Tweet
I’ve always thought that the key to the JTR-case is in the night of the double event, and specially the Mitre Square scene. Something happened that night, and this made a change in the behaviour of the investigators. Before the murder of Catherine Eddowes, police had, in my opinion, an open communication with the press. But in near time after Mitre Square they completely shut this door, and I think it was the New York Times that wrote about police using more resources on keeping the press away, than on actually working on catching the murderer. Considering this, the piece of apron found in G. Street, helped the investigators moving the focus away from Mitre Square, and it makes me wonder if this was a hidden agenda (where was the apron between 1.44am and 2.55am?.) This is of course merely speculations, but the fact is, that something did change this terrible night of the double event.
One thing we know for sure, is that the behaviour of the killer changed at Mitre Square. For the first time he went for his victims face. Why?
One could argue that her wounds is a result of anger, but in my mind there is something more to it. – Symmetry. Both eyelids are cut in the same way, and inverted Vs pointing to the eyes on both sides. The killer had taken some time to do this, so it must somehow mean something to him. Had Catherine seen something she wasn’t supposed to?
We know that the superintendent of the casual ward in Shoe Lane told the East London Observer that Eddowes said to him she had come back to earn the reward offered for the apprehension of JTR. – I think I know him. This might be a joke from her side, or the journalist trying to make his interview more interesting, tough it should be considered as a possibly fact.
From this point the important questions rises: where did she get the money to get drunk earlier that night? Second; why would she follow the murderer, if she knew who it was, into the dark and empty Mitre Square?
Israel Schwartz saw two men in Berner Street a short time before the murder of Sride. One trying to pull a woman (most likely Stride) in to the street, and throwing her down on the footway. The other near by, starting to follow Schwartz. At 1.35 a.m. Joseph Lawende saw a woman (most likely Eddowes) and a man talking near the Church Passage (leading to Mitre Square). Just a few minutes earlier a watchman named Blenkingsop saw a respectably dressed man in St James’s Place, who asked him if he’d seen a man and a woman go through the passage.
My speculations of what could have happened:
Catherine Eddowes knew something, she suspected someone to be, or at least know something about the Whitechapel murderer. The murderer suspected that Eddowes suspected him, but what she didn’t know was that the Whitechapel murderer was in fact the Whitechapel murderers. So one of them, probably the one Eddowes didn’t suspect, got her drunk earlier that day, knowing that she would use her last penny on drinks, which in turn, forced her to get out on the streets again after she was released from the arrest. Then this same man picks her up by the “prostitutes church” shortly after the murder of Stride, taking her up Duke Street, where Lawende observed them. The other murderer had to keep an distance, walking around near bye, waiting. Then he loses them of sight, and ask the watchman in St James’s Place if he have seen them. After murdering Catherine they leave a message: If you see something you shouldn’t, you better keep quiet!
One thing we know for sure, is that the behaviour of the killer changed at Mitre Square. For the first time he went for his victims face. Why?
One could argue that her wounds is a result of anger, but in my mind there is something more to it. – Symmetry. Both eyelids are cut in the same way, and inverted Vs pointing to the eyes on both sides. The killer had taken some time to do this, so it must somehow mean something to him. Had Catherine seen something she wasn’t supposed to?
We know that the superintendent of the casual ward in Shoe Lane told the East London Observer that Eddowes said to him she had come back to earn the reward offered for the apprehension of JTR. – I think I know him. This might be a joke from her side, or the journalist trying to make his interview more interesting, tough it should be considered as a possibly fact.
From this point the important questions rises: where did she get the money to get drunk earlier that night? Second; why would she follow the murderer, if she knew who it was, into the dark and empty Mitre Square?
Israel Schwartz saw two men in Berner Street a short time before the murder of Sride. One trying to pull a woman (most likely Stride) in to the street, and throwing her down on the footway. The other near by, starting to follow Schwartz. At 1.35 a.m. Joseph Lawende saw a woman (most likely Eddowes) and a man talking near the Church Passage (leading to Mitre Square). Just a few minutes earlier a watchman named Blenkingsop saw a respectably dressed man in St James’s Place, who asked him if he’d seen a man and a woman go through the passage.
My speculations of what could have happened:
Catherine Eddowes knew something, she suspected someone to be, or at least know something about the Whitechapel murderer. The murderer suspected that Eddowes suspected him, but what she didn’t know was that the Whitechapel murderer was in fact the Whitechapel murderers. So one of them, probably the one Eddowes didn’t suspect, got her drunk earlier that day, knowing that she would use her last penny on drinks, which in turn, forced her to get out on the streets again after she was released from the arrest. Then this same man picks her up by the “prostitutes church” shortly after the murder of Stride, taking her up Duke Street, where Lawende observed them. The other murderer had to keep an distance, walking around near bye, waiting. Then he loses them of sight, and ask the watchman in St James’s Place if he have seen them. After murdering Catherine they leave a message: If you see something you shouldn’t, you better keep quiet!