piece of apron

[Observer]

Hi Pinkmoon

Attempting to predict the mind-set of the man known as Jack The Ripper is a virtual minefield. Some poster's here in Casebook think they can get into the mind of The Whitechapel Fiend. More fool them.

Who knows if he was responsible for the graffito. If he was responsible for the graffito, then leaving the apron section in close proximity to it, might well have been enough in his mind to convey to the police that he wrote it. As regards the graffito's content, again, to us, incomplete, baffling in fact. To the killer however (if he wrote it) crystal clear in meaning to anyone who read it.

Regards

Observer

[lynn cates]

knifemanship

Hello CD. Thanks.

"How do you know it would be a trickle?"

You may have a point. Perhaps he nearly took off a finger.

That kind of knifemanship would explain:

1. Why he did such a rum job on Kate, leading Baxter to ask if it might be an imitator.

2. The interval between Kate and "MJK." (He was waiting for the wound to close.)

"And I take it you didn't like the souvenir idea?"

Apron as souvenir? In which case he quickly changed his mind, eh?

Cheers.
LC

[Digalittledeeperwatson]

Hullo Lynn.

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

I love this guy! It is why I have dubbed you King Cachous. Now back to business. The wiping of hands, knife, etc is only one possibilty. And not exactly more likely than say, carrying organs away. What if the murder wore gloves? He doesn't exactly need to wipe his hands maybe? Scenario: The murderer lived in the area. Close to Goulston Street. He wraps up the organs and gloves and possibly the knife in the apron. And instance where putting all you eggs in one basket is a good thing as you can toss it simply if the need arises. He goes home deposits and cleans. Leaves to drop off the apron piece and write the message???. Goulston Street being only a short distance away and he is familiar with the goings on of things since he lives in the area. Goes back home.

[lynn cates]

logical

Hello Jason. Thanks.

"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."

Well, that's one way of putting it. And I can--more or less--agree.

But would you agree that mental problems do not preclude achievement in math/logic?

"To what degree we don't know but certainly these actions are not the actions of a completely normal person."

Concedo, amicus meus. But MANY normal people are not terribly logical thinkers. That is why I can command a decent price teaching them.

Cheers.
LC

[Digalittledeeperwatson]

Hullo all.

Not sure how to say this, but here goes. Logic is just a tool. So if the killer wants to kill then it is logical to kill. He may have been very logical in what he was doing. It's a difficult thing to try and convey.

[lynn cates]

organs

Hello DLDW. Thanks.

Well, if you REALLY love me, why not call me "My dear" like Jason? (heh-heh)

If he used the apron for organ transport, why jettison it near home? Why not take it inside with the organs? Then, later, throw it in a proper dustbin.

And why was such done in none of the other killings?

It looks to me PRECISELY as if the cloth is left to implicate someone. A bit too obvious for my taste.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

conveyance

Hello (again) DLDW.

Actually, you conveyed it quite well. Did I mention you are spot on?

Cheers.
LC

[pinkmoon]

Murder isn't really an intelligent act

[lynn cates]

maybe

Hello Jason. Thanks.

"Murder isn't really an intelligent act."

Depends upon one's Weltanschauung.

Cheers.
LC

[pinkmoon]

Something else to ponder in a logical way where was he taking the kidney?Call me old fashioned if I turned up at home in the early hours with a human organ and with blood stains on my clothes my wife would have a thing or two to say about it.Could he have lived alone? Or could he have some where special to go where he wouldn't be disturbed by anyone? Or could he have left the kidney with the piece of apron by the message and a stray dog dispose of it?

[Digalittledeeperwatson]

Hullo Lynn.

Hello DLDW. Thanks.

Well, if you REALLY love me, why not call me "My dear" like Jason? (heh-heh)

If he used the apron for organ transport, why jettison it near home? Why not take it inside with the organs? Then, later, throw it in a proper dustbin.

And why was such done in none of the other killings?

It looks to me PRECISELY as if the cloth is left to implicate someone. A bit too obvious for my taste.

Cheers.
LC

I said I love you, not IN love with you. Well, not yet anyways. Anyways, for clarity, I was suggesting he went home to deposit his "belongings", then he went back out to leave the apron. If he did live near Goulston he might have left and deposited the apron to draw attention to a specific location, misdirection. Also, living close by he could watch the ensuing circus. Perhaps he did attempt something similar previously and it went undiscovered. Hence the GSG, maybe? Implicate someone is interesting. It would have been a risk to venture back out afterwards so maybe it was close by and not too risky. Implicate or warn maybe. Losing train of thought. Ceasing.

[Digalittledeeperwatson]

Hullo Lynn.

Hello Jason. Thanks.

"Murder isn't really an intelligent act."

Depends upon one's Weltanschauung.

Cheers.
LC

Ja Herr Cates. Ja. By the by, what is it that you teach? Man, I wish I'd had you for a Lehrer. How much extra credit do you give out for well reasoned theories about multiple killers? Wanna see if it is worth the effort. Yeah, I'm that student. Ha ha!

[Digalittledeeperwatson]

Aaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhh!

Something else to ponder in a logical way where was he taking the kidney?Call me old fashioned if I turned up at home in the early hours with a human organ and with blood stains on my clothes my wife would have a thing or two to say about it.Could he have lived alone? Or could he have some where special to go where he wouldn't be disturbed by anyone? Or could he have left the kidney with the piece of apron by the message and a stray dog dispose of it?

Not the dog thing!!! Disregarding canine based explanations, you bring up good points. Although I wonder how much blood really may have been on this fella. With dark clothing it may have not been noticable. Or in a line of work that would not raise any suspicions perhaps? The smell may have been more damning.

[Sally]

Pink - Perhaps he lived in a lodging house? Generally speaking, nobody asked too many questions in such places. The larger ones were better for anonymity. If he'd boarded in a private house, say, chances were his fellow house dwellers would've grassed him up to the cops.

[curious4]

Well put

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.

Hello Dig,

Very well put. If we were playing cricket, you'd get a "Well played Sah/Madam!

I am one hundred per cent with you on point seven. Jack was nothing if not arrogant.

All good wishes,

Gwyneth/C4