The GSG - Did Jack write it? POLL

[Trevor Marriott]

If the apron piece was her santitary napkin, why did just throw it in someone elses doorway?

then if found you might have again asked that same question, if it was soiled perhaps she went under the archway to go to the toilet, perahps she didnt need to wear one anymore who knows? but one thing for sure is that it was discarded.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Trevor Marriott]

IF SHE WAS USING A PIECE OF APRON AS A SANITARY NAPKIN, WHY DIDN'T SHE JUST USE THE WHOLE APRON, FOLDED?
Why did she put it back in her pocket after she used it, and replace it with one of the 12 pieces of rag?

A whole apron would be to big for that purpose. The 12 pieces of neatly folded rag were probably better quality material which she probably intended to try to sell by how they were folded. Too many to suggest she could have used one of those when she had two pieces of old white apron

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Trevor Marriott]

Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post


The apron piece was described as being wet no mention of wet with, blood PC Longs signed official inquest testimony

IT HAD BEEN RAINING!

But there was no mention of her clothing being wet !

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Trevor Marriott]

The mortuary apron-piece was cut into two, Trevor. It also had bloodstains, as Dr Brown mentions;

Morning Advertiser 5 Oct
"Was your attention called to this portion of an apron which was found upon the woman?-It was. There were stains of blood upon the apron.
Are the stains of recent origin?-They are"

Thats not recorded anywhere in the official testimony so it is unsafe to rely on.

bearing in mind at the mortuary when the body was stripped and they were taking note of all the cuts to her clothing and the bloodstains why did they not make mention of the apron being cut or blood stained if she was supposed to be wearing an apron. Theyt didn so what does that tell us ?

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Simon Wood]

Hi Leanne,

It's an unwritten rule of Ripperology that you must never ask sensible questions.

Regards,

Simon

[Leanne]

If the apron in her possessions was in one piece, and Jack needed it to wipe his knife and hands, why didn't he just grab and take off with the whole apron?

[Leanne]

Point out the apron she was wearing:

[Leanne]

….probably to sell at the old clothing fair at Petticoat Lane

[Leanne]

All those little bits and pieces Eddowes had in her possession.How did she carry them? Too much to be carried in the hands,and the apron didn't appear to have pockets.Two pockets were mentioned though,but not claimed to hold anything.Perhaps the apron piece found by long acted as a holdall?

THE APRON PIECE WAS IN HER POSSESSIONS! SO WERE THE NEEDLES AND THIMBLE...…..she loved mending clothing.
Why would she be wearing an apron at that time?

[Leanne]

Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post


The apron piece was described as being wet no mention of wet with, blood PC Longs signed official inquest testimony

IT HAD BEEN RAINING!

[Leanne]

All those little bits and pieces Eddowes had in her possession.How did she carry them? Too much to be carried in the hands,and the apron didn't appear to have pockets.Two pockets were mentioned though,but not claimed to hold anything.Perhaps the apron piece found by long acted as a holdall?

Pockets.

[harry]

All those little bits and pieces Eddowes had in her possession.How did she carry them? Too much to be carried in the hands,and the apron didn't appear to have pockets.Two pockets were mentioned though,but not claimed to hold anything.Perhaps the apron piece found by long acted as a holdall?

[Wickerman]

The Star, 2nd October 1888, knew the answer—

“That he [dropped the bloodstained rag] in Goulston Street does not occasion any surprise. The police have never doubted that this midnight murderer lived in the midst of the community he has been terrorising.”

The piece of apron provided the police with a rationale for conducting an extensive house-to-house search amongst the Jews of the East End, details of which were included in Chief Inspector Swanson's 19th October report.

That's why the apron piece was planted in Goulston Street.

The police did not need 'planted' pieces of evidence to conduct house-to-house searches in other murder cases. The Star knew nothing, the police told them nothing. The Star, along with other newspapers, complained in print how tight-lipped the police are.
The Star published speculation, that's how they made their money, that's how they sold copy.

[Simon Wood]

Reportedly, Eddowes was seen at Aldgate at 1.30 am.

[APerno]

If the apron piece was her santitary napkin, why did just throw it in someone elses doorway?

I agree with the post you wrote above this one, it makes little sense for her to use her apron in such a manner especially if she was carrying rags about. I was interested in with whether it was possible for her to have passed Goulston Street before getting to the Square.

In regards to just trowing it into a doorway, I have no problem with that, impoverished/homeless people have a special kind of hatred for society that manifests itself in many passive aggressive ways, leaving their flit behind is one of them.