The GSG - Did Jack write it? POLL

[Leanne]

Insp Collard itemized Catherine's POSSESSIONS:

¹⁰⁰

1. Pair of men's lace up boots with mohair laces, right boot fixed with red thread; Red guaze silk (worn about the neck); 1 large white handkerchief; 2 unbleached calico pockets; 1 blue stripe bed ticking pocket with waist band and strings; 1 white cotton pocket handkerchief with red and white birds eye border; 1 pair of brown ribbed stockings with white mended feet; 12 pieces of white rag; 1 piece of white coarse linen; 1 piece of blue and white shirting -- three cornered; 2 small blue bed ticking bags; 2 short black clay pipes; 1 tin box with tea; 1 tin box with sugar; 1 piece of flannel; 6 pieces of soap; 1 small tooth comb; 1 white handle table knife; 1 metal tea spoon; 1 red leather cigarette case with white metal fittings; 1 empty tin match box; 1 piece of red flannel with with pins and needles; a ball of hemp; and A PIECE OF OLD WHITE APRON.¹⁰¹
   
   She was WEARING a black straw bonnet with green and black velvet, black beads, and black strings; a black cloth jacket trimmed with fake fur at the collar and cuffs and 2 outside pockets trimmed with black sik braid and fake fur; a chintz skirt -- 3 flounces with a brown button on the waistband; A brown linsey dress bodice with a black velvet collar and brown metal buttons down the front; a grey stuff petticoat with a white waistband; a very old green alpaca skirt; a very old ragged blue skirt with a red flounce and light twill lining; a white calico chemise; a man's white vest with button to match down front and 2 outside pockets; she had no drawers or stays.¹⁰²

DC Halse noticed a piece of apron was missing.

[Leanne]

DC Halse noticed a piece of apron was missing.....FROM THE ONE AMOUNGST HER POSSESSIONS!!!!

[Leanne]

It wasn't!

First off, all those victims wore a chemise, likely every woman did of their type.
The piece of apron is not listed on the hand written original as "with repair", this detail has been added by whomever created that link.

Why???????
link me to this "Original"!!!!!!!!!!! Because it's in every copy I've found.

[Sam Flynn]

Why???????
link me to this "Original"!!!!!!!!!!! Because it's in every copy I've found.

It doesn't matter whether she was wearing it or not. The salient fact is that one piece was found in Goulston Street, and it was definitively matched to the piece remaining with the body.

Can we get the discussion back to the authorship of the Goulston Street Graffito, please?

[DJA]

Reckon it was written by the person that nicked half the apron

[DJA]

Eddowes & Kelly, the only two of the five.

(but you quoted part of it from Evans & Skinner, where do you think they got it from?)

Actually I cut and pasted it from Casebook.

[Trevor Marriott]

Sounds like you prefer Jack to carry a Gladstone bag and prolly wear a top hat

well that more plausible than some of the explanations given by some on here

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Trevor Marriott]

It was Constable Lewis Robinson who identified the apron at the inquest. He was the policeman who arrested her.

Byfeld was busy getting a name and address from her so he could release her.

Hutt was the last policeman to see her at the station.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k5hWWe-ts2s

So what was unusual about her apron for Hutt to make a mental note of the fact that she was wearing an apron in the first instance, and then at the inquest days later recalls she was wearing one, and then to be presented with a piece of apron which he then identifies as the one she was wearing come on lets get real. The reality is that he could have been presented with any old piece of apron, and he would still have said it was the one she was wearing.

All Victorian women wore white aprons

Byfield booked her into custody, he would have been responsible for taking her property off her and listing it. He also released her, so there were two occasions when she was directly before him ,yet he makes no mention of this important piece of evidence, definitely one of the more honest policemen of the day !

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Trevor Marriott]

Witness at Catherine Eddowes' inquest.

Frederick William Foster was the City surveyor who presented plans and maps relating to the Eddowes murder as well as sketches of her injuries to the inquest. These consisted of a scale map of Mitre Square and a sketch of the murder scene (both with Eddowes' body in situ), a map of the area between Mitre Square and Goulston Street upon which were marked two possible routes the murderer could have taken. He also made three sketches of Eddowes' mutilations, one full-length depiction as she was found, one in the mortuary and one concentrating on the facial injuries. He stated:
"I have made the plans produced - I have them in three sections one 8 feet to an inch, another 200 feet to an inch from an Ordnance map of the City - I have marked on an Ordnance Map of the same scale from Berner Street to Mitre Square - that would be 1144 yards about 3/4 of a mile - it would take about 12 minutes to walk it from one to another".
"It is the nearest route that anyone unaccustomed to it would take it - There are 2 routes to Goulstone Street one from Church Passage through Duke Street crossing Houndsditch through Gravel Lane, Stoney Lane crossing Petticoat Lane and through to Goulstone Street. A person going from Mitre Square to Flower and Dean Street would go as the most direct route across Goulstone Street - it would take within 1/4 of an hour to get there".^[1]
Foster's plans were discovered in the basement of the (Royal) London Hospital in Whitechapel by Professor Francis Camps and his assistant Sam Hardy in the 1960s^[2]. They are currently held in the hospital's museum and archives.

He was not in Mitre sq the night of the murder so the victims body sketch was not made at the time by him and is not accurate

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[DJA]

So what was unusual about her apron for Hutt to make a mental note of the fact that she was wearing an apron in the first instance, and then at the inquest days later recalls she was wearing one, and then to be presented with a piece of apron which he then identifies as the one she was wearing come on lets get real. The reality is that he could have been presented with any old piece of apron, and he would still have said it was the one she was wearing.

All Victorian women wore white aprons

Byfield booked her into custody, he would have been responsible for taking her property off her and listing it. He also released her, so there were two occasions when she was directly before him ,yet he makes no mention of this important piece of evidence, definitely one of the more honest policemen of the day !

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

If 'All Victorian women wore white aprons",it would be remarkable if Eddowes did not

The apron presented was unusual in that it was blood stained and half of the lower was missing.

Next!

[DJA]

He was not in Mitre sq the night of the murder so the victims body sketch was not made at the time by him and is not accurate

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

It is very accurate,right down to the blood on the pavement.

I have the originals on CD.

[Trevor Marriott]

If 'All Victorian women wore white aprons",it would be remarkable if Eddowes did not

The apron presented was unusual in that it was blood stained and half of the lower was missing.

Next!

Yes we know it was but was it blood stained when she left the police station if it was the it would give more credence to hurt and Robinson’s id

[DJA]

Yes we know it was but was it blood stained when she left the police station if it was the it would give more credence to hurt and Robinson’s id

Strongly suspect it was ripped and bloodied in Mitre Square and doubt that "hurt and Robinson" would gain credence if they gave false evidence.

[Trevor Marriott]

Strongly suspect it was ripped and bloodied in Mitre Square and doubt that "hurt and Robinson" would gain credence if they gave false evidence.

Well based on what I have stated their evidence is not as supportive to your theory as is being suggested.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Trevor Marriott]

Strongly suspect it was ripped and bloodied in Mitre Square and doubt that "hurt and Robinson" would gain credence if they gave false evidence.

perhaps they were just trying to be helpful to the adopted belief that was readily accpted by the time they came to give evidence.

It should also be noted that the city police did not make statements relative to the inquest beforehand, they simply came along and gave it at the time of the inquest unlike the met who did have statements to present to the coroner in advance. Thats why Pc Long was not in possession of his pocket book he was giving his evidence off the cuff.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk