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:
Lechmere/Cross, Charles: The Nature of Evidence - by Henry Flower 1 minute ago.
Lechmere/Cross, Charles: The Nature of Evidence - by Pierre 2 minutes ago.
Lechmere/Cross, Charles: The Nature of Evidence - by Henry Flower 4 minutes ago.
Non-Fiction: Deconstructing Jack by Simon Wood - by David Orsam 7 minutes ago.
Motive, Method and Madness: Lechmere Triple Event - by Pierre 10 minutes ago.
Shades of Whitechapel: Favorite Films (lists up to participating site members) - by Robert 13 minutes ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Lechmere/Cross, Charles: The Nature of Evidence - (34 posts)
Motive, Method and Madness: Lechmere Triple Event - (21 posts)
"The Royal Conspiracy": Annie and Alice Crook photographs. - (9 posts)
Audio -- Visual: Exorcist and JTR - (7 posts)
Non-Fiction: Deconstructing Jack by Simon Wood - (4 posts)
Shades of Whitechapel: Favorite Films (lists up to participating site members) - (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 > Motive, Method and Madness

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 11-16-2016, 11:45 PM
Charles Daniels Charles Daniels is offline
Constable
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 58
Default Apron placement as intimidation?

Just an idea floating through my head this morning --

Perhaps the placement of the bloody apron at the exact place it was left was meant to intimidate a specific person?

I mean if you want to drop off a bloody apron an hour after a murder, then a location 5 minutes away from the scene makes little sense or is hard to understand at the best of times.

The killer also had seemingly endless potential dump sites for the apron in the area.

Just got me wondering if there was someone in the building the killer wanted to scare or send a message to.

I mean, it could well be that the apron and graffiti have been terrible red herrings all these years -- the killer used the apron for some purpose and dumped it next to some graffiti. That's actually been my default assumption for years now.

But I think it's good to go back and look again and question...

I'm assuming the police probably checked out that property very thoroughly and spoke to residents there. So who was living there?

It could be just to unsettle the Jewish tenants there, but, I can imagine a killer getting his jollies dropping such an item at the doorstep of someone he had some personal direct beef against...
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 11-17-2016, 06:44 AM
Pierre Pierre is online now
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 4,126
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Charles Daniels View Post
Just an idea floating through my head this morning --

Perhaps the placement of the bloody apron at the exact place it was left was meant to intimidate a specific person?

I mean if you want to drop off a bloody apron an hour after a murder, then a location 5 minutes away from the scene makes little sense or is hard to understand at the best of times.

The killer also had seemingly endless potential dump sites for the apron in the area.

Just got me wondering if there was someone in the building the killer wanted to scare or send a message to.

I mean, it could well be that the apron and graffiti have been terrible red herrings all these years -- the killer used the apron for some purpose and dumped it next to some graffiti. That's actually been my default assumption for years now.

But I think it's good to go back and look again and question...

I'm assuming the police probably checked out that property very thoroughly and spoke to residents there. So who was living there?

It could be just to unsettle the Jewish tenants there, but, I can imagine a killer getting his jollies dropping such an item at the doorstep of someone he had some personal direct beef against...
Hi Charles,

What happens if you analyze the data from the perspective of the concept of "closeness"?

Was the apron close to the murder site?

Was the GSG close to the murder site?

Was the apron close to the GSG?

If some time passed between the murder and the visit in Goulston Street, how come you get the results you get from your analysis?

Regards, Pierre
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 11-17-2016, 12:54 PM
Michael W Richards Michael W Richards is offline
Superintendent
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 2,947
Default

I assume we are talking about a garment like this? If so, its easy to see why there could have been 2 pieces, each with a string still attached.
Attached Images
 
__________________
Michael Richards
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 11-17-2016, 01:22 PM
GUT GUT is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: I come from a land Down Under
Posts: 7,030
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael W Richards View Post
I assume we are talking about a garment like this? If so, its easy to see why there could have been 2 pieces, each with a string still attached.
Similar but probably plain calico rather than any fancy work.
__________________
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
  #5  
Old 11-17-2016, 01:45 PM
spyglass spyglass is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: gravesend,kent
Posts: 564
Default

Hi,
Of course, there remains the possibility that JTR just threw the rag down anywhere without giving it a second thought about it being found or noticed.
Maybe he lived in Goulston Street and discarded it just before going in doors.

Regards.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 11-22-2016, 02:16 PM
Harriet the Student Harriet the Student is offline
Cadet
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Aberdeen
Posts: 12
Default Another explanation?

i quite like the theory that the bloody apron was left by Eddowes herself as she walked the streets looking for customers; similar cloths were used by women as sanitary pads and I don't think it's impossible to imagine her discarding it when it became totally soiled.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 11-22-2016, 03:17 PM
Elamarna Elamarna is online now
Assistant Commissioner
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: South london
Posts: 3,043
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Harriet the Student View Post
i quite like the theory that the bloody apron was left by Eddowes herself as she walked the streets looking for customers; similar cloths were used by women as sanitary pads and I don't think it's impossible to imagine her discarding it when it became totally soiled.
Hi Harriet, not even going into the long and convoluted debates about the size of apron or when it was cut.

Just pointing out the possible logistical issues involved.

We are told it is soiled, some blood(amount debatable) and wet, still wet leads one to assumes it is deposited fairly recently to time of discovery.


Eddowes is locked up from8.45 until 1am.

She is then seen heading towards Houndsditch.

To deposit the cloth herself, she needs to change direction, no problem there, and head toward Goulston street, she is probably not moving very fast, but we cannot be sure.

She gets to Goulston street and either discards the material/cloth/apron or she loses it.

She now has to find client, either on route back to Mitre Square, or at Mitre Square.

And all must occur before being killed at around 1.30-1.35am.

That seems a very tight time frame. of approx 30mins to go, drop, come back and pick up.



Some will will agree with you, on the possible use of the cloth, others not. Which ever way you go on the issue, good luck.


Steve
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 11-22-2016, 04:37 PM
Trevor Marriott Trevor Marriott is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 4,465
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Elamarna View Post
Hi Harriet, not even going into the long and convoluted debates about the size of apron or when it was cut.

Just pointing out the possible logistical issues involved.

We are told it is soiled, some blood(amount debatable) and wet, still wet leads one to assumes it is deposited fairly recently to time of discovery.


Eddowes is locked up from8.45 until 1am.

She is then seen heading towards Houndsditch.

To deposit the cloth herself, she needs to change direction, no problem there, and head toward Goulston street, she is probably not moving very fast, but we cannot be sure.

She gets to Goulston street and either discards the material/cloth/apron or she loses it.

She now has to find client, either on route back to Mitre Square, or at Mitre Square.

And all must occur before being killed at around 1.30-1.35am.

That seems a very tight time frame. of approx 30mins to go, drop, come back and pick up.



Some will will agree with you, on the possible use of the cloth, others not. Which ever way you go on the issue, good luck.


Steve
Let me add some more to your reply to Harriet

She could quite easily have been wearing a piece of apron as a sanitary device when she was arrested and locked up.

The wetness was never clarified, some will suggest it was wet due to the rain. But that is not conclusive, it could have been urine. It is a known fact that when drunken persons are locked up in police cells they fall asleep and become incontinent.So that could account for the wetness.

The piece was described as either being spotted with blood or smeared with blood, and traces of faecal matter were also present. All of those combined are what might be expected to be found on a piece of cloth used as a sanitary device, and consistent with being between the legs of a street prostitute in 1888.

It is also not beyond the realms of possibility that Eddowes did decide to make her way back to Flower and Dean street where she was living, which was not that far away from Goulston Street, so she would have every reason to be in that area.

If she did decide to go home, then she could have gone under the archway to go to the toilet and then disposed of the soiled piece, and then perhaps decided against going home and decided to go back to the Mitre Sq area thus meeting her killer.

For those who label me a one trick pony of this issue. Let me suggest another alternative to also consider. If she was intending to go home. and then met a punter en route and went under the archway to engage in some sexual activity, and at the conclusion used one of the two pieces in her possession to wipe herself, and then discarded the soiled piece.

For information I can tell you that out in the big wide world there are many people like Harriet who are of the same opinion as her on this issue.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Last edited by Trevor Marriott : 11-22-2016 at 04:44 PM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 11-22-2016, 05:10 PM
Elamarna Elamarna is online now
Assistant Commissioner
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: South london
Posts: 3,043
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trevor Marriott View Post
Let me add some more to your reply to Harriet

She could quite easily have been wearing a piece of apron as a sanitary device when she was arrested and locked up.

The wetness was never clarified, some will suggest it was wet due to the rain. But that is not conclusive, it could have been urine. It is a known fact that when drunken persons are locked up in police cells they fall asleep and become incontinent.So that could account for the wetness.

The piece was described as either being spotted with blood or smeared with blood, and traces of faecal matter were also present. All of those combined are what might be expected to be found on a piece of cloth used as a sanitary device, and consistent with being between the legs of a street prostitute in 1888.

It is also not beyond the realms of possibility that Eddowes did decide to make her way back to Flower and Dean street where she was living, which was not that far away from Goulston Street, so she would have every reason to be in that area.

If she did decide to go home, then she could have gone under the archway to go to the toilet and then disposed of the soiled piece, and then perhaps decided against going home and decided to go back to the Mitre Sq area thus meeting her killer.

For those who label me a one trick pony of this issue. Let me suggest another alternative to also consider. If she was intending to go home. and then met a punter en route and went under the archway to engage in some sexual activity, and at the conclusion used one of the two pieces in her possession to wipe herself, and then discarded the soiled piece.

For information I can tell you that out in the big wide world there are many people like Harriet who are of the same opinion as her on this issue.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk


Trevor,

If you actually read what was posted you would see I did not rule out the possibility of her heading in the direction of Goulston street, upon her release.
I however did ask about the timing involved in proceeding back to Mitre Square for 1.30am, which you of course basically ignore,your only comment being

"and then perhaps decided against going home and decided to go back to the Mitre Sq area thus meeting her killer."


Yes maybe she did, who knows?

However there is no attempt by you to look at the timings involved, to see what is possible? and what is probable?


Go on there is plenty of data out there to help.


And then to make the possibility more improbable you, out of left field, suggest she may have stopped for a client before returning to Mitre Square,

Do you actually listen to yourself?


Actually if you read what Harriet said, it was she liked the idea no more, no less.


And many believe, from the sources that it was wet, with blood.



Steve

Last edited by Elamarna : 11-22-2016 at 05:21 PM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 11-22-2016, 05:37 PM
Elamarna Elamarna is online now
Assistant Commissioner
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: South london
Posts: 3,043
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trevor Marriott View Post
The wetness was never clarified, some will suggest it was wet due to the rain. But that is not conclusive, it could have been urine. It is a known fact that when drunken persons are locked up in police cells they fall asleep and become incontinent.So that could account for the wetness.
Trevor,

I note that you give many reasons why it could be said to have been wet; however I see no mention of blood being one such reason.

Given that several sources say this was the case, and indeed it was suggested as such by the coroner at the inquest was it not?

Why may one ask do you not include it as a possible reason?

Is it just forgetfulness or something else?




Steve
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 01:31 PM.


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