Why that ?

[Leatherface]

Not to add fuel to the fire, but there is Marriott's theory that the cloth was not left by JTR, but was left by Eddowes herself after she used is for hygenic purposes earlier that afternoon or after she was released. I don't know if I buy it, but it certainly is interesting.

R

[DVV]

If you like boring things that much, try to read True North by Jim Harrison. It has spoiled half of my July...

[joelhall]

i learnt how to wait by watching the blair witch project

[DVV]

Yes my dear,
and as I've already told you, I'd like to know if your theory will involve one or some of the famous suspects of September, such as Piggot, Pizer, Isenschmid...
But I've learnt how to wait in Ethiopia, after being a very nervous youth...

Amitiés,
David

[joelhall]

ps: except your (s), your post looks like you are on the trail of 1 killer now...Am I wrong?

haha, no i still dont believe the lone killer as being solely responsible. ive started to formulate a couple of theories which ill share soon

...i know youre getting impatient

[DVV]

To some extent, that was my point.
Think about the way he escaped from Mitre Square has been described in the literature.
Think about the arguments against BSM as JtR.

Amitiés,
David

ps: except your (s), your post looks like you are on the trail of 1 killer now...Am I wrong?

[joelhall]

ive personally never thought the killer(s) to have been clever or careful. quite the opposite, the murders were clumsy & rushed, without any clear purpose (such as a common trophy). indeed the victims were of varying appearance, the locations were different (think square, street, garden, etc) the timings were staggered, etc etc. nothing really becomes common amongst these killings except the ease of the prey & the weapon of choice.

its been said it was a disorganised killer. i think haphazard is a better word.

[DVV]

Maybe, Joel.
If Jack was in a hurry, as you said, still it was a mistake... Interesting, 'cause that shows that our man was not as careful as we often imagine him.

Amitiés,
David

[joelhall]

The problem I have with this piece of apron is the place where it has been found.
Why did the murderer throw it in a place where it could be found? Why not with other garbage, in a hole, etc?

Amitiés,
David

to draw attention to the message maybe? or perhaps the killer was just in a hurry?

[joelhall]

i still reckon it was to put the stolen organs in before he took off in a hurry.

after all who wants blood & crap in their pocket? well ok the blood dries, but i doubt he was counting on the faeces. hence he nicked something to wrap it in.

[DVV]

The problem I have with this piece of apron is the place where it has been found.
Why did the murderer throw it in a place where it could be found? Why not with other garbage, in a hole, etc?

Amitiés,
David

[Limehouse]

In Victorian times, women wore their aprons tied or looped around the neck and waist so that the bodice and area from the waist down were covered. Now, if the murderer in the course of carrying out the mutilations cut the ties from around the waist, that would leave the loop over the neck intact, thus complying with the description in the police inventory.

[FrankO]

How did the City Police manage to overlook the apron Eddowes was "wearing"?

Hi Simon,
As far as I can see, they didn't. In his written statement made at the inquest, Detective Halse deposed as to what he saw at the mortuary: "I saw deceased stripped and saw a portion of the apron was missing." The Times of 12 October is even clearer, as it reads: "He there saw the deceased undressed, noticing that a portion op the apron she wore was missing."

All the best,
Frank

[Simon Wood]

Hi All,

The only problem I see with the apron scenario is that, according to the official City Police inventory of clothing and possessions, Eddowes wasn't "wearing" an apron.

"1 Piece of old White Apron" was inventoried by the City Police, which The Times and other newspapers reported as "a piece of old white coarse apron . . . tied loosely around the neck."

A full apron tied with strings would have been difficult for the City Police to miss, especially as they had found witnesses who "saw the deceased standing at the corner of Duke-street, Aldgate, a few minutes' walk from Mitre-square. This was as near as they can recollect about half-past one o'clock, and she was then alone."

This was a pre-Lawende sighting [Evening News 11th October 1888].

"They [the witnesses] recognized her on account of the white apron she was wearing."

According to Inspector Collard's inquest testimony the City Police inventory was taken on Eddowes' arrival at the mortuary on Sunday morning. No apron was mentioned. However, by the time of Eddowes' post mortem on Sunday afternoon Doctor Brown matched the piece of apron found in Goulston Street with "the remaining portion, which was still attached by the strings to the body."

How did the City Police manage to overlook the apron Eddowes was "wearing"?

Regards,

Simon

[Monty]

Gareth,

I know you did mate, just that I know someone would pick up on it and twist it around.

Monty