piece of apron

[lynn cates]

you're drafted

Hello Neil. Yes. From A division, if I recall properly?

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

when?

Hello Thomas.

"do we know if he was in the know already about Liz?"

According to Long's statement at inquest, it seems he found out about Liz:

1. after he found the apron/graffito

but

2. Before going to the station and leaving another constable in charge.

("The Ultimate" p. 214. His phrasing is slightly ambiguous.)

Cheers.
LC

[Fisherman]

"1. The ripper hid in the area/close to the area between Mitre Square and GS."

Very well. Why is he waiting? Why not go home straightaway?

LC

I think we may need to add the element of brushing up here. He may have been soiled and taken the opportunity to clean up somewhat. He may also have had access to some place to hide the innards - if they were trophies.

All the best,
Fisherman

[Monty]

PC Long was a draft.

Monty

[lynn cates]

obvious

Hello (yet again) Thomas. Thanks.

"obvious to me but wasn't sure about others"

That is the way it is beginning to feel about the WCM in general. (heh-heh)

Cheers.
LC

[El White Chap]

Itīs a bizarre world, El - hadnīt you noticed? I do, however, put some faith in Longs assertions that the rag was not there as he passed the doorway the first time. He is kind of adamant about it.

All the best,
Fisherman

What with all the hysteria in the air caused by the fresh news coming from Berner Street, it would be quite plausible would it not, for the P.C. to have overlooked the doorway in its entirety. When under pressure, being completely thorough can be somewhat challenging. I haven't yet come across any information stating if the P.C. was already aware of news from Berner Street, do we know if he was in the know already about Liz?.
Going on the assumption he was informed, could that news have influenced the way in which he 'combed' his beat area? Looking for an assailant on the streets and checking each crevice off the streets (door archways etc etc) would be different altogether with the 'alarm bells' of murder ringing in the air, when compared to an unalarmed beat combing.

[lynn cates]

2

Hello (again) Thomas. Thanks.

"The first two killings being WHICH exact TWO victims of the many Whitechapel Murders?"

Polly and Annie.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

scenarios

Hello Thomas. Thanks.

Your timeline seems flawless.

"1. The ripper hid in the area/close to the area between Mitre Square and GS."

Very well. Why is he waiting? Why not go home straightaway?

"That there was some safe house/hideout available."

This needs to be dovetailed with the other killings--provided, of course, you are a soloist.

"2. Returned to the area within the 1hour+ to leave the apron there."

You answer well below.

"Seemingly unlikely and illogical given the police presence at risk levels."

"3. It was planted by a third party. Enter the many conspiracy theories."

Although I don't care for conspiracies, for the usual reasons, I cannot derail a line of thought, simply for this reason.

"4.The apron was in the archway of the Wentworth dwellings much earlier than it was found and was overlooked during that time."

This satisfies the time anomaly, but not the DISTANCE one. The cloth should not be where it was.

Cheers.
LC

[Fisherman]

I posted an option 4, albeit added a short while after my original post, just one minute before you posted a reply to my options mentioning it could have been overlooked. How bizarre!

Itīs a bizarre world, El - hadnīt you noticed? I do, however, put some faith in Longs assertions that the rag was not there as he passed the doorway the first time. He is kind of adamant about it.

All the best,
Fisherman

[El White Chap]

An overlooked rag is always a possibility, El. But I would happily buy option 1 here. As for specific addresses, my money is on Broad Street, since I favour Charles Lechmere as the killer. He would have killed Stride close to his motherīs quarters, proceeded along his old work route to Broad Street, killed Eddowes, gone on to Pickfords on Broad Street to hide out, and then he would set sail for Doveton Street, passing Goulston Street on his way home.

So option 1, thank you very much!

The best,
Fisherman

I posted an option 4, albeit added a short while after my original post, just one minute before you posted a reply to my options mentioning it could have been overlooked. How bizarre!

[Fisherman]

This would suggest 3 possibilities:
1. The ripper hid in the area/close to the area between Mitre Square and GS. That there was some safehouse/hideout available.
2. Returned to the area within the 1hour+ to leave the apron there.
Seemingly unlikely and illogical given the police presence at risk levels.
3. It was planted by a third party. Enter the many conspiracy theories...

Are there anymore realistic/solid possibilities? No animal theories please!

An overlooked rag is always a possibility, El. But I would happily buy option 1 here. As for specific addresses, my money is on Broad Street, since I favour Charles Lechmere as the killer. He would have killed Stride close to his motherīs quarters, proceeded along his old work route to Broad Street, killed Eddowes, gone on to Pickfords on Broad Street to hide out, and then he would set sail for Doveton Street, passing Goulston Street on his way home.

So option 1, thank you very much!

The best,
Fisherman

[El White Chap]

But that is my WHOLE point.

Hello Lynn, was obvious to me but wasn't sure about others, you were indirectly indicating that much anyhow. I just wanted to test the water and see you make a more committed and direct statement to that avail.

[El White Chap]

I like you El....you can stay.

Monty

Thanks for the welcome Monty. Stay? I'll be here 'terrorising' at least for the Autumn.

[El White Chap]

Perhaps some day you will agree with me that Kate's killer was a cunning and calculating chap trying to pass off Kate's demise with the first two killings.

The first two killings being WHICH exact TWO victims of the many Whitechapel Murders?

[Tecs]

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

Hi all,

The problem with the above "logic" is that it could excuse any criminal act. In other words normal people don't commit crime therefore anybody who does, de facto, can't be normal. In which case they must have something wrong with them, probably a mental issue of some sort. This could then lead to any criminal being forgiven because they can't help it.

The case I'm thinking of is the Yorkshire Ripper Peter Sutcliffe. There is abundant evidence that he simply enjoyed killing women and was never schizophrenic or suffered from any other malady. Without going into the case in detail, several factors clearly point to him being perfectly normal and killing for fun and pleasure. Certainly that's what the jury at his trial believed. Most people forget that Sutcliffe was found guilty of murder when the jury saw through his nonsense about voices etc. He may be mad now after three decades of the chemical cosh, but it doesn't mean he was when he committed his crimes. (I live near Ashworth where Ian Brady is and know a couple of people who work there. They have told me some very sad stories of people who were imprisoned for something very minor, then given powerful and often experimental drugs to combat their supposed malady which led to them becoming mentally ill, like a self fulfilling prophecy.)


Sorry for going on there! What I wanted to ask was, in his audio version of the case, Martin Fido says that the writing had been smudged meaning people had brushed past it and so was therefore not the work of the Ripper.

Just wondered what anybody thought of that?

regards,