A Victorian Apron Full of Questions...

[C. F. Leon]

#1: Maybe Jack didn't carry chalk, but Eddowes probably DID.

It's interesting how often opportunities where chalk would be used occur in the Ripper murders. Tailors certainly used chalk as did carters/porters.

Personal observation that might be pertinent: My mother (born 1914 in Kansas) loved to sew as a hobby. She came from a large family where she was the next to youngest and then had 3 girls closely-spaced, so having to repair hand-me-downs was important. She had several pieces of tailor's chalk in her basket. These were well-worn chunks of blue-colored chalk, about 2 inches on each side, but thinner. The chalk had kind of a more waxy feel to it than school chalk did (possibly a water-proofing additive). I don't know the origin, she may have gotten them from HER mother, whom I know virtually nothing about.

I don't remember colored chalk being widely available in my childhood ('60s-'70s). Do we know about different kinds/colors of chalk in the 1880s?

[Harry D]

I wanna blame Trevor for shitting up another thread with his theory but more fool the rest of you for biting.

[Herlock Sholmes]

[QUOTE=Trevor Marriott;n796845][QUOTE=Herlock Sholmes;n796837]

Now how did I know you would pop out of the woodwork ?

My ‘nonsense alarm’ went off.

Could you after murdering a female, and in almost total darkness find your way round the inside of a blood filled abdomen to be able to find two vital organs, be able to take hold of them, despite them being wet and slippery and remove them in under 5 mins with a long bladed knife?

Under 5 minutes is simply a fabrication on your part. You have quite deliberately shrunk the time in an attempt to decrease the likelihood. The killer might easily have had 10 minutes.

I know I couldnt even after all these years of studying the location of these organs.

How long can it take to study the location of the organs Trevor? 20 seconds, 30 seconds, a bit longer?

But I could probably if the body was on a mortuary table with sufficient light available to me so I could see what I was doing.

Sequiera felt that there was sufficient light and he was there.

Bearing in mind this would be made easier due to the lividity of the body where all the blood left in the body sinks to the bottom half of the body, so given that I would not have a blood filled abdomen to hinder the removal as would those who removed the organs from the victims at the mortuaries making it easier for them.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

I couldn’t climb Everest or beat Magnus Carlsen at chess either Trevor but that doesn’t mean that it couldn’t be done. And as there’s not a single, solitary iota of evidence against this then we know that the killer managed to do it.

Anyway…..back to the subject of the thread.

[Abby Normal]

What level of injuries did Jackson & McKensie have compared to Kelly?

Ripping to cutting off limbs - a pretty big jump. What makes you think those kills are connected?

hi books
is cutting off breasts, ears and noses, cutting out internal organs and cutting throats so deep as to almost decapitate so different from cutting off limbs? not to me it isnt.

then you have the other connections of similar sig, victimology, time and place, unsolved and both end at the same time. then you have the very specific stomach flaps cut away in jackson, kelly and chapman.
difference can be ascribed to not having his bolt hole available and or escaltion.

added to that the rarity of two post mortem body parts removers in same town and time. the thought of two such cretins operating at the same time and place is too much a coincidence for me.

now all that being said, i realize of course the differences could mean it wasnt the same man, i just lean heavily, say 75%, toward they were.

[Abby Normal]

hi abby. been awhile, currently in cali, doing my best to avoid the Stockton serial killer, seems like he’s causing his own autumn of terror round these parts.

Haven’t read through this thread yet, so maybe it’s been mentioned before. However, your post inspired a random thought.

taking “if’s” into consideration:

at the eddowes inquest, inspector collard spoke of some of catherine’s items being found alongside her body (mustard tin, buttons). my questioning thought being, does the chalk belong to catherine?

considering she is found with buttons, pins, needles, thimble… would chalk have been that random of a personal posession if, say, she had tendencies of sewing or tailoring?

hey devil!
good idea! sure he could have found chalk on her. perhaps thats what gave him the idea to cut her apron and write tje gsg!

[Abby Normal]

[QUOTE=Trevor Marriott;n796836][QUOTE=BooksbyBJThompson;n796829]

Maybe it's just me, but there's no way I'd know my way around body parts that shone wet inky-black in even a low light source.

Does this mean anything?

It means the killer did not remove the organs. and your own personal comments are spot on

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

stop misleading the noobs!

[Trevor Marriott]

[QUOTE=Herlock Sholmes;n796837][QUOTE=Trevor Marriott;n796836]

Maybe it's just me, but there's no way I'd know my way around body parts that shone wet inky-black in even a low light source.

Does this mean anything?

No it doesn’t.

Now how did I know you would pop out of the woodwork ?

Could you after murdering a female, and in almost total darkness find your way round the inside of a blood filled abdomen to be able to find two vital organs, be able to take hold of them, despite them being wet and slippery and remove them in under 5 mins with a long bladed knife?

I know I couldnt even after all these years of studying the location of these organs. But I could probably if the body was on a mortuary table with sufficient light available to me so I could see what I was doing. Bearing in mind this would be made easier due to the lividity of the body where all the blood left in the body sinks to the bottom half of the body, so given that I would not have a blood filled abdomen to hinder the removal as would those who removed the organs from the victims at the mortuaries making it easier for them.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[FISHY1118]

Should read ''My own personal theory is the killer did not remove the organs'' .

The ''Truth'' is never as complicated in such a way as the abundance of theories going around these days.

[Herlock Sholmes]

[QUOTE=Trevor Marriott;n796836][QUOTE=BooksbyBJThompson;n796829]

Maybe it's just me, but there's no way I'd know my way around body parts that shone wet inky-black in even a low light source.

Does this mean anything?

It means the killer did not remove the organs. and your own personal comments are spot on

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

No it doesn’t.

[Trevor Marriott]

[QUOTE=BooksbyBJThompson;n796829]

Maybe it's just me, but there's no way I'd know my way around body parts that shone wet inky-black in even a low light source.

Does this mean anything? [QUOTE]

It means the killer did not remove the organs. and your own personal comments are spot on

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[BooksbyBJThompson]

A person who finds a body is just that,a person who finds a body.Before that person can be suspected of a crime regarding that body,it has to be decided a crime was committed,and that evidence of a guilty nature connects the finder to that crime.

Yeah, I'm not seeing Cross as anyone but a person happening upon a body.

[BooksbyBJThompson]

My thoughts on lighting:

Elizabeth Stride: Location was pitch black, so dark that Diemschutz would not have noticed the body had his horse not have wavered. even pulling his cart alongside her body, the form was indistinguishable to him so much so that he had to strike a match. if the location was this dark, it's doubtful that Jack the Ripper would have been able to see well enough to eviscerate and harvest her organs per his M.O. This point may be evidenced by the fact the Elizabeth Stride only suffered from having her throat slashed rather than suffering from Catherine Eddowes' mutilated fate only an hour later. My belief being, that lack of a light source forced Jack the Ripper to reconsider & move on from Berner Street.

Polly Nicholls: Buck's Row. Dark enough that Lechmere could not immediately distinguish her form as that of a woman. So dark that neither man noticed her throat had been slashed. Lack of a sufficient light source might be evidence why she was ripped rather than eviscerated.

Annie Chapman: Jack the Ripper had sufficient light that he eviscerated and harvested her organs. Devil is in the details, he had sufficient light that he was able to: 1) dodge around her navel when he was cutting open her belly; 2) rifle through her pockets and place the items around her body. Considering that her location of death was in the gloomy corner of someone's backyard (with little/no light source?), my thoughts are that her ToD must have been closer to sunrise.

Catherine Eddowes: there was a light source in Mitre Square, he could see well enough to identify her organs as well as knicking her eyelids.

Mary Jane Kelly: Jack the Ripper showed what he was truly capable of when he had more than adequate lighting.

Maybe it's just me, but there's no way I'd know my way around body parts that shone wet inky-black in even a low light source.

Does this mean anything?
Is this perp used to working at night?
Used to eviscerating guts at night?
(Ex. Stockyard killings done late at night in the East End?)

And as the Stride case goes, the killer wasn't thinking with his head -- that narrow entrance, no alternate exit without going through the club, zero light source, club packed -- I keep thinking Stride wasn't planned OR Jack needed to target Stride and couldn't locate her anyehere else, so he was forced to kill her there or not at all.

[DJA]

My thoughts on lighting:


Annie Chapman: Jack the Ripper had sufficient light that he eviscerated and harvested her organs. Devil is in the details, he had sufficient light that he was able to: 1) dodge around her navel when he was cutting open her belly; 2) rifle through her pockets and place the items around her body. Considering that her location of death was in the gloomy corner of someone's backyard (with little/no light source?), my thoughts are that her ToD must have been closer to sunrise.

Catherine Eddowes: there was a light source in Mitre Square, he could see well enough to identify her organs as well as knicking her eyelids.

Wanna try that again

[harry]

A person who finds a body is just that,a person who finds a body.Before that person can be suspected of a crime regarding that body,it has to be decided a crime was committed,and that evidence of a guilty nature connects the finder to that crime.

[Robert St Devil]

9) Why are we assuming that Jack did his ripping in the dark? Light source, anyone?

My thoughts on lighting:

Elizabeth Stride: Location was pitch black, so dark that Diemschutz would not have noticed the body had his horse not have wavered. even pulling his cart alongside her body, the form was indistinguishable to him so much so that he had to strike a match. if the location was this dark, it's doubtful that Jack the Ripper would have been able to see well enough to eviscerate and harvest her organs per his M.O. This point may be evidenced by the fact the Elizabeth Stride only suffered from having her throat slashed rather than suffering from Catherine Eddowes' mutilated fate only an hour later. My belief being, that lack of a light source forced Jack the Ripper to reconsider & move on from Berner Street.

Polly Nicholls: Buck's Row. Dark enough that Lechmere could not immediately distinguish her form as that of a woman. So dark that neither man noticed her throat had been slashed. Lack of a sufficient light source might be evidence why she was ripped rather than eviscerated.

Annie Chapman: Jack the Ripper had sufficient light that he eviscerated and harvested her organs. Devil is in the details, he had sufficient light that he was able to: 1) dodge around her navel when he was cutting open her belly; 2) rifle through her pockets and place the items around her body. Considering that her location of death was in the gloomy corner of someone's backyard (with little/no light source?), my thoughts are that her ToD must have been closer to sunrise.

Catherine Eddowes: there was a light source in Mitre Square, he could see well enough to identify her organs as well as knicking her eyelids.

Mary Jane Kelly: Jack the Ripper showed what he was truly capable of when he had more than adequate lighting.