The GSG - Did Jack write it? POLL

[Trevor Marriott]

I am not entirely satisfied an apron was classified as part of clothing,or reported as such.Dr Brown? states cuts and stabs were made through the clothes,but we find no mention of any of the apron pieces being so cut or stabbed through,even though the apron ,in full,must have covered a considerable area of her body.

Hi Harry

That is a very good point, which I have previously highlighted. The evidence of cuts in the clothing shows that the killer must have stabbed her with the knife through her outer clothing and drawn the knife in a downwards direction. These cuts emanated from the waist area downwards for in some cases 12 inches. Note the clothing as described as well as being cut was blood stained where the blood had seeped from the wounds through the clothing.

With that in mind had she been wearing a full apron we might have expected to have seen similar cuts on either one, or both of the apron pieces if they had come from the same apron Neither piece showed any cuts, consistent with above.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Trevor Marriott]

All the skirts and petticoats worn by Eddowes had been cut through their waistbands. Likewise the strings of her pockets tied around her waist had also been cut. Presumably her killer did this in order to make them loose enough for him to expose her whole abdomen when thrown up. Given that everything around her waist had been cut, it seems likely that the apron she was wearing would similarly have been cut through the waistband. And if the killer wanted a piece of cloth, he needed only to extend this cut the whole length of the apron, dividing it vertically into two parts, and cut one string. With one piece removed, the other would remain in place - apparently worn - but no longer actually attached, possibly leading to it being easily dislodged by the time the body arrived at the mortuary.
That's my take.

See post #1741

[Joshua Rogan]

With that in mind had she been wearing a full apron we might have expected to have seen similar cuts on either one, or both of the apron pieces if they had come from the same apron Neither piece showed any cuts, consistent with above.

All we know is that the apron had (at least) one cut, dividing it into two pieces. The four skirts/petticoats had one cut each, dividing their waistbands and extending downward for varying distances. I don't know the direction of the apron cut (does anyone?) but if vertical then it was entirely consistent with the cuts to the skirts, albeit extended the full length of the garment.

[Trevor Marriott]

All we know is that the apron had (at least) one cut, dividing it into two pieces. The four skirts/petticoats had one cut each, dividing their waistbands and extending downward for varying distances. I don't know the direction of the apron cut (does anyone?) but if vertical then it was entirely consistent with the cuts to the skirts, albeit extended the full length of the garment.

No, we do not know that it was cut in half. If that had have been the case surely they would have mentioned matching halves, and the GS piece would have had a string attached if that had have been the case.

And if it had have been cut in half down the middle as you suggest how would the Gs piece become detached because all you would have is a cut apron at the front still tied with both strings at the back

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Sam Flynn]

Could I trouble you for a reference? I've only been able to find it used for a type of Victorian dressing gown.

There was such a thing as a "wrapper-brat" aka "wrapper-apron". Had to look that up in the OED, where it is given as the 9th definition of the word. The example usage is from M Quiller-Couch, Jane Vercoe, 1896: "enveloped in what was commonly called a 'wrapper-apern'".

In this context of loosening her upper garments, which was the case here, I think "wrapper" simply means "A shawl, mantle, etc., for wearing about the person". This is the 2nd definition of the word, example from Dickens' Oliver Twist, 1838: "[he] pulled off a large wrapper which had concealed the lower portion of his face". Another example from Mabel Collin's Prettiest Woman, 1885: "She had thrown a loose white wrapper round her shoulders".

[DJA]

Hope that's a wrap!

[Pierre]

No, we do not know that it was cut in half. If that had have been the case surely they would have mentioned matching halves, and the GS piece would have had a string attached if that had have been the case.

And if it had have been cut in half down the middle as you suggest how would the Gs piece become detached because all you would have is a cut apron at the front still tied with both strings at the back

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

"It was the corner of the apron with a string attached".

[Sam Flynn]

That's quite feasible, Pierre. Thanks.

[Trevor Marriott]

"It was the corner of the apron with a string attached".

Except your example would still result in two halves, and there was no mention of two halves, and the cuts in the clothing were either in a downward direction, or across, none were described as being diagonal.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Wickerman]

Could I trouble you for a reference? I've only been able to find it used for a type of Victorian dressing gown. Besides, would Hutt have needed to loosen her dress to notice an apron? Unless...Trevor is right and she was using an old piece of apron as a scarf?

Hi Joshua.
This has been discussed before, and references do exist. What became apparent was that American sources commonly used 'wrapper' to identify a full length gown, but English usage concerned full length garments worn by maids or service personnel, which included aprons.
I notice Gareth has offered some examples, I'll take a look for what was previously posted on the subject. Though I'm not sure if it was on Casebook or JTRForums.

You have read the police list of her possessions? - do you see a 'dressing gown'-type article of clothing?
I do not, so the mention by Hutt must have meant something else that was on the list.

[Wickerman]

Hi Harry

That is a very good point, which I have previously highlighted. The evidence of cuts in the clothing shows that the killer must have stabbed her with the knife through her outer clothing and drawn the knife in a downwards direction. These cuts emanated from the waist area downwards for in some cases 12 inches. Note the clothing as described as well as being cut was blood stained where the blood had seeped from the wounds through the clothing.


www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Trevor, you mentioned this before, last year?
At that time you were reminded that the clothing was lifted up, so her skirts were upsidedown, which I think has led you to draw another erroneous conclusion.

[Wickerman]

Except your example would still result in two halves, and there was no mention of two halves, and the cuts in the clothing were either in a downward direction, or across, none were described as being diagonal.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

A brown paper parcel was produced, from which two pieces of apron were taken and shown to the witness, who said, - To the best of my knowledge and belief that is the apron.
Times. Oct. 12.

When he last saw her in the police cell at 8.50 p.m. on the Saturday evening he noticed she was wearing the apron produced (in two pieces).
Morning Post. Oct 12.

The apron was here produced by the police, in two pieces, covered with blood, and witness identified it.
Star. Oct 11.

Anything not clear in the above?

[Wickerman]

Hi Joshua.

I came across this post on the subject of the wrapper-apron...

http://forum.casebook.org/showpost.php?p=395282&postcount=769

Which offered this link....

https://www.zazzle.ca/wrapper+aprons

[harry]

The recorded evidence,it still exists,taken at the time was the inventory of the clothing and possessions.Eddowes was stripped under close supervision,each item of clothing worn was noted in order of removal.Had Eddowes been wearing an apron,it would have been the first item removed,and headed the list.There is no such recording of it being so.
Now heres a couple of questions.(1)Who matched the two pieces?(2)Who is first recorded as having stated a match was made?

[Wickerman]

The apron was only recognised for what it was when the second piece was found, and matched to the piece of rag on her body.

We must realise, when the GS piece was brought in by Phillips, it wasn't because he knew this was a piece of evidence in the City case, it was more of a question.
The piece of blood-stained apron was likely brought to see if it belonged to the City murder, because it doesn't belong to the first murder, or was it unrelated to either murder?
They may have been surprised to make the match they did, because no-one at the crime scene in Mitre Square realised she had been wearing an apron at all.
And, this is reflected in the list of possessions.
The part that was matched to the GS piece, had been described as a handkerchief.

The list of possessions is a re-write for the inquest. Police notes were recorded in a pocketbook, so the list will have been on several small pages.
This evidence was then re-written on two pages for the court, at the inquest.