piece of apron

[curious4]

Understanding wife?

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?

Hello Pink,

Perhaps he had a very understanding (and stupid) wife. Caught with the kidney he could have said "Look what the dog just brought in m'dear." No, I think we can safely say he had somewhere nearby to hide (and perhaps gloat) in. Not necessarily where he lived though. If he had company it would be someone who didn't dare oppose him.

Best wishes,
C4

[lynn cates]

risky

Hello DLDW. Thanks.

"I was suggesting he went home to deposit his "belongings", then he went back out to leave the apron."

I think you, yourself, answer this best below.

"It would have been a risk to venture back out afterwards. . ."

"Hence the GSG, maybe?"

If the GSG were meant for clarification, it failed.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

vita

Hello (again) DLDW. Thanks.

Currently in both the philosophy (intro, logic, ethics) department and humanities department.

Love to go into prof mode.

Cheers.
LC

[El White Chap]

Purpose of the piece of apron.

"Some blood and apparently faecal matter was found on the portion that was found in Goulston Street"

From the reports I've read it's not exactly clear on the condition of the apron, i.e. amounts/proportions of blood and faecal matter in accordance to surface area of the torn apron piece. From what I've learnt, it doesn't sound as if the apron was completely soaked in either which would suggest it wasn't used to store the missing kidney as some theorise because it would have been 'drenched' in blood, but could have been used to either wipe the knifes blade (then again that could have been done easily using any of the fabrics Catherine had on at the scene of the crime), or as I would hazard a guess, wipe the murderer clean of these fluids which inadvertly might have sprayed on them before and during the mutilations of Eddowes, but wiping themselves clean as they made their escape from Mitre Square.

[lynn cates]

seepage

Hello EWC. Welcome to the boards.

Are you good with an inadvertent cut to the large colon allowing material to seep onto the hands and a piece of apron to wipe?

Cheers.
LC

[El White Chap]

Hello EWC. Welcome to the boards.

Are you good with an inadvertent cut to the large colon allowing material to seep onto the hands and a piece of apron to wipe?

Cheers.
LC

Thank you Lynn, much appreciated squire.

I'm a firm believer that Kate's murderer cut the piece from the apron to do exactly that, simply clean themselves of the matter that hit them from both the neck and abdomen. An unplanned method of 'cleaning up' whilst on foot escaping the scene of her gruesome demise.

[Digalittledeeperwatson]

Hullo Lynn.

Hello DLDW. Thanks.

"I was suggesting he went home to deposit his "belongings", then he went back out to leave the apron."

I think you, yourself, answer this best below.

"It would have been a risk to venture back out afterwards. . ."

"Hence the GSG, maybe?"

If the GSG were meant for clarification, it failed.

Cheers.
LC

I would argue, not very hard, that leaving to deposit the apron was much less risky than murdering and mutilating a woman out in the open. Yes, the GSG didn't provide much clarity. Then again maybe it does...

[Digalittledeeperwatson]

Hullo El White Chap.

"Some blood and apparently faecal matter was found on the portion that was found in Goulston Street"

From the reports I've read it's not exactly clear on the condition of the apron, i.e. amounts/proportions of blood and faecal matter in accordance to surface area of the torn apron piece. From what I've learnt, it doesn't sound as if the apron was completely soaked in either which would suggest it wasn't used to store the missing kidney as some theorise because it would have been 'drenched' in blood, but could have been used to either wipe the knifes blade (then again that could have been done easily using any of the fabrics Catherine had on at the scene of the crime), or as I would hazard a guess, wipe the murderer clean of these fluids which inadvertly might have sprayed on them before and during the mutilations of Eddowes, but wiping themselves clean as they made their escape from Mitre Square.

Welcome to the boards. It does not sound as if the apron piece was heavily saturated. I do question the notion that if it was used to carry the organs away that it would've been drenched of blood. Eddowes probably would've bleed out quite a bit of blood before the kidney was removed. Then some of the blood remaining in the kidney would have vacated upon its removal. The size of the apron piece taken is not exactly ideal for wiping one's hands off. Why not cut a smaller portion off? I'm not sure how bloody the kidney would've been as I have no experience with fresh ones. It would seem this murder would be more likely to leave the murderer messier than previous ones. Excluding maybe Tabram? If the killer had his own recepticle for carrying away organs he may have wrapped the apron piece around that. Especially given the fecal matter. Might that explain the size of the piece cut and lack of residue on it? The size of the apron piece was not particularly practical for hand wiping. Wish they had been more detailed about it. It might have been revealing.

[Wickerman]

Thank you Lynn, much appreciated squire.

I'm a firm believer that Kate's murderer cut the piece from the apron to do exactly that, simply clean themselves of the matter that hit them from both the neck and abdomen. An unplanned method of 'cleaning up' whilst on foot escaping the scene of her gruesome demise.

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.

[El White Chap]

Welcome to the boards. It does not sound as if the apron piece was heavily saturated. I do question the notion that if it was used to carry the organs away that it would've been drenched of blood. Eddowes probably would've bleed out quite a bit of blood before the kidney was removed. Then some of the blood remaining in the kidney would have vacated upon its removal. The size of the apron piece taken is not exactly ideal for wiping one's hands off. Why not cut a smaller portion off? I'm not sure how bloody the kidney would've been as I have no experience with fresh ones. It would seem this murder would be more likely to leave the murderer messier than previous ones. Excluding maybe Tabram? If the killer had his own recepticle for carrying away organs he may have wrapped the apron piece around that. Especially given the fecal matter. Might that explain the size of the piece cut and lack of residue on it? The size of the apron piece was not particularly practical for hand wiping. Wish they had been more detailed about it. It might have been revealing.

Hello DALDW and thanks for your warm welcome.
First off, I haven't managed in all my time of researching to find an exact or even approximate size quoted for the piece of apron. Only the word "sizable" has been attributed. I'd be very interested to hear if you have any more information about it's scale because that could then further indicate to us what it's purpose was for, or not.
What I would say is that I'm not completely convinced either way if the surface area of the apron piece is vital in terms of indicating a practical use, in that the ripper would most likely have torn the piece in 'some haste' as time was of the essence, it would only have needed to be sufficient for a purpose, and it had taken already some considerable minutes for the 'work' done on Kate so cutting exact dimensions wasn't essential. For example, when one wipes their hands and body clean/dry, it's often done with a towel or what have you which is perhaps more than necessary in size for what is required of it. I would also suggest it wasn't only used for hand wiping but for possibly sleeve, arm and maybe even as far as close to the face.

The GSG is one thing in terms of police failure with potential evidence from the killer, but what I'm finding to be of even more interest to me of late is the lack of exact information on the apron. The only real 'piece of evidence' in the case as far as I'm aware.

[El White Chap]

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.

Thanks for your well thought out response. Did I mention once that the piece of Eddowes apron would be in view? No, of course I didn't. That would be plain stupid/sloppy of the killer. What I was suggesting was that it was used during the evacuation from Mitre Square in various places where the killer felt safe to stop and use to clean themselves, perhaps in the doorway of the Wenworth dwellings as well as anywhere seen fit before it was dumped there.

[El White Chap]

I'm also not convinced it was a long way to carry the piece of apron, only 4 blocks/4 parallel streets away from Mitre Square. Considering it would likely have been used only in places on that route that were deemed 'safe', that distance isn't an all together challenging prospect to imagine.

[Wickerman]

Oh, by the way, - Welcome

You don't think this distance is too long to be wiping your hands, and looking conspicuous at the same time?

The blue line is the suggested route, but not the only one.

[El White Chap]

Thanks for the welcome Jon, glad to be here.

Actually I don't think it's too long at all, especially when only used in intervals to avoid suspicion in the view of the general public. For example, ducking into an arched doorway after noticing some fluid on ones sleeve, cleaning it off. Coming out of the doorway back onto the street and then passing a lamp post which illuminates you and your clothes again, noticing more fluid on ones trousers. Back into another crevice to clean that off. Back onto the street, passing some more light noticing back of hands are still covered in fluid, find another safe spot to use the piece of apron. Hiding the apron back under ones cloak/jacket. And so on. Passing under the lights of lamp posts etc would momentarily illuminate oneself and bring new attention to any unnoticed stains. The lighting conditions were poor, especially at that time in the morning when Kate was murdered so 'good light' would have been sporadic in layout.

She was butchered, had her kidney removed and her intestines pulled out and spread acrross her shoulder, amoungst other activities from the reports I've read, all have mentioned a lot of fluids (blood/faeces/other bodily fluids) at the scene. Which would suggest a rather messy job. Could have taken quite some time to clean oneself up after causing such a mess, in all likelihood it would have taken several 'stealth intervals' of cleaning.

[Wickerman]

Hello Thomas.

So, if you see him as concerned about the blood, etc. where do you see him carrying the kidney and the uterus?, which most likely was oozing blood.