'the biggest blunder in the search for Jack the Ripper'

[Abby Normal]

The hiding of the body parts wouldn’t have been the issue, Tom. The problem would have been the transmission of fluids on to the killer’s clothing. The apron remnant would have overcome this problem, absorbing much of the fluid that would certainly have been discharged from freshly abstracted viscera.

Let’s look at it in a different way. Had the killer merely wished to clean his hands and knife, he could have done so at the crime scene by using Eddowes’ skirts. Had he intended to authenticate the Goulston Street message, he could have done so to far greater effect simply by slicing off one of Eddowes’ ears and leaving it in the vestibule. So why did he require the portion of apron if not to protect his clothing?


I would suggest otherwise, Tom. Successful serialists learn from experience and apply newfound knowledge to subsequent crimes. Thus if the killer had encountered the problem of body part fluid seepage at the time of the Hanbury Street killing, it should come as no surprise that he adopted appropriate countermeasures when faced with similar circumstances in Mitre Square.

Hi Garry, Tom, Chris

How about this.

I have always beleived that the GSG and the apron were probably connected and that the ripper left them because he was pissed off by being seen/ interupted by jews that night. But he did not start off the evening knowing that was going to happen so he did not have chalk on him.

After he kills Eddowes he removes the organs and knowing he needs something to prove his message he cuts the apron. Not having chalk on him and knowing he needs to get away from the secene quickly he skeedadles for his bolt hole. He has the apron and bloody organs so why not just wrap them up in the apron as he heads away from the scene. At home he leaves his knife and goodies, perhaps cleans up a tad and heads back out with apron and chalk. Covers pretty much everything and also explains the time gap.

[Wyatt Earp]

I have always beleived that the GSG and the apron were probably connected and that the ripper left them because he was pissed off by being seen/ interupted by jews that night. But he did not start off the evening knowing that was going to happen so he did not have chalk on him.

After he kills Eddowes he removes the organs and knowing he needs something to prove his message he cuts the apron. Not having chalk on him and knowing he needs to get away from the secene quickly he skeedadles for his bolt hole. He has the apron and bloody organs so why not just wrap them up in the apron as he heads away from the scene. At home he leaves his knife and goodies, perhaps cleans up a tad and heads back out with apron and chalk. Covers pretty much everything and also explains the time gap.

Abby, this is exactly the type of scenario I am envisioning as well. A possible variant, though, would be this: the Ripper did cut the apron to put around the organs, and he only made the decision to go back and leave a message after he was already back at his safe haven and had perhaps had a little time to stew about things for a bit.

[Wyatt Earp]

Something else that occurs to me, Abby, is that if the Ripper had anticipated taking organs that night, he might have already had a pouch or something else on him with which to transport the organs. And so taking the apron could indeed have been done for the specific purpose you mentioned.

[caz]

A Pig's Ear

Had he intended to authenticate the Goulston Street message, he could have done so to far greater effect simply by slicing off one of Eddowes’ ears and leaving it in the vestibule. So why did he require the portion of apron if not to protect his clothing?

Well he may have planned to slice off an ear, Garry, but in the darkness made a pig's ear of it, only sliced off a small piece, which was then lost among her clothing. But if the apron piece was in the vestibule and not noticed first time round, would a tiny little ear on the ground have been spotted at all, let alone connected with the writing? People could easily have stepped on it or kicked it unknowingly. The apron piece was many times the size and as good a match to its other half, still with the body, as an ear would have been to its twin.

Successful serialists learn from experience and apply newfound knowledge to subsequent crimes. Thus if the killer had encountered the problem of body part fluid seepage at the time of the Hanbury Street killing, it should come as no surprise that he adopted appropriate countermeasures when faced with similar circumstances in Mitre Square.

But you are surely not suggesting he only picked on Eddowes because she had a handy, easy to remove apron on her person, to use afterwards for the fluid seepage? If Hanbury St had taught him such a lesson he'd have simply brought something out with him for the purpose along with his newly sharpened knife.

Love,

Caz
X

[Archaic]

Hi Caz.

Good points; I agree with you about the ear and the apron. A little piece of human ear lying on the ground was too prone to be stepped on and squashed, kicked out of the way, or even carried off by an animal- dog, cat, rodent.

The killer could easily have a canvas or oilcloth pouch in his pockets; he could even have sewn such a lining into his pockets to allow him to stash his trophies even faster.

If he was prepared for taking Annie's body parts a few weeks earlier, then he already knew what to do and how to do it quickly & efficiently. If he hadn't been ideally prepared at the time of Annie's murder, then by Sept. 30th he'd had several weeks to dwell on the subject, fantasize, and perfect his method.

For those of you who think a human body part would have made a better calling card, there's always the Lusk kidney... which was dismissed as a hoax by many. It's like the poor Ripper can't win.

Best regards,
Archaic

[The Good Michael]

You know, I don't think the killer took the apron for any other purpose but to leave it where he did. He could have taken a sleeve, a piece of petticoat, anything, but he cut away a good half of an apron. I think it was a reference to Leather Apron, a joke.

Mike

[Bridewell]

But you are surely not suggesting he only picked on Eddowes because she had a handy, easy to remove apron on her person, to use afterwards for the fluid seepage? If Hanbury St had taught him such a lesson he'd have simply brought something out with him for the purpose along with his newly sharpened knife.

Perhaps he did, but had already had to use it to clean his knife after Dutfields Yard. That's not an original idea, and I'm afraid I can't remember who originally suggested it on another thread. Plausible though, in my view.

Regards, Bridewell.

[Wickerman]

You know, I don't think the killer took the apron for any other purpose but to leave it where he did. He could have taken a sleeve, a piece of petticoat, anything, but he cut away a good half of an apron. I think it was a reference to Leather Apron, a joke.

Mike

Mike.
Yet I find it more bizarre to consider the killer removed those sloppy wet organs and slid them into a pocket soiling his clothes with bloodstains, only to then slice off a sizable portion of apron for no other reason than to use it as a marker several streets away.

What else would he have had to put those organs in?, a black leather bag perhaps?

Regards, Jon S.

[Tom_Wescott]

Pockets! Come on, folks, it's not pocket science!


Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

P.S. No blood would have been on the knife in Stride's murder. Nothing to clean off.

[mariab]

No blood would have been on the knife in Stride's murder. Nothing to clean off.

You mean, cuz of the scarf around her neck?

It's not pocket science, but so many peeps are standing on the pocket fence nowadays.

[Bridewell]

Really?

Pockets! Come on, folks, it's not pocket science!


Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

P.S. No blood would have been on the knife in Stride's murder. Nothing to clean off.

Hi Tom.

A 6" incision to the neck causing severance of the left carotid artery and division of the windpipe. You've lost me (admittedly not that difficult sometimes). How does he do that without getting blood on his knife?

Regards Bridewell.

[Tom_Wescott]

Hi Bridewell. When you make a cut to someone, the knife is moving faster than the blood, so no blood will get on the blade. Same is true for stabbing if you remove the blade quick enough.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[GregBaron]

Chalk, ears and rats...

And not knowing he was going to be disturbed/interupted by a bunch of Jews (Schwartz, Diemschutz, Lawende and co) he did not start out the evening with Chalk on him. He had to get some. Which would also explain the time gap of the discovery of the apron/GSG from the time of Eddowes murder.

Perhaps Abby Normal, but heading back out after a rather exhaustive nights work simply to scapegoat seems unlikely.

Maybe the ripper just happened to see the graffiti (either before or after Eddowes) and a light bulb went off – “terrific, an easy way to further confound the cops.”

Just a thought -- could have been snatched up by a cat or a dog.

Excellent Wyatt Earp. And this returns us to the two theories that make the organ lugging discussion moot. The Giant rat theory and the clever Trevor morgue theory.

Well he may have planned to slice off an ear, Garry, but in the darkness made a pig's ear of it, only sliced off a small piece, which was then lost among her clothing. But if the apron piece was in the vestibule and not noticed first time round, would a tiny little ear on the ground have been spotted at all, let alone connected with the writing? People could easily have stepped on it or kicked it unknowingly. The apron piece was many times the size and as good a match to its other half, still with the body, as an ear would have been to its twin.

You people are getting silly, an ear would have proven Van Gogh the killer! Jeez..



Greg

[Simon Wood]

Hi Tom,

Whoa! You've obviously had practise.

Remind me never to cross you.

Regards,

Simon

[moonbegger]

Pockets! Come on, folks, it's not pocket science!


Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

P.S. No blood would have been on the knife in Stride's murder. Nothing to clean off.

Hello,Hello,Hello,

He may have had special sealed compartments within his top hat ?