GSG Conclusion

[Wickerman]

... Well it might have been seen as rather strange for a man to be walking through the streets at 2am with half a womans apron smeared with faeces and wet on one corner with blood. I think that would certainly have led to you being arrested at the very least to give a satisfactory explanation, particularly given the killings that had happened previously...

I'm not so sure it would have been noticeable, the rag was dirty after all, he had to carry the organs away in something, a slice of apron is perfect. Blood looks black at night and he likely would have avoided most of the streetlamps anyway.

I dont believe the killer wrote the graffitti and therefore I don't see any connection between that and the apron.

Agreed.

Here is some conjecture though. Imagine the killer did just drop the apron piece their randomly. It gives us his direction of travel.

Yes it may, but lets not forget roughly an hour had passed between the murder and the discovery of the apron. Which leaves the possibility that he had been 'home' already, but returned to the street to dump the piece of apron. I know some will criticize PC Long for having missed the apron at 2:20, when he first passed the spot, but if he did he would have missed it twice. He had to pass the spot at 1:55 also.
The murderer was gone from Mitre Sq. by 1:44 and it doesn't take 11 minutes to travel three streets, roughly 1500ft to Goulston St. I accept PC Long's statement, so there is an hour to be accounted for.

Now for instance I would say AK man is probably the best suspect in the case. Seemingly very well dressed.

I think he left while Kelly was still alive. Mrs Kennedy saw Kelly outside the Britannia around 3:00am the morning of the murder, she was standing with the same man who accosted Lewis & Kennedy two nights before.
This character should be a prime suspect.

[Wickerman]

If Matthew Packer is to be believed then the killer may have had a bag handy;

Evening News 4 Oct
"'Give us half a pound of the black ones, then,' said the man. I put the grapes in a paper bag and handed them to him."

I don't recall any mention of this being seen or found on Stride's person, nor about the yard, so perhaps her companion put it in his pocket for later?

I'm sure it was the same man seen by PC Smith.
"...When I was in Berner street at 12.30 or so I saw a man and a woman talking together. The woman was like the deceased - in fact, I am sure the woman is the deceased. The two stood a few yards up Berner street. I noticed the man who was talking to her. He had a parcel done up in newspaper in his hand, about 18 inches long and 6 to 8 inches broad. He was about 5ft 7in high, as near as I can say. He had a hard felt hat on, and was wearing dark clothes and a cutaway coat. I did not overhear any of their conversation. Both of them seemed to be sober. I did not see much of the man's face, but he had no whiskers, and as near as I could judge was about 28 years of age. He was respectably dressed. I noticed that the woman had a flower in her dress".

Estimates can be wildly inaccurate ie; the size of the package, but the man was with Stride at the same time, in the same place, as described by Packer.
I think PC Smith saw the killer.

[Sunny Delight]

Sunny D, you are young and impressionable and full of the rather ill-thought out questions of your age. I'm not going to reply to your statement and questions, above. I'm going to leave that to Abe, below.

Ike

Well that is rather curt reply. Suit yourself.

[Iconoclast]

If Matthew Packer is to be believed then the killer may have had a bag handy;

Evening News 4 Oct
"'Give us half a pound of the black ones, then,' said the man. I put the grapes in a paper bag and handed them to him."

I don't recall any mention of this being seen or found on Stride's person, nor about the yard, so perhaps her companion put it in his pocket for later?

Excellent spot, Joshua. Possibly not big enough for the size of apron he cut away (it was quite a large piece) but - as we just don't know - this could be the very bag he used.

Great stuff.

Ike

[Joshua Rogan]

Well firstly you assume he had a bag(is that why AK man had one- he didn't want to make the same mistake again?). Of course as you say he could have put it in his inner pocket but from what I have read that would not necessarily be very easy as even half an apron would still have been quite lengthy.

If Matthew Packer is to be believed then the killer may have had a bag handy;

Evening News 4 Oct
"'Give us half a pound of the black ones, then,' said the man. I put the grapes in a paper bag and handed them to him."

I don't recall any mention of this being seen or found on Stride's person, nor about the yard, so perhaps her companion put it in his pocket for later?

[Iconoclast]

Hi Ike,

Morning Abe,

I trust you're well and as presidential as ever?

I'd say it's a moot point. He carried a bloody knife. He took body parts. He evaded detection and capture right under the noses of a city on high alert and being increasingly gripped by fear and panic. I don't think pocketing a piece of apron was the hardest task.

Couldn't agree more. He may have been reckless but I doubt he was stupid. Pocketing a piece of Eddowes' apron (quite a big piece, by the way - he evidently wanted this thing to be noticed) was a clear sign that he had thought his actions through and had made adequate preparations for its transportation to Goulston Street.

I seem to recall, the Victorian equivalent of a shopping bag was a piece of cloth used to bundle the items up. Something like, say, a piece of an old apron.

Absolutely, Abe. This is precisely what I had in mind when I referred to a Victorian equivalent of a modern shopping bag. Obviously, what I wasn't suggesting was that Jack had stuffed a Tesco grab-a-bag down his trousers before going out that night. Anything that protected his coat without being so bulky as to slow him down or make him stand out, I'd suggest, and definitely not one of those dreadful expanding net bags you see hippies carrying their sandals in at the beach.

Nice to see your finally allowed day releases from the ward by the way!

Hey, it's lovely out here, ain't it, guv'nor? I see you've got mobile 'phones, cars running on electric, lights working on electric! Everyone's equal now, apparently. Oh, and the Soviets are back to ordering Trabants. I'm currently on sixty-four medications - just because I can be. The NHS is an amazing thing, isn't it? Good old Labour!

The only time I cease to see the rapid progress I usually glimpse between the iron bars is when I come onto Casebook: Jack the Ripper. Sometimes it's really rather challenging to know if I'm currently in or out. By the way, someone has torn my Wor Jacky Ripper poster in the iconic No. 9 shirt striking at the Gallowgate end (so I'll need you to bring me a small, wall-penetrating drill next time you visit, please). I'll get the bastard mind. I've fashioned a shank out of a chicken bone and a shard of malachite I found in the exercise cupboard. That'll fix whoever it was (probably Lord Orsam - he's still in the next room, you know - oh the noise!). The attendants still don't clean my dentures often enough, by the way. Bloody Labour!

Aren't I due a visit soon, Abe? I do love those almond slices you bring me but could you bring me a cake next time? A big cake?

Ike

[Iconoclast]

Well firstly you would need to define what a Victorian equivalent of a shopping bag looked like. Then where they were available and thirdly how readily available they were?

Sunny D, you are young and impressionable and full of the rather ill-thought out questions of your age. I'm not going to reply to your statement and questions, above. I'm going to leave that to Abe, below.

Ike

[Al Bundy's Eyes]

I would say that it was plausible that Jack could have carried the apron in a Victorian equivalent of a modern shopping bag and that he had hidden it in the inner pocket of a coat.

Okay, let's simplify it. Would you say it was:

A) Impossible
B) Implausible
C) Plausible
D) Very Likely?

What say ye?

Hi Ike,

I'd say it's a moot point. He carried a bloody knife. He took body parts. He evaded detection and capture right under the noses of a city on high alert and being increasingly gripped by fear and panic. I don't think pocketing a piece of apron was the hardest task.

I seem to recall, the Victorian equivalent of a shopping bag was a piece of cloth used to bundle the items up. Something like, say, a piece of an old apron.

Nice to see your finally allowed day releases from the ward by the way!

[Sunny Delight]

I would say that it was plausible that Jack could have carried the apron in a Victorian equivalent of a modern shopping bag and that he had hidden it in the inner pocket of a coat.

Okay, let's simplify it. Would you say it was:

A) Impossible
B) Implausible
C) Plausible
D) Very Likely?

What say ye?

Well firstly you would need to define what a Victorian equivalent of a shopping bag looked like. Then where they were available and thirdly how readily available they were?

[Iconoclast]

Well firstly you assume he had a bag ... Of course as you say he could have put it in his inner pocket but from what I have read that would not neccessarily be very easy as even half an apron would still have been quite lengthy.

I would say that it was plausible that Jack could have carried the apron in a Victorian equivalent of a modern shopping bag and that he had hidden it in the inner pocket of a coat.

Okay, let's simplify it. Would you say it was:

A) Impossible
B) Implausible
C) Plausible
D) Very Likely?

What say ye?

[Sunny Delight]

Come on, Sunny D., you're a bright lad (or lass). What would you do?

Personally, I'd put it in a bag of some sorts and put all of that in my inner coat pocket so that it isn't visible and it isn't damaging my coat. I'd write my funny Jewish joke on the jamb and then - and only then - would I get the bag out, empty the apron onto the ground, put the bag back in my pocket, and walk calmly away.

Well firstly you assume he had a bag(is that why AK man had one- he didn't want to make the same mistake again?). Of course as you say he could have put it in his inner pocket but from what I have read that would not neccessarily be very easy as even half an apron would still have been quite lengthy.

[Iconoclast]

Well it might have been seen as rather strange for a man to be walking through the streets at 2am with half a womans apron smeared with faeces and wet on one corner with blood. I think that would certainly have led to you being arrested at the very least to give a satisfactory explanation, particularly given the killings that had happened previously.

Come on, Sunny D., you're a bright lad (or lass). What would you do?

Personally, I'd put it in a bag of some sorts and put all of that in my inner coat pocket so that it isn't visible and it isn't damaging my coat. I'd write my funny Jewish joke on the jamb and then - and only then - would I get the bag out, empty the apron onto the ground, put the bag back in my pocket, and walk calmly away.

[Sunny Delight]

Too much conjecture Sunny D. I take your point about the lighting in Goulston Street, but the hypotheticals about writing in Mary Kelly's room are exactly that. We weren't Jack so let's not make Jack us. Jack was his own man. He didn't write a GSG-style message in Mary Kelly's room. Doesn't mean anything. He did in Goulston Street, and I have suggested in SocPill that that was because he had a room in Middlesex Street and potentially could see the east side of Goulston Street and therefore could go back to his room and watch the drama (if there was to be one) unfold.

Here's another idea. Maybe he was able to watch Goulston Street from his room, realised that Halse had missed the writing on the wall, so went back out again to drop the apron there as a flag. It's just an idea - no more, no less.

Why would he worry about being stopped with the apron in his pocket? If he was well-dressed, as witnesses say, he would not have been suspicious. No blood, no knife. No-one's stopping Jack from his idea of fun.

Fair enough that was too much conjecture I take your point. Well it might have been seen as rather strange for a man to be walking through the streets at 2am with half a womans apron smeared with faeces and wet on one corner with blood. I think that would certainly have led to you being arrested at the very least to give a satisfactory explanation, particularly given the killings that had happened previously. I dont believe the killer wrote the graffitti and therefore I don't see any connection between that and the apron.

Here is some conjecture though. Imagine the killer did just drop the apron piece their randomly. It gives us his direction of travel. Now for instance I would say AK man is probably the best suspect in the case. Seemingly very well dressed. And so I look at Charles Booth's map and look for the areas shaded red which he defined as 'middle class- well to do'. When we do that we can see that there are a few. Also quite a few 'fairly comfortable' areas shaded light red. Where the Ripper in my estimation was headed looks to be somewhere in either of those two areas. Most likely the red shaded one. Of course that is only my opinion.

[Iconoclast]

Never been to London even. We don't know the lighting conditions there in 1888 or at least we can't discernibly tell what the visual for someone passing there at 2:20am that night was. I think PC Halse is important in this regard. He says he passed at around 2:20am as well but told the Inquest he wouldn't neccessarily have seen the Apron. That is a very important piece of evidence. We can take from that Halse was saying it wasn't as obvious as you suggest.

As for home being closer again it's possible. But for me it just seems so unlikely. He still has to re-enter the streets with an incriminating piece of evidence on him. And surely if he was someone keen on messages or riddles Mary Kelly's room was the perfect place to pen another one. If he was getting off on teasing Police surely he would have taken the opportunity to add another message.

Too much conjecture Sunny D. I take your point about the lighting in Goulston Street, but the hypotheticals about writing in Mary Kelly's room are exactly that. We weren't Jack so let's not make Jack us. Jack was his own man. He didn't write a GSG-style message in Mary Kelly's room. Doesn't mean anything. He did in Goulston Street, and I have suggested in SocPill that that was because he had a room in Middlesex Street and potentially could see the east side of Goulston Street and therefore could go back to his room and watch the drama (if there was to be one) unfold.

Here's another idea. Maybe he was able to watch Goulston Street from his room, realised that Halse had missed the writing on the wall, so went back out again to drop the apron there as a flag. It's just an idea - no more, no less.

Why would he worry about being stopped with the apron in his pocket? If he was well-dressed, as witnesses say, he would not have been suspicious. No blood, no knife. No-one's stopping Jack from his idea of fun.

[Sunny Delight]

Have you ever been to Goulston Street? It would be nigh-on impossible to miss that apron.

The reason why he didn't write the GSG then go home? Simple, mate - home was nearer.

Never been to London even. We don't know the lighting conditions there in 1888 or at least we can't discernibly tell what the visual for someone passing there at 2:20am that night was. I think PC Halse is important in this regard. He says he passed at around 2:20am as well but told the Inquest he wouldn't neccessarily have seen the Apron. That is a very important piece of evidence. We can take from that Halse was saying it wasn't as obvious as you suggest.

As for home being closer again it's possible. But for me it just seems so unlikely. He still has to re-enter the streets with an incriminating piece of evidence on him. And surely if he was someone keen on messages or riddles Mary Kelly's room was the perfect place to pen another one. If he was getting off on teasing Police surely he would have taken the opportunity to add another message.