The GSG - Did Jack write it? POLL

[rjpalmer]

I believe the message in the lower left corner reads 'Up the Spout' (ie., slang for knocked up, pregnant; evidently an attempt at humor due to the building's many drain pipes)

lower right corner, that is...

I don't know if a plan of this building exists, but the size/shape of this back entry makes me think it was an open passage that gave access to the stairwells (?) Someone should know...

[Sam Flynn]

Why would anyone want to carry around two pieces of old white apron?

[Leanne]

THERE WAS NO MENTION THAT CATHERINE EDDOWESS WAS WEARING HALF AN APRON.
Among her possessions was: '1 piece of old white apron with repair'.

As she had lots of sewing gear amongst her possessions:
'12 pieces of white rag some slightly blood-stained,
1 piece of course linen,
1 piece of blue and white skirting,
1 piece of red flannel with pins and needles,
serveral buttons and a thimble,'

could not the two pieces of apron have been among her possessions for her to mend, fallen in two pieces with Jack grabbing one piece to carry away her kidney?
It's a shame the police didn't examine the bloodstained pieces of white rag in her possession to see if those stains could have been made with a wiping of a knife.

[Leanne]

Read this:

https://casebook.org/victims/eddowes.html

[Trevor Marriott]

Why would anyone want to carry around two pieces of old white apron?

Who knows what strange things people do, but one plausible explanation given the description of how the Gs piece was decsribed is that it could have been used as a sanitary device as I have suggested, and the second as a back up perhaps.

One thing is for sure, is that The GS piece was connected to the victim, and the victim was in lodgings very close to where it was found, and given the fact that her movements between 1am-1.44am are not known, and given the fact that she would have had time after leaving the police station to make her way back towards her lodgings and for those reasons this should not be dismissed outright.

i have gathered enough evidence to show that the organs were not taken away in it, and that there are many reasons why the killer would not have needed to wipe his hands or his knife on it. So there has to be an explanation does there not ?

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Leanne]

Why would anyone want to carry around two pieces of old white apron?

To repair them into one piece??????

[Sam Flynn]

When we get anywhere near the real truth, we see signs of mass panic among those wanting to keep propping up the old theory

Nobody's propping anything up, and what "old theory" had you in mind anyway? That the killer cut the apron away from Eddowes and discarded it in Goulston Street? Fits the evidence far better than your idea that she discarded it herself after having used it as a sanitary towel.

[Leanne]

Why would anyone want to carry around 12 pieces of white rag?

[Sam Flynn]

Why would anyone want to carry around 12 pieces of white rag?

To blow your nose? You can blow your nose in half an apron, I guess, but it would be like using an oil-drum as a spitoon.

[Sam Flynn]

To repair them into one piece??????

Why not repair it and wear it? Wait - her apron was repaired and she was wearing it (because it was tied around her neck), so that's that mystery solved.

PS: Don't feed the Trevor.

[Trevor Marriott]

Why not repair it and wear it? Wait - her apron was repaired and she was wearing it (because it was tied around her neck), so that's that mystery solved.

PS: Don't feed the Trevor.

You cant handle the truth

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Sam Flynn]

You cant handle the truth

You don't know what the truth is, anymore than I do.

[etenguy]

Who knows what strange things people do, but one plausible explanation given the description of how the Gs piece was decsribed is that it could have been used as a sanitary device as I have suggested, and the second as a back up perhaps.

One thing is for sure, is that The GS piece was connected to the victim, and the victim was in lodgings very close to where it was found, and given the fact that her movements between 1am-1.44am are not known, and given the fact that she would have had time after leaving the police station to make her way back towards her lodgings and for those reasons this should not be dismissed outright.

i have gathered enough evidence to show that the organs were not taken away in it, and that there are many reasons why the killer would not have needed to wipe his hands or his knife on it. So there has to be an explanation does there not ?

Hi Trevor

I wondered if it was worth exploring your suggestion that the apron piece was used as a sanitary towel. If that were the case, it is unlikely to be used as a wipe, but more likely to be worn in the gusset over time. Most women will lose one or two teaspoons of blood over the course of a day. The apron piece was described as having a corner wet with blood, so not dried blood, or blood stains accumulated over time. I struggle to match the kind of stain described by the police with the use you ascribe. Given the description, it seems to me more likely the apron was bloodied at the murder site and carried away. I just wondered how you conceive the apron could be wet with blood given your alternative suggestion for how the rag became bloodied in the first place.

[Trevor Marriott]

Hi Trevor

I wondered if it was worth exploring your suggestion that the apron piece was used as a sanitary towel. If that were the case, it is unlikely to be used as a wipe, but more likely to be worn in the gusset over time. Most women will lose one or two teaspoons of blood over the course of a day. The apron piece was described as having a corner wet with blood, so not dried blood, or blood stains accumulated over time. I struggle to match the kind of stain described by the police with the use you ascribe. Given the description, it seems to me more likely the apron was bloodied at the murder site and carried away. I just wondered how you conceive the apron could be wet with blood given your alternative suggestion for how the rag became bloodied in the first place.

The apron piece was described as being wet no mention of wet with, blood PC Longs signed official inquest testimony

It was described as being spotted with blood and traces of fecal matter, all of the stains were on one side, all consistent with being between her legs, another description is that it was smeared on one side, again consistent with the aforementioned theory.

As to the blood spots a modern day consultant gynecologist states that due to her perhaps being malnourished when menstruating her body may have only produced spots of blood. In victorian days street women when menstruating wore pieces of rag as sanitary devices.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Joshua Rogan]

Given the description, it seems to me more likely the apron was bloodied at the murder site and carried away.

This is a good point.
If the killer was organised and intended from the beginning to take the apron piece then it makes sense that he would have cut it at the beginning, probably when he cut through the waistband of all Kate's clothing. But if it was a last minute decision after the mutilations, then he would have had to extract the apron from under the intestines trailing across the thrown-up clothing.