Casebook: Jack the Ripper - Main
   

Introduction
Victims
Suspects
Witnesses
Ripper Letters
Police Officials
Official Documents
Press Reports
Victorian London
Message Boards
Ripper Media
Authors
Dissertations
Timelines
Games & Diversions
Photo Archive
Ripper Wiki
Casebook Examiner
Ripper Podcast
About the Casebook

Most Recent Posts:
Non-Fiction: Going Digital: Which books do I rebuy on Kindle? - by barnflatwyngarde 12 minutes ago.
Mary Jane Kelly: Was Joe Barnettīs alibi accepted lightly? - by DJA 6 hours ago.
Lechmere/Cross, Charles: Lechmere The Psychopath - by Elamarna 6 hours ago.
Mary Jane Kelly: Was Joe Barnettīs alibi accepted lightly? - by Merry_Olde_Mary 7 hours ago.
Cohen, David: Cohen Questions..........? - by Merry_Olde_Mary 7 hours ago.
Cohen, David: Cohen Questions..........? - by DJA 7 hours ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Lechmere/Cross, Charles: Lechmere The Psychopath - (29 posts)
Motive, Method and Madness: Not for nothing - (6 posts)
Hutchinson, George: Hutchinsons statement.... - (4 posts)
General Discussion: Are there any other fiction writers here? - (3 posts)
Non-Fiction: Going Digital: Which books do I rebuy on Kindle? - (3 posts)
Cohen, David: Cohen Questions..........? - (3 posts)

Wiki Updates:
Robert Sagar
Edit: Chris
May 9, 2015, 12:32 am
Online newspaper archives
Edit: Chris
Nov 26, 2014, 10:25 am
Joseph Lawende
Edit: Chris
Mar 9, 2014, 10:12 am
Miscellaneous research resources
Edit: Chris
Feb 13, 2014, 9:28 am
Charles Cross
Edit: John Bennett
Sep 4, 2013, 8:20 pm

Most Recent Blogs:
Mike Covell: A DECADE IN THE MAKING.
February 19, 2016, 11:12 am.
Chris George: RipperCon in Baltimore, April 8-10, 2016
February 10, 2016, 2:55 pm.
Mike Covell: Hull Prison Visit
October 10, 2015, 8:04 am.
Mike Covell: NEW ADVENTURES IN RESEARCH
August 9, 2015, 3:10 am.
Mike Covell: UPDDATES FOR THE PAST 11 MONTHS
November 14, 2014, 10:02 am.
Mike Covell: Mike’s Book Releases
March 17, 2014, 3:18 am.

Go Back   Casebook Forums > Ripper Discussions > Scene of the Crimes

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 12-13-2010, 07:59 AM
AdamWalsh AdamWalsh is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: London UK
Posts: 207
Default Did Jack wear gloves?

I doubt anyone can say for sure - but I just wondered as I was reading a recall of a murder committed by Issei Sagawa who said when removing the innards of a lady his hands stung because of the stomach acid........so I wonder if Jack would've thought about that - although the torn apron would suggest otherwise.......
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 12-13-2010, 11:51 AM
JTRSickert JTRSickert is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 440
Default

Adam,

This assumption would have to theorize that the Ripper was probably aware of the new fingerprinting method of identification that was just beginning to be used in criminal cases (if at all). So, he would have had to be a very knowledgable individual to pre-suppose something like that, which I doubt. However, that may not be the only reason for his wearing gloves. Since he knew he was going to be ripping open chests and removing organs and what have you, perhaps he wore gloves for a number of other reasons. Such as: perhaps he was afraid that contact with blood would run the risk of contracting a veneral disease or some other illness the prostitute may have. He may worn them to get a better grip on his trophy organs (after all, blood and other stuff on the organ would cause the fingers to become slippery and his target trophy may have fallen out of his hands otherwise.) Finally, perhaps, after commintting his crime, he would take off his gloves and stuff them in his pockets so he could walk around freely at night and, if a bobby or some other citizen stopped to talk to him, he could show them a pair of clear, blood-free hands.
__________________
I won't make any deals. I've resigned. I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed,de-briefed, or numbered!
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 11-30-2016, 08:54 PM
dantheman dantheman is offline
Constable
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 58
Default

Based on the fact that the ripper tore Eddowe's apron to wipe his hands clean, then I have to say no he did not wear gloves. I think if he did wear gloves then that's what would've of been found in Goulston St instead of Kate's apron.


Sincerely,

Dan
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 11-30-2016, 09:19 PM
RockySullivan RockySullivan is offline
Inspector
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 1,384
Default

If he wasn't wearing gloves, wouldn't his hands have been covered in blood/etc from Chapman..and then why didn't the killer use the pale of water to clean his hands?
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 11-30-2016, 09:52 PM
dantheman dantheman is offline
Constable
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 58
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RockySullivan View Post
If he wasn't wearing gloves, wouldn't his hands have been covered in blood/etc from Chapman..and then why didn't the killer use the pale of water to clean his hands?


It's possible he used a dry spot on Chapman's clothes to wipe/clean hands.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 11-30-2016, 10:00 PM
jerryd jerryd is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 721
Default

If we accept that Alice McKenzie was a ripper victim, there is evidence that shows her killer was not wearing gloves. At least not wearing gloves that covered the finger tips. The night time temperatures wouldn't have warranted a definite need for gloves except on the night of Mary Kelly. But she was also killed indoors.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 12-01-2016, 01:53 AM
GUT GUT is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: I come from a land Down Under
Posts: 6,950
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jerryd View Post
If we accept that Alice McKenzie was a ripper victim, there is evidence that shows her killer was not wearing gloves. At least not wearing gloves that covered the finger tips. The night time temperatures wouldn't have warranted a definite need for gloves except on the night of Mary Kelly. But she was also killed indoors.
But many don't accept her as a victim.
__________________
G U T

There are two ways to be fooled, one is to believe what isn't true, the other is to refuse to believe that which is true.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 12-01-2016, 03:05 AM
RockySullivan RockySullivan is offline
Inspector
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 1,384
Default

wouldn't reaching in and pulling out the organs really get the hands messy? wouldn't they still be very stained after just wiping on cloth?
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 12-01-2016, 05:08 AM
Jon Guy Jon Guy is offline
Superintendent
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,485
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dantheman View Post
It's possible he used a dry spot on Chapman's clothes to wipe/clean hands.
He could have also taken something of Chapman`s to wipe/ clean hands.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 12-01-2016, 08:20 AM
Michael W Richards Michael W Richards is offline
Superintendent
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 2,878
Default

Wool gloves might have allowed for better grip on the organs even if blood soaked, much better than wet leather gloves for sure, and he may have wiped off his gloves on Kates clothing.
__________________
Michael Richards
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 07:07 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.