piece of apron

[pinkmoon]

Our murderer has just killed one woman nearly been caught red handed and has headed of looking for another victim.On murdering another victim and removing her kidney in a dark court yard which police patrol regularly he decides to chalk a strange message and places part of the victims apron underneath the message to prove its genuine.Later on our killer sends the kidney and a nasty letter to a nice man whos trying to help catch him .Why if this message is so important to the killer (and it must have been because it's delaying his time to escape ) does he not do something to prove beyond doubt it's from him.Surely it would take a few seconds to scrawl something like "just killed two" or draw a line pointing down to apron .Also why didn't he keep a small piece of apron and send it with kidney surely they can be no doubt then it's from him.The obvious conclusion is killer didn't write message or send the kidney I think when you apply simple logic things do look a lot clearer

[Digalittledeeperwatson]

Hullo pinkmoon.

Our murderer has just killed one woman nearly been caught red handed and has headed of looking for another victim.On murdering another victim and removing her kidney in a dark court yard which police patrol regularly he decides to chalk a strange message and places part of the victims apron underneath the message to prove its genuine.Later on our killer sends the kidney and a nasty letter to a nice man whos trying to help catch him .Why if this message is so important to the killer (and it must have been because it's delaying his time to escape ) does he not do something to prove beyond doubt it's from him.Surely it would take a few seconds to scrawl something like "just killed two" or draw a line pointing down to apron .Also why didn't he keep a small piece of apron and send it with kidney surely they can be no doubt then it's from him.The obvious conclusion is killer didn't write message or send the kidney I think when you apply simple logic things do look a lot clearer

The problem is the number of assumptions being made here. So logically it is not as sound as it might appear to be.

1. We do not know if Stride was murdered by the same individual who killed Eddowes.

2. We do not know, if indeed it was the same killer, that he set out to find another victim. Could have been just going home or distancing himself from Berner Street and an opportunity presented itself.

3. We do not know the GSG was written by the killer hence we can not be sure it was placed under it intentionally.

4. We can not be perfectly certain the apron was placed there by the killer. Although it is probably the most likely possiblity to anything else. May be the one thing here we can be the most certain of.

5. If the killer did scrawl the GSG we do not know that it delayed his escape. He could have already escaped and then returned to deposit the apron and write the message. He could have lived close by. There is a time descrepancy if one is to take the PC who was on patrol word.

6. We do not know that the message was of any importance to the killer if he did write it. Could simply be a matter of distraction.


7. Why should the killer, if he did write the message, leave the apron, and send the kidney, care to prove the kidney was genuine? He knew it was.

Hope this is helpful in some way.

[pinkmoon]

The two points I was trying to make the communications would have had much more impact if there was no doubt they were genuine.Also it wouldn't have been that hard for the killer to do that .I will agree with you that Liz stride might not have been ripper victim

[lynn cates]

logic

Hello Jason. Good observations.

But at least, the apron is real enough.

My problem is now, and ever been, WHY is that apron piece so far away? Ideas?

"I think when you apply simple logic things do look a lot clearer."

Shhh, "Jack the Ripper" himself might go away then. (heh-heh)

Cheers.
LC

[Digalittledeeperwatson]

Hullo pinkmoon.

The two points I was trying to make the communications would have had much more impact if there was no doubt they were genuine.Also it wouldn't have been that hard for the killer to do that .I will agree with you that Liz stride might not have been ripper victim

I know what you are getting at. You used the "L" word. I was compulsed to break it down some. I would bring up the point that it may have been the killer's intent to not provide certainty.

[lynn cates]

hold on

Hello DLDW. Good reasoning.

Yes, it looks like the killer is the natural choice for apron deposit; however, it would not be natural to hold onto the cloth for so long.

Cheers.
LC

[Digalittledeeperwatson]

Hullo Lynn.

Why should the apron be any closer or further away from where it was?

[Digalittledeeperwatson]

Hullo Lynn.

Hello DLDW. Good reasoning.

Yes, it looks like the killer is the natural choice for apron deposit; however, it would not be natural to hold onto the cloth for so long.

Cheers.
LC

Might that not depend upon the reason for taking it? Or simple opportunity perhaps? I'm happy you didn't say a dog placed it there. Don't think my sanity could take it currently.

[c.d.]

Hello Jason. Good observations.

But at least, the apron is real enough.

My problem is now, and ever been, WHY is that apron piece so far away? Ideas?

"I think when you apply simple logic things do look a lot clearer."

Shhh, "Jack the Ripper" himself might go away then. (heh-heh)

Cheers.
LC

Hello Lynn,

The killer (ah what the heck, I'll just say Jack) might have cut himself and used it to stop the bleeding or to clean his hands. He might also have taken it as a souvenir. If the former, he might have run off not even realizing that he still had it in his hands and dropped it when he became aware of it. If the latter, at some point, he may have decided that this was a really bad idea and got rid of it as he was heading home. Just some ideas.

c.d.

[lynn cates]

experiment

Hello DLDW. Thanks.

"Why should the apron be any closer or further away from where it was?"

Great question. I take it you are au fait with the Manson case? As you recall, then, Bugliosi wanted to find the bloody clothes. So he and some others left the murder scene with extra clothes in the car. They were to change whilst driving normal speed. As soon as they finished changing they looked for the next area where they could pull off the road.

When they go there, they walked down the hill side and what do you suppose met their gaze?

Now, if Kate's assassin used the cloth to wipe his hands (after getting faecal material on them) the wiping should have been completed, roughly, by the time he exited Mitre sq.

But to make sure, try the following experiment.

1. With a partner and a tape measure, squeeze together about a quarter pound of raw ground beef in your hands--smear well.

2. Take a knife and cut a piece of cloth.

3. Stand and begin wiping whilst walking. But neither too fast (suspicious) nor too slow (need to move along before caught).

4. When finished, stop and measure.

5. Post results on Casebook.

Cheers.
LC

[pinkmoon]

I think the problem with this case it's too easy to forget we are not dealing with some one who is thinking logically.....I mean the killer not me

[lynn cates]

plausible

Hello CD. Thanks.

Surely that trickle would be little compared to his hands after going through Kate's innards?

Can think of no other plausible reason than wiping faeculent matter from hands.

But I'm open to suggestions.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

know

Hello Jason.

". . . it's too easy to forget we are not dealing with some one who is thinking logically. . . "

How do we know that?

Cheers.
LC

[c.d.]

Hello CD. Thanks.

Surely that trickle would be little compared to his hands after going through Kate's innards?

Can think of no other plausible reason than wiping faeculent matter from hands.

But I'm open to suggestions.

Cheers.
LC

Hello Lynn,

How do you know it would be a trickle? And I take it you didn't like the souvenir idea.

c.d.

[pinkmoon]

My dear lynn I think we can safely assume if some one is running about killing and mutilating women then they have got some form of mental problem.To what degree we don't know but certainly these actions are not the actions of a completely normal person