Apron placement as intimidation?

[Varqm]

2 cents..

It was dark,he did not need to have any special purpose (for communication) for carrying the apron far,he did not intend to meet/talk to anybody,so by default he could carry it as far as he can/could with no additional risk (besides he was carrying the organ and knife),and after he was done with it he discarded it.He was cautious/careful taking 3-4x the time to walk from Mitre square to Goulston.It's the simplest explanation.

Most graffito are written at night where the tagger could not be seen,especially in this case something that could easily be understood/misunderstood as anti-semitic.That no residents saw it was not unusual.If it was written at 9 pm to midnight would Halse have known the difference compared to a graffito made at past 2:20 AM (Long's discovery).


Sam made a good point,there were many anti-semitic people and the chances one of them wrote it was far greater.And Harry's point,if you look at the C5 the killer did not show any need/tendency to communicate.

[Darryl Kenyon]

While the message is probably anti-semitic, based on the above reasoning a pro-Jewish interpretation does not seem unreasonable (to me anyway).
It does not seem unreasonable to me either C.d
I think the graffiti probably didn't come from the killer, but if it did i think it's more likely that it would be written by a jew lashing out against the world at his perceived injustices. If he had been at the IWEC earlier in the evening the talks could have fueled his anger. More likely, [in my opinion] than writing the message because he may have been interrupted by Diemscultz.

[etenguy]

The last few pages of this thread have concentrated heavily on who wrote the grafitto and what did it mean.

I wonder why the apron was there at all. Why did the murderer take the apron from the scene and discard it in Goulston street?

The two obvious reasons to explain why it was taken are:
1. to clean up, in which case he would discard it in the place where he performed his cleaning, which I would suggest would be somewhere less open than in the middle of a street (such as a dark alley of which there were plenty).
2. to carry away the organs, in which case he would need to secure the organs before discarding the apron. This would suggest he went home, or to a safe place, to store the organs and came back onto the streets to discard it. Presumably not too close to home.

Neither makes sense, unless there is some piece of information missing.

If he wrote the grafitto and wanted to authenticate his message - that provides a reason which makes some sense.

Without some other information, there is no other good reason I can think of for the apron to be in Goulston Street.

[Sam Flynn]

Etenguy,

The apron piece was not deposited in the open street, but in the darkened recess of a doorway ; a perfect place to scrub up out of sight.

[etenguy]

Etenguy,

The apron piece was not deposited in the open street, but in the darkened recess of a doorway ; a perfect place to scrub up out of sight.

I disagree that this was the perfect place. It was a doorway that opened out onto a reasonably large street. The fact a policeman saw the apron from the street would suggest any passerby would have seen someone cleaning himself up in the doorway. It was recessed back by a couple of feet, but by no means out of sight, even in the dark. If the killer was desperate to clean up, then better than the street. But assuming the killer knew the area somewhat, much more secluded places very close by.

[Darryl Kenyon]

Hi Etenguy
The killer could have cleaned up in a bolt hole nearby. In his haste, panic and with the Adrenalin flowing, he could have put the apron back his pocket, realized it on Goulston St and threw it in the darkened doorway.
PS In my last post i meant to say - more likely than a Gentile being interrupted by Diemschultz.

[etenguy]

Hi Etenguy
The killer could have cleaned up in a bolt hole nearby. In his haste, panic and with the Adrenalin flowing, he could have put the apron back his pocket, realized it on Goulston St and threw it in the darkened doorway.

We cannot know for sure the size of the apron piece, but there is reason to suggest it was a reasonable size (it was referred to as half the apron that Catherine Eddowes had been wearing). He could have taken it with him after cleaning up, unlikely I think to fit in a pocket though and it was wet with blood. Possible, but unlikely, I think.

[Sam Flynn]

We cannot know for sure the size of the apron piece, but there is reason to suggest it was a reasonable size (it was referred to as half the apron that Catherine Eddowes had been wearing).

The apron was attached by strings around the waist so, if it was of the type that extended to the knee, it need't have been all that big when bisected: a couple of square feet, perhaps. Of course, it's very unfortunate that no measurements survive.

[Abby Normal]

The last few pages of this thread have concentrated heavily on who wrote the grafitto and what did it mean.

I wonder why the apron was there at all. Why did the murderer take the apron from the scene and discard it in Goulston street?

The two obvious reasons to explain why it was taken are:
1. to clean up, in which case he would discard it in the place where he performed his cleaning, which I would suggest would be somewhere less open than in the middle of a street (such as a dark alley of which there were plenty).
2. to carry away the organs, in which case he would need to secure the organs before discarding the apron. This would suggest he went home, or to a safe place, to store the organs and came back onto the streets to discard it. Presumably not too close to home.

Neither makes sense, unless there is some piece of information missing.

If he wrote the grafitto and wanted to authenticate his message - that provides a reason which makes some sense.

Without some other information, there is no other good reason I can think of for the apron to be in Goulston Street.

Great post and totally agree. I was going to steer the post in this direction but you beat me to it. There is only two reasons for for cutting the portion of apron and then later dumping that makes any sense imho. One is to sign the graffiti which I think is the most likely.

But I could see if he cut himself he used it as a bandage.

[Abby Normal]

Etenguy,

The apron piece was not deposited in the open street, but in the darkened recess of a doorway ; a perfect place to scrub up out of sight.

Hi sam

He could have cleaned wiped his hands then and their over the body. Would have taken seconds. This is the most likely imho.

[etenguy]

There is only two reasons for for cutting the portion of apron and then later dumping that makes any sense imho. One is to sign the graffiti which I think is the most likely.

I find the whole apron/GSG episode to be quite perplexing. If you are right, then he must have planned to leave a message. To bring chalk with him and to take away a piece of the apron. But, for the chalk at least, he would have planned this before the Stride murder. So being angry at being interrupted would not have been his motivation for leaving the GSG. Unless he carried chalk around as a matter of course (teacher perhaps).

The other alternative is that he sought out chalk between Stride and Eddowes, maybe from home, in which case the radius of where he was staying shrinks.

Or it is all a coincidence, and he just discarded the apron at Goulston street while he was on the move. But that doesn't make sense to me either (previous post).

There seems to be something missing that might help us understand what happened.

[Abby Normal]

I find the whole apron/GSG episode to be quite perplexing. If you are right, then he must have planned to leave a message. To bring chalk with him and to take away a piece of the apron. But, for the chalk at least, he would have planned this before the Stride murder. So being angry at being interrupted would not have been his motivation for leaving the GSG. Unless he carried chalk around as a matter of course (teacher perhaps).

The other alternative is that he sought out chalk between Stride and Eddowes, maybe from home, in which case the radius of where he was staying shrinks.

Or it is all a coincidence, and he just discarded the apron at Goulston street while he was on the move. But that doesn't make sense to me either (previous post).

There seems to be something missing that might help us understand what happened.

Hi eten
Yes very perplexing.
I think what happened is that he headed out that evening without any intention of writing something and so didn’t have any chalk. But after being interrupted by Jews that night, the main one being Schwartz who had a heavy Jewish appearance and illicited the angry Jewish slur lipski he got the idea to do something to blame the Jews and so cut eddowes apron.

Not having chalk he headed home, dropped off his goodies, knife , cleaned up a bit grabbed a piece of chalk and headed back out to write the gsg.

If any single thing that IMHO links the anti Jewish grifitti with the events of that night it would be the Jewish slur lipski.

[etenguy]

Hi eten
Yes very perplexing.
I think what happened is that he headed out that evening without any intention of writing something and so didn’t have any chalk. But after being interrupted by Jews that night, the main one being Schwartz who had a heavy Jewish appearance and illicited the angry Jewish slur lipski he got the idea to do something to blame the Jews and so cut eddowes apron.

Not having chalk he headed home, dropped off his goodies, knife , cleaned up a bit grabbed a piece of chalk and headed back out to write the gsg.

If any single thing that IMHO links the anti Jewish grifitti with the events of that night it would be the Jewish slur lipski.

Well. That all hangs together and explains the timing of finding of the apron and the GSG. That also squarely locates his bolthole within a short distance of Goulston street, no more than about a 20 minute walk, and perhaps closer.

[Abby Normal]

Well. That all hangs together and explains the timing of finding of the apron and the GSG. That also squarely locates his bolthole within a short distance of Goulston street, no more than about a 20 minute walk, and perhaps closer.

Exactly. That’s my next extrapolation.

The ripper lived within a 20 minute brisk walk from miter square. And back..

[MrBarnett]

Exactly. That’s my next extrapolation.

The ripper lived within a 20 minute brisk walk from miter square. And back..

Abby,

Do you think the choice of the double event murder sites - Stride by the IWMEC and the Arbeiter Fraint premises, Eddowes behind the Great Synagogue - was random and had nothing to do with their 'Jewishness'?

Gary