Tweet
Originally posted by Wickerman
View Post
However, we do know that the killer took the apron piece with himself after killing Eddowes. And we do know that it ended up at a place that it would take about five minutes to reach on foot.
This tells me that if the killer used the rag as a means to carry the organs in, then it would be a strange thing to do to take the innards out from it and discard it in a doorway. It would make more sense if the organs were carried all the way to where he wanted to store them.
It also tells me that if the rag was used for wiping purposes, then he wiped away for a very long time with a rag that would be very dangerous to carry around the town. I would have expected a quick rub, and then he´d discard it close to the murder scene. It would not suffice to get all the gunk off his hands anyway, no matter how long he rubbed, so the clever thing would be to get rid of it quickly.
We also have Long to add to the equation - he tells us in no uncertain terms that the apron was not in the doorway at 2.20.
Okay. 2.20 is 35-40 minutes after the slaying. If Long is right - and we must accept that he probably is - then the killer hung on to the rag for at least that long time. It could be as much as 70-75 minutes.
In this time, you can stem the bloodflow from rather a severe wound. But as I said, we deal in uncertainties - it is impossible to establish just how severe the wound was. But I don´t think it is in any way impossible to imagine that it was severe enough to bleed profusely for some time, only to then stop bleeding after, say, a period of inbetween 35 and 75 minutes.
What we would then have is a wound that bled enough to turn one corner of the rag wet with blood, but that had stopped bleeding as the killer checked it in Goulston Street, deciding that he could finally drop the rag and rid himself of that particular damning evidence.
We would also have fresh blood in the rag, not blood from a woman that had been killed perhaps an hour before the rag was dropped. And fresh blood is wet, whereas old blood is not. That is the deciding factor to me.
The degree of seriousness of the wound is hard to establish and discuss. Serious enough to bleed enough to cause the apron appear covered in blood to a significant extent, not serious enough to keep bleeding for hours.
Keep in mind that the killer may have prioritized stopping blood from dripping onto the ground, forming a trail. Not very serious wounds does that too, as well as more serious ones.
Also keep in mind that there are very many shallowly placed blood vessels in our hands - when we cut our fingers, they will bleed extensively even if the cut is not severe, due to the wealth of blood vessels close to the skin in this area.
The best,
Fisherman
Comment