Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Time-gap between Eddowes murder and Goulston Graffito

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Wickerman View Post
    Hi Christer.
    But, pursuing that thought, if the apron was extensively covered in blood then his self inflicted wound must have been serious.
    Wouldn't you keep this provisional bandage on the wound until you get some medical attention, or even until you get home?
    Once you have dressed the wound, and you return to the street, isn't the apron dried up much the same as the initial scenario?

    What is gained by that proposal, the passage of time is the same and the apron is in the same condition.

    Alternately, are you saying this serious wound suddenly stopped bleeding in Goulston St., so he didn't need it any more?
    Then the wound was not serious afterall?
    We are dealing with a lot of unknown factors here, Jon, let´s start by admitting that.

    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


    • Originally posted by Cogidubnus View Post
      Hi Christer



      And presumably half an apron?

      All the best

      Dave

      James Kent, 20, Drew's Blocks, Shadwell, a packing-case maker, said: I work for Mr. Bayley, 23A, Hanbury-street, and go there at six a.m. On Saturday I arrived about ten minutes past that hour. Our employer's gate was open, and there I waited for some other men. Davis, who lives two or three doors away, ran from his house into the road and cried, "Men, come here." James Green and I went together to 29, Hanbury-street, and on going through the passage, standing on the top of the back door steps, I saw a woman lying in the yard between the steps and the partition between the yard and the next. Her head was near the house, but no part of the body was against the wall. The feet were lying towards the back of Bayley's premises. (Witness indicated the precise position upon a plan produced by the police-officers). Deceased's clothes were disarranged, and her apron was thrown over them.

      Monty
      Last edited by Monty; 04-29-2014, 12:07 AM.
      Monty

      https://forum.casebook.org/core/imag...t/evilgrin.gif

      Author of Capturing Jack the Ripper.

      http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/aw/d/1445621622

      Comment


      • Wound

        Hello all,

        A cut from a knife which was contaminated with fecal matter (and we can say with almost 100 % certainty that it was) would in all likelihood have proved fatal.

        Best wishes,
        C4

        Comment


        • Originally posted by curious4 View Post
          Hello all,

          A cut from a knife which was contaminated with fecal matter (and we can say with almost 100 % certainty that it was) would in all likelihood have proved fatal.

          Best wishes,
          C4
          The knife did in all probability come in contact with feces from the cut colon of Eddowes.
          But when?
          And at what stage did the killer cut himself, if he did so?
          The blade was a long one, according to most evaluations. Was there feces on all of the blade?
          Did the killer use just the one knife, or did he use more than one - like on Tabram?

          Plus not all contaminations of the blood accelerate into sepsis. Different people will be differently well equipped to fight off bacterial disease.

          I´ve said it before: we are dealing with a lot of unknown factors here.

          A well-known factor is that the longest hiatus inbetween the killings occurred between Eddowes and Kelly. Maybe the killer took ill after Eddowes for some time; who can say?

          The best,
          Fisherman

          Comment


          • Originally posted by curious4 View Post

            A cut from a knife which was contaminated with fecal matter (and we can say with almost 100 % certainty that it was) would in all likelihood have proved fatal.
            No way. Not even close. People get feces on themselves every day and eat without washing hands, and as disgusting as it may be to do so, they don't die. If infected, one could die, yes, but that also isn't likely.

            Mike
            huh?

            Comment


            • "Dirty" wounds

              Hello Fisherman,

              Wounds contaminated with fecal matter are classified as the worst kind of "dirty" wound (looked it up). Wouldn't he be most likely to cut himself while using the knife? Slashing around with the knife he would (I believe) be likely to spread any contamination along the blade.

              Best wishes
              C4

              Comment


              • Blood spots

                Originally posted by Fisherman View Post
                Okay, Curious - If you find it, let me know.

                The best,
                Fisherman
                Hello Fisherman,

                I have found something in the Source Book, mentioning spots of blood on the piece of apron left on the body and "some blood and apparently (that is, what appeared to be, C4) faecal matter." Not soaked with blood and faeces. I will continue to look, but will be away from home for a few days with not much time to pursue my interests (those not grandchildren oriented, anyway!). Glad Valborg!

                C4

                Comment


                • White wrapper?

                  Hello,

                  Regarding Chapman's missing scarf, I noticed that Kate was said to be wearing a white wrapper at the police station which doesn't seem to be mentioned in the list of her clothing. Another missing scarf?

                  Very hurried regards,
                  C4

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by curious4 View Post
                    Hello Fisherman,

                    Wounds contaminated with fecal matter are classified as the worst kind of "dirty" wound (looked it up). Wouldn't he be most likely to cut himself while using the knife? Slashing around with the knife he would (I believe) be likely to spread any contamination along the blade.

                    Best wishes
                    C4
                    Yes, of course he would have been cut by his own blade - if he WAS cut. However, to what extent the blade was contaminated along it´s full length, we don´t know.
                    Nor do we know that he cut himself after that blade got contaminated - or before.
                    Nor do we know how many knives he used - he used two on Tabram, if it was the same killer.

                    Finally, I think Mike makes a fair point. Much as getting bacteria in your blood can be dangerous, we should not regard it as a death sentence - **** happens ...

                    The best,
                    Fisherman

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by curious4 View Post
                      Hello Fisherman,

                      I have found something in the Source Book, mentioning spots of blood on the piece of apron left on the body and "some blood and apparently (that is, what appeared to be, C4) faecal matter." Not soaked with blood and faeces. I will continue to look, but will be away from home for a few days with not much time to pursue my interests (those not grandchildren oriented, anyway!). Glad Valborg!

                      C4
                      Glad Valborg själv!

                      As for the spots, yes there were spots. But there was also a portion of the apron that was wet with blood, and Long described the apron as "covered in blood".

                      The quotation is the one I posted earlier, relating to Brown´s testimony at the inquest. Once again, "some" is impossible to determine the extent of. And we cannot say that "some" must point to " a little". That would be "some" understatement.

                      The best,
                      Fisherman

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Fisherman View Post
                        The knife did in all probability come in contact with feces from the cut colon of Eddowes.
                        But when?
                        And at what stage did the killer cut himself, if he did so?
                        The blade was a long one, according to most evaluations. Was there feces on all of the blade?
                        Did the killer use just the one knife, or did he use more than one - like on Tabram?

                        Plus not all contaminations of the blood accelerate into sepsis. Different people will be differently well equipped to fight off bacterial disease.

                        I´ve said it before: we are dealing with a lot of unknown factors here.

                        A well-known factor is that the longest hiatus inbetween the killings occurred between Eddowes and Kelly. Maybe the killer took ill after Eddowes for some time; who can say?

                        The best,
                        Fisherman
                        hi fish
                        me and you have discussd this before. I suggested if the killer did cut himself and used the rag to bandage that perhaps it happened like this:

                        The killer cuts himself at the start of the mutilations.
                        He cuts a piece of her apron to wrap around his hand.
                        He finishes his work(in the process getting fecal matter on the bandage) and takes off
                        Later he drops the apron at goulston st.

                        It was a damp night, so it would help keep the blood moist, or wet with blood.
                        "Is all that we see or seem
                        but a dream within a dream?"

                        -Edgar Allan Poe


                        "...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
                        quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

                        -Frederick G. Abberline

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Fisherman View Post
                          Much as getting bacteria in your blood can be dangerous, we should not regard it as a death sentence - **** happens ...
                          ...and **** gets on your hand(s), if you smear excrement over something.
                          Kind regards, Sam Flynn

                          "Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)

                          Comment


                          • Hi Christer

                            I don´t know how much of a fashion it was to wear half aprons back then, Dave - for sure, Eddowes did. But did Chapman?
                            Shame though...it would've been fun!

                            All the best

                            Dave

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Sam Flynn View Post
                              ...and **** gets on your hand(s), if you smear excrement over something.
                              Hand(s), yes! Partially, at least. Other parts may stay clean.

                              Once again, there are unknown elements a plenty around!

                              ... but it nevertheless sounded lika a parallel hit to "Smoke gets in your eyes" ; "**** gets on your hands".

                              Bryan Ferry, anybody ...?

                              The best,
                              Fisherman

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Cogidubnus View Post
                                Hi Christer



                                Shame though...it would've been fun!

                                All the best

                                Dave
                                It would! But what should we call it? An ap(e) or a Ron?

                                Fisherman

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X