Leather Apron

[Hunter]

There were abrasions on the left side of Catherine Eddowes' face and marks under her ear similar to the marks on Chapman. Despite the fact that no one seemed to hear a struggle - except for maybe... maybe Cadosch - the evidence points to these women being overpowered by sudden force.

[Bridewell]

The London Hospital

Hi Bridewell

Thinking back, the only source that springs to mind is something I read a long time ago in one of the many books devoted to Jack the Ripper. I can't recall the book in question, and it did not stipulate the reason for Cadosch's hospital stay, but rather the author speculated as you did, that because Cadosch visited the privy twice in quick succession perhaps a urinary problem was the reason for the operation.

I would suggest that the hospital in question was The London Hospital, and as they hold an extensive archive, it's not beyond the bounds of possibility that they have Cadosch's operation details on record.

Regards

Observer

Hi Observer,

It's interesting that you should say that. I too would have thought the London Hospital to be the most likely - as did the archivist. No trace. The same goes for the records of the much smaller Bethnal Green Hospital which also survive.

Regards, Bridewell.

[Sally]

Hi Observer,

It's interesting that you should say that. I too would have thought the London Hospital to be the most likely - as did the archivist. No trace. The same goes for the records of the much smaller Bethnal Green Hospital which also survive.

Regards, Bridewell.

So if Cadosch did indeed have an operation, where might that have been? What about the infirmary records - worth a look maybe?

[Michael W Richards]

Hello all,

I would think even without clear evidence that some of the women were somehow choked its pretty much a given in the case of Polly, Annie, Liz, and Kate. The murders proximity to awake witnesses who swore they heard little or no sounds means he abruptly cut off their ability to call out,... and breathe. In Liz's case we do have the addition of noise through the upstairs window, but the kitchen door was ajar and people were awake in the cottages opposite the murder site. Mary may have been asleep on her right side when the knife slit her throat, which would have quickly ended any calls that might be heard.

I disagree with the idea that strength would be any real factor in these cases, a hold, or some kind of garotte, using the womens scarves, if done quickly, could be employed by a man of average strength. Maybe in some cases the strength of a butchers forearm would be plenty.

Polly was drunk, Annie was feeble due to illness, Liz's murderer may have choked and cut in a second or 2. Kates killer might have had some above average strength, and perhaps Marys. But not all the murders needed a strong man in my opinion of course.

Best regards all,

Mike R

[Observer]

Hi Observer,

It's interesting that you should say that. I too would have thought the London Hospital to be the most likely - as did the archivist. No trace. The same goes for the records of the much smaller Bethnal Green Hospital which also survive.

Regards, Bridewell.

Hi Bridewell

Should Cadosch and the person mentioned in the Echo 11th September be two separate individuals, and I strongly suggest that they are, the alternative is to search for persons who underwent operations to remove carbuncles from the neck immediately prior to 11th September.

Regards

Observer

[Observer]

Hi Mike

My initial argument did not involve the evaluation of the physical strength of Jack the Ripper. Rather it was my opinion that the individual mentioned by a high ranking official at Scotland Yard in the Echo on the 11th September, could not have been Jack the Ripper, on the grounds that the officer revealed that the individual was, and I quote

"The man suspected - rightly or wrongly - of being him is a person of weak physique, and but a short time ago underwent a very painful operation, when a large carbuncle was extracted from the back of his neck. Since then, until within quite recently, he has been an inmate of a convalescent home, and at the present time his physical [powers?] are less than those of any woman."

The officer lead the Echo to believe that the man in question was known as Leather Apron.


Regards

Observer

[Michael W Richards]

Hi Mike

My initial argument did not involve the evaluation of the physical strength of Jack the Ripper. Rather it was my opinion that the individual mentioned by a high ranking official at Scotland Yard in the Echo on the 11th September, could not have been Jack the Ripper, on the grounds that the officer revealed that the individual was, and I quote

"The man suspected - rightly or wrongly - of being him is a person of weak physique, and but a short time ago underwent a very painful operation, when a large carbuncle was extracted from the back of his neck. Since then, until within quite recently, he has been an inmate of a convalescent home, and at the present time his physical [powers?] are less than those of any woman."

The officer lead the Echo to believe that the man in question was known as Leather Apron.


Regards

Observer

Hi Observer,

I missed the context you intended, my apologies. The description above though would leave one wondering how a man that was weak to begin with matches the type alluded to in the general descriptions of the man. Menacing was one I recall. I dont believe the profile suggests that he used weapons or knives to threaten them on every occasion either, which suggests that his "menace" if you will must have come from his means of physical intimidation to some extent.

These women serviced dock workers, general laborers, warehouse and slaughterhouse men. All of these categories require some physical strength, particularly in the muscles that power the arms and back.

My point was that the killer need not be strong per se, but of adequate strength to work in those kinds of occupations.

There is of course room to argue the man was not from any of these occupations but rather a gentleman with only moderate exercise at best as a routine. In which case my suggestion above still holds true...he need not be a "strong" individual.

Best regards,

Mike R

[lynn cates]

The eyes have it.

Hello Mike.

" . . . suggests that his "menace" if you will must have come from his means of physical intimidation to some extent."

Perhaps it was merely the look in his eyes?

Cheers.
LC

[Wickerman]

Hello Jon. Thanks. Fair point about the take down.

But can we not rule out ligature in Polly and Annie's cases, given the bruises corresponding to thumbs and fingers?

Cheers.
LC

Hi Lynn.
In the case of Chapman, Dr. Phillips described the scratches as running in a contrary direction, to the direction of the cut. Anyone of us might have said that the scratches ran vertical while the cut ran horizontal. At least that is how I interpret his words.

Assuming you are grasping the victim by the throat, your fingers are horizontal across her throat. Therefore, if your nails leave any scratches at all they are also horizontal. In fact the nail of your forefinger is above the nail mark of your middle finger, which is above the nail mark of your ring finger, etc.

The person who is scratching downward, is not the attacker, it is the victim. The vertical scratches were caused, in my opinion, by Chapman attempting to pull something tight & thin from her throat. A cord would meet the requirements perfectly.

If Chapman's attacker used his hands, or his forearm, to strangle/suffocate her then it is difficult to see how her throat was also exposed sufficiently for her to cause those scratches.

The killer didn't do it, Chapman couldn't do it if her throat was covered by his hands or arm. Therefore I think it was a cord that was wrapped around her throat, which caused her to scratch at the thin ligature, marking her throat with vertical scratches.


As for Polly, we do not have the same mention of scratches, but the facial bruises are consistent with a hand across the mouth. Those bruises were not on the throat, so to my mind they do not support manual strangulation.

The location of the bruises are described like this:




Which, to my mind suggests a hand holding down the head with a left hand, while cutting her throat with his right hand.



So the bruises on Polly do not support manual strangulation. How she was rendered unconscious is open to debate.

Regards, Jon S.

[Wickerman]

... I dont believe the profile suggests that he used weapons or knives to threaten them on every occasion either,...

Agreed Michael, I would go so far as to believe the victims never saw a knife, except MJK maybe.
"Jack" in my opinion was a strangler (garrotter), it was this action which rendered them from innocence to victim.
Any women in the East end who were attacked by a knife wielding thug were not faced with "Jack". A strangler takes the casual calm approach, takes his victim by surprise.

which suggests that his "menace" if you will must have come from his means of physical intimidation to some extent.

If menace was evident, I'm not sure how many women would trust him in a dark ally.
I can see other men sensing "menace" if they get too near. In that respect I agree with Lynn, very likely it was from his expression. The eyes are the principal weapons of expression.

There is of course room to argue the man was not from any of these occupations but rather a gentleman with only moderate exercise at best as a routine. In which case my suggestion above still holds true...he need not be a "strong" individual.

Yes, the field is entirely open with respect to the "strength" requirement of the killer.

Regards, Jon S.

[lynn cates]

ligatures and such

Hello Jon. Thanks.

In Annie's case, let's assume that she scratched herself. That is indeed consistent with wishing to remove the ligature. But, unless the hands strangling are immobile, it is also consistent with manual strangulation.

As for Polly, Dr. Llewellyn thought the bruise resulted from a thumb OR a blow.

Cheers.
LC

[Michael W Richards]

Hello Mike.

" . . . suggests that his "menace" if you will must have come from his means of physical intimidation to some extent."

Perhaps it was merely the look in his eyes?

Cheers.
LC

Hi Lynn,

Thats a conundrum for me Lynn, because I can see women wanting to avoid a man with "crazy" or "evil eyes", but if he also appears physically weak, I would think they'd avoid him because he seemed crazy, not necessarily because he seemed a threat to them. If I recall correctly the women were scared and frightened by Leather Apron, in my opinion thats because he appeared physically capable of carrying out some kind of attack on their person.

What Im thinking is that there is real fear... and there is revulsion, I feel crazy eyes would produce the second emotion.

My best regards Lynn,

Mike R

[Trevor Marriott]

Hi Lynn,

Thats a conundrum for me Lynn, because I can see women wanting to avoid a man with "crazy" or "evil eyes", but if he also appears physically weak, I would think they'd avoid him because he seemed crazy, not necessarily because he seemed a threat to them. If I recall correctly the women were scared and frightened by Leather Apron, in my opinion thats because he appeared physically capable of carrying out some kind of attack on their person.

What Im thinking is that there is real fear... and there is revulsion, I feel crazy eyes would produce the second emotion.

My best regards Lynn,

Mike R

How is a woman expected to see crazy and evil eyes in a man in darkness.

In my lifetime i havent seen to many men or women with crazy and evil looks in their eyes except on here !

[lynn cates]

shake down

Hello Mike. Thanks. Leather Apron was supposed to be fairly powerful. His eyes and grin were supposed to be malignant and repellant.

I presume that, when confronted with this chap, many were delighted to part with 2d rather that continue the confrontation.

Of course, Polly and Annie were both broke and physically impaired.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

malignant

Hello Trevor. I have a great photo of him. It was published in the "Ripperologist" #125.

Malignant? I think so.

Cheers.
LC