, it matched what was left of Eddowes apron, according to Dr. Brown.
Inst. Collard discovered she was wearing a piece of apron while she was laid out at the mortuary. The piece she was wearing was listed among her belongings, the last article on the list.
Dr. Phillips produced the Goulston St. portion at the inquest, and Dr. Brown described how the two pieces matched.
Regards, Jon |
Author: Bob Hinton
Tuesday, 18 January 2000 - 04:11 am | |
Dear Jon,
Are you Jon Smyth who wrote the article? I wonder if you would be kind enough to email me, I'd like to discuss something with you.
many thanks
Bob Hinton |
Author: anon
Tuesday, 18 January 2000 - 12:30 pm | |
| Could someone cut of a piece of Kate's apron between 1.45 and 2.55 am without anyone detecting it and thus create the Goulston St. writing/ apron hoax? |
Author: Christopher-Michael
Tuesday, 18 January 2000 - 01:56 pm | |
| It seems unlikely. After the body was discovered, it was never left alone again. The only person who might have had an opportunity to do such a thing was PC Edward Watkins, who watched over Eddowes' remains while watchman George Morris ran out into Mitre Street looking for help. I think, however, that we can rule him out. |
Author: J.Cockren
Tuesday, 18 January 2000 - 06:06 pm | |
| If the apron doesn't fit, you must equit... |
Author: D. Radka
Tuesday, 18 January 2000 - 10:52 pm | |
You mean acquit, Johnny.
Shees!
David |
Author: Jacksback
Tuesday, 18 January 2000 - 11:23 pm | |
| You obviously not be from "The Hood" Radka.. |
Author: Simon Owen
Monday, 06 March 2000 - 09:16 am | |
| There has been some discussion about what the word ' Juwes ' meant in the Goulston Street grafitti , it might possibly have Masonic connotations. There are however a large number of connections to Freemasonry in relation to the Eddowes murder and to Mitre Square in particular. These have already been mentioned by Melvyn Fairclough but I will restate them here in order to emphasise the fact the grafitto could have Masonic connections. The Eddowes murder site is steeped in Masonic history. In the 18th century the Mitre Tavern ( no 3 Mitre Square ) was used for lodge meetings by the Union Lodge and the Hiram Lodge , in the 19th century it was used by the Lodge of Joppa and the Royal Alpha Lodge itself for meetings. The Hiram Lodge also met in the Crown Tavern in nearby Duke Street , the Lodge of Judah met at the Tailors Arms in Mitre Street and in the St James Tavern in St James' Place. An early lodge ( no. 53 ? ) met in nearby Leadenhall. As to the square itself , a mitre is a stonemason's tool to check right-angles, a square is also a tool to check angles as in setsquare. The corpse was found with ' V-shape ' mitre symbols under her eyes , however let me make a supposition ( I believe I am the first to do so ). These cuts were under the eyes , they could represent pyramid shapes - thus the sum is that the marks represented pyramids with eyes. And we know that the ' Pyramid with an Eye ' is a Masonic symbol for the rise to Enlightenment from baseness. Just check your dollar bill for details. |
Author: Simon Owen
Thursday, 16 March 2000 - 07:40 am | |
| Here is a mystery to solve : Catherine Eddowes left Bishopsgate police station at 1am on Sunday 30th September. She was seen at Mitre Square at 1.35am.Yet - and heres the rub - it only would have taken about 10 minutes to reach Mitre Square from the police station. Where had Eddowes been for the intervening 25 minutes , again no witnesses , very mysterious. She may have popped into a nearby court to relieve herself , after all she had been drinking heavily , and this may account for the excrement on her apron too. But this would have only taken her 5 minutes. How do we account for the missing 20 minutes of her life? She was last seen in Church passage , but Mitre Square WAS NOT her beat. We do not know for sure , but consider this : the only evidence we have for Eddowes being a prostitute is a statement by Major Smith saying she had a small area which she worked in , and she was known by the local constables. Yet the City Constables who found the body did not recognise it , and it was left to John Kelly to identify the corpse. If Kate had a beat , surely it would have been in the Whitechapel area where she lived ? And not in Mitre Square ? |
Author: David M. Radka
Thursday, 16 March 2000 - 10:58 am | |
Simon:
First you say "Mitre Square was NOT her beat."
Next you say: "We do not know for sure."
This is a self-contradiction. You're swinging from the heels.
David |
Author: Diana
Thursday, 16 March 2000 - 09:40 pm | |
| Hey, does that shred of apron still exist? I'm thinking DNA. I'm thinking matches with Eddowes descendants. I'm thinking finding out if he bled on it or not! |
Author: Christopher T. George
Thursday, 16 March 2000 - 11:51 pm | |
Hello Diana:
The piece of apron is not known to still exist. IT was not a "shred of apron" as you put it but, I understand, half an apron. These aprons worn by the working class women of the day were substantial things, stretching from their waist almost down to the bottom of their ankle-length dresses that they wore. The contemporary photograph to be found here on the Casebook under "Victorian London" and labeled "Dorset Street, late 19th century" shows a couple of women wearing such garments.
The blood on the piece of apron was almost undoubtedly Eddowes's blood, so it is hard to see how DNA testing would help even if we had the half apron. And to clarify, the fecal matter would not have been, as Simon Owen hints, from Eddowes having "popped into a nearby court to relieve herself." It would have been from the disembowelling that took place after her throat was cut--her bowels were breached and the feces were exposed by the mutilations to her abdomen. Not a pleasant thought but nevertheless it is what happened.
Chris George |
Author: Simon Owen
Friday, 17 March 2000 - 04:32 am | |
| It was always my opinion that the fecal matter came from Eddowes' dissected bowel , but I was merely making a suggestion. |
Author: Simon Owen
Friday, 17 March 2000 - 04:45 am | |
| Also , Catherine Eddowes shawl which was supposedly taken from the body by PC Simpson still exists , and is in the Black Museum of Scotland Yard |
Author: Christopher-Michael DiGrazia
Friday, 17 March 2000 - 09:24 am | |
Simon -
There is a great deal of disagreement over whether the "Simpson" shawl is really that of poor Kate Eddowes. Discussion about it can be found in recent issues of "Ripperana," and I believe that at the moment opinion is divided; some, like Andy and Sue Parlour believe in it (of course, they also believe that "FM" was scratched into the wooden panel next to Mary Jane Kelly's bed), while others believe that, like the Maybrick Diary, its provenance is simply too fragile to credit the relic as being what it is supposed to be.
Pamela Ball, author of "JTR: A Psychic Investigation," believes it is real. Whether you accept her verdict depends entirely, of course, on whether you accept the validity of "psychic" phenomena, and I most assuredly do not.
And on a related note: one of Simon's suggestions for the "missing" time before Eddowes' death is that she might have popped in to the lodging-house to let John Kelly know she had been released. In my opinion, this is a non-starter. Would a man like Kelly - who, we must remember, preferred to pawn his boots and walk around the East End barefoot before allowing Eddowes to streetwalk - really go back to sleep and let Kate wander penniless through Jack the Ripper's Whitechapel till morning? Don't forget their supposed final words concerned Kelly's worry that Eddowes might fall afoul of the Ripper (surely an ironic farewell if ever there were one). While some of your ideas have merit, Simon, I can't credit this at all.
Slainte,
CMD |
Author: Simon Owen
Friday, 17 March 2000 - 10:36 am | |
CMD, I think is a worthwhile suggestion that Eddowes would have tried to find John Kelly to tell him she had been released from prison ; while I don't think Kelly would have gone to sleep either he may have hung around the communal kitchen of the lodging house until he got thrown out. After all , it was somewhere warm on a cold , wet night. If Eddowes did set out to find Kelly , where would have been the first place she would go to look - surely their place of residence. I wonder if Kate thought her boyfriend would have been in a pub , she seemed unhappy about the lateness of the hour , perhaps the pub closed at 1.00am. If Kate had thought John Kelly was going to be in a certain pub until closing time , if she was released early she could have gone to meet him. But if the pub was closing she would have had to hurry out , then she may have got the idea Kelly would have gone to the kitchen of their lodging house to keep warm. Thus she would have hurried to catch him... Finally , remember Kate's final words : ' I shall get a damn fine hiding when I get home '. This suggests that going home was on her mind , or at least going to rendezvous with Kelly. She didn't say ' I shall have to go and find some shelter because I've got nowhere to go ' did she ? |
