piece of apron

[lynn cates]

plant

Hello Jason. Thanks.

The best exit for that location would be Church Passage. But if the killer exited there, he should have run bang into PC Harvey, right?

But, even so, he is walking all that way with the cloth? Don't think so.

Looks more like someone trying to "plant" evidence. What do you think?

Cheers.
LC

[Trevor Marriott]

Hello Trevor. It makes sense that he wished to wipe his hands with a piece of cloth.

The cloth turning up on Goulston, however, makes no sense.

Agreed halfway?

Cheers.
LC

Why. he could have done that before he left the scene on her clothes no need to cut a piece off.

And has already been said why would he be walking down the road wiping his hands with incriminating evidence.

It wouldnt have taken him that long to wipe his hands and he could have got rid of the piece long before Goulston St.

Beside wiping bloody hands on the cloth would have left the cloth much for stained than is described.

And the cruncher. How could he cut a piece of her apron off when she wasn't wearing one

[pinkmoon]

If my memory serves me right and I might be wrong here didn't I read something in one of my many books years ago that police officer who discovered message and apron was sacked for drinking on duty two years later.Also I think the story implied he received money from newspaper for his story

[pinkmoon]

How certain were the police that the message wasn't already in existence before murder I remember reading that two policemans beats crossed over just by where message was and I think that was main reason why they assumed it was a recent message

[lynn cates]

respondeo quod

Hello Trevor. Thanks.

"Why? He could have done that before he left the scene on her clothes no need to cut a piece off."

True enough. But we all, on occasion, do things the difficult way, yet later regret it. (Some of us are married. heh-heh)

"And has already been said why would he be walking down the road wiping his hands with incriminating evidence."

Well, not far beyond the exit. By the way, with your flair for research and re-enactment, why not have a go at the scenario I suggested? That could give an answer to how far he'd need to wipe.

"It wouldnt have taken him that long to wipe his hands and he could have got rid of the piece long before Goulston St."

Absolutely. We agree that there is no reason for the piece to be there.

"Beside wiping bloody hands on the cloth would have left the cloth much for stained than is described."

But the description is quite ambiguous.

"And the cruncher. How could he cut a piece of her apron off when she wasn't wearing one?"

The coppers said otherwise.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

not certain

Hello Jason.

"How certain were the police that the message wasn't already in existence before the murder?"

Not certain at all.

Cheers.
LC

[Wickerman]

Hello Jon.

"A rather long way to carry it don't you think?
Also, for a man to be seen running through the streets away from a crime scene is one matter, but to be actively wiping his hands & clothes at the same time would project a memorable sight to any casual passer-by.

Being caught carrying a bloodstained rag is an immediate clue to culpability."

Yet another reason to believe that the piece should be near one of the three entrances to Mitre sq.

Cheers.
LC

Indeed it should, and I cannot see a murderer standing under a lamp, for all the world to see & identify, while wiping blood stains of himself.
There is something counter-intuitive about that.

Isn't it far more likely he took the darkest route staying away from lighted area's, especially lampposts.

[Wickerman]

Accept it you and all the others over the years who have subscribed to this theory have now been proved wrong

On the contrary, the stained cloth you posted is precisely what we should expect to see.

And I will later post a pic of kidney after removal to prove you wrong yet again

The only blood associated with a kidney is what surrounds it when you remove it, and due to the fatty membrane blood does not stay on the kidney.

Test what happens to blood when you drip it on to fat Trevor.

[Wickerman]

I tend to agree the killer, if we are indeed dealing with just one of course, came prepared. His method is quite organized. One might even say methodical. So yes, I see it very likely he brought "storage". I am still not convinced the killer would have to be all that messy though. The notion of gloves doesn't seem too far fetched if he can plan ahead so to speak. And he has learned something from the Chapman murder. Might also explain some of the "sloppiness" with Eddowes.

Quite, whether he was messy enough to need wiping down is also an assumption, apart from his hands being bloody, I would say not.
I was told Chapman's scarf was missing, I never did look into that point. So, possibly that was also what he used to wrap her uterus in?

[Digalittledeeperwatson]

Hullo Wickerman.

Quite, whether he was messy enough to need wiping down is also an assumption, apart from his hands being bloody, I would say not.
I was told Chapman's scarf was missing, I never did look into that point. So, possibly that was also what he used to wrap her uterus in?

Thanks Wickerman. And if his hands be gloved then remove and they are clean! Don't remember anything about Chapman's scarf being missing. That would be mighty interesting indeed.

[Digalittledeeperwatson]

Hullo Lynn.

Hello DLDW. Thanks.

Why could it not be a disaffected Gentile?

Cheers.
LC

Oh it could be. It's just simpler that way. The Juwes are responsible. In whatever way it is meant to be. Not saying I believe it o be the case, but it is pretty straightforward. I mean it could be.

[Digalittledeeperwatson]

Lesson learned.

One pic is worth a thousand words and no matter how many pics are put before those who want to beleive the killer carried the organs way in they will not accept otherwise.
I set out to prove or disprove this theory in an unbiased way
That excercise I say again clearly shows the killer did not take away the organs in
Further tests also show he didn't wipe his hands on it or his knife.

So there has to be alternative explanation for the apron piece turning up on gs

Hullo Trevor. Nice discussing things with you. I had looked forward to it. Perhaps you mistook my meaning. Never question the inphallibility of Mr. Marriot. Apologies. Perhaps next time we will make a better go of it. I sincerely hope so.

[Wickerman]

And the cruncher. How could he cut a piece of her apron off when she wasn't wearing one

And here's me thinking you were trying to be serious...

[Digalittledeeperwatson]

Hullo El White Chap.

Apron. About half of the apron. Maybe between 3-5 square feet.
http://www.casebook.org/dissertations/dst-graffito.html. Hope I did the link thing correcly. First attempt. Geronimo!

[El White Chap]

Lamp posts are everywhere in London, then and now. Eventually the killer would have to pass one on their route. Law of averages. There is also light from many other sources which causing illumination onto the street. You can move all you want to in the shadows, regardless, the light will still 'kiss' you at some points.

Saying the ripper wasn't messy enough to need wiping down would also be an assumption, Mitre Square would have been in poor light whilst he was doing his work, work that created a lot fluid. Simply look at what was left at the scene, it's abundantly clear that the hands up to the sleeves would have been drenched at the very minimum. Add to that the potentially unexpected spurts from her neck and abdomen. Even more likely when one cannot see so clearly. I've been to the square enough times to know, even now in the early hours of the morning you can see how poorly lit it was during the victorian era.

Carrying a piece of apron concealed on ones person from Mitre Square north a few streets is hardly a leap of magic.