Time-gap between Eddowes murder and Goulston Graffito

[Sam Flynn]

Please notice that "I should not necessarily have seen it" is NOT a means to say that he could/would not have done so. It is actually more or less a statement that he could/would have seen it if he DID look purposefully into the doorway.

Purposefully being the operative word. Besides, it's a moot point whether purposefully looking into a doorway would mean consciously registering any litter on the floor. And Halse, like Long, was not a litter warden. (Have I mentioned that before?)

Taking all of this into account, I hope that you will realize that "it was easily overlooked" is a description that actually lays down that the rag was hard to see even if you looked for it purposefully.

To say that something is "easily overlooked" does not at all imply that it is hidden or undetectable - just that it is not "in-your-face" noticeable.

So no low blow, Gareth - but instead a very crucial distinction.

Also very crucial is Halse's statement that the apron "was in the building", which you omitted to include. Perhaps because that, in itself, demonstrates that the apron would have been easily overlooked (in the normal meaning of that word).

[Sam Flynn]

Except it wasn't a whopping great blood-stained apron, at first glance, was it. It was just an off-white rag tossed in a gloomy passageway.

"I found a portion of an apron covered in blood" (Alfred Long)

Not: "I saw a large, blood-stained apron as I was walking down the street". Get real, Fish. Something caught his eye in the passageway, so he went for a closer look. Picked it up - smells a bit funny! - unwrapped it, switched on his lamp, and noticed the blood then.

It was, pure and simple, an off-white rag tossed in a gloomy passageway. No doubt about it.

[Fisherman]

Also very crucial is Halse's statement that the apron "was in the building", which you omitted to include. Perhaps because that, in itself, demonstrates that the apron would have been easily overlooked (in the normal meaning of that word).

From my post 1154 a little further up this page:

"What Halse DID say was that he should not necessarily have seen the apron since it was in the building."


Goodnight, Gareth.

The best,
Fisherman

[Sam Flynn]

That´s why I am saying that the example with the papers is just useless.

Well, have it your way. It's pointless my responding to anything else you have to say.

[curious4]

Doorway

If the message was "on the jamb", and the apron piece was lying underneath, then it was in the doorway (see my post vis a vis jamb brick) and fairly noticeable by someone passing. We register things subconsciously when viewing a familiar scene. P.C. Long perhaps passed the doorway when there was nothing there, not perhaps consciously registering that there was nothing there, but noticing when the doorway looked different in some way when he next passed it.

Best wishes,
C4

P.S. Quite sure no-one is particularly interested but my new grandchild weighed in at four and a half kilos - thank god for c-sections, mum is five feet tall and weighs around seven stone (under 98 lbs for you americans :-) )

[curious]

Not at all, Jon. Half a woman's apron would be about the size of a tea-towel.

We can also be pretty certain that the chirpy little sparrow, Catherine Eddowes, did not have an apron the size of Goliath's winding-sheet.

Good Morning,
I do agree that Eddowes size would make her apron considerably smaller than that of MJK or Chapman's.

However, half of it would still be considerably larger than a tea-towel (or at least those we have in the States). It would take at least 3 or 4 normal size tea towels, but more like 6 or 8 -- to reach from the waist to the floor and from the navel to the mid back and worn over other clothing.

Get out a tea-towel, put it to your waist and look. It would take 3 or 4 tea towels (maybe 5), hanging vertically, then another two, stitched horizontally to take the apron from the knees to the floor. Then remember, the apron has to be worn over voluminous skirts. The piece of material from Eddowes' apron would have been substantial.

curious

[The Good Michael]

If the message was "on the jamb", and the apron piece was lying underneath, then it was in the doorway (see my post vis a vis jamb brick) and fairly noticeable by someone passing. We register things subconsciously when viewing a familiar scene. P.C. Long perhaps passed the doorway when there was nothing there, not perhaps consciously registering that there was nothing there, but noticing when the doorway looked different in some way when he next passed it.

Best wishes,
C4

P.S. Quite sure no-one is particularly interested but my new grandchild weighed in at four and a half kilos - thank god for c-sections, mum is five feet tall and weighs around seven stone (under 98 lbs for you americans :-) )

Congrats on the grandchild. And I agree with the statement about Long. It is interesting that Long never said he looked around this spot, but said he 'passed' it. Not to be nitpicking, but passing is much different than searching or looking in.

Cheers,

Mike

[curious4]

Passing

Congrats on the grandchild. And I agree with the statement about Long. It is interesting that Long never said he looked around this spot, but said he 'passed' it. Not to be nitpicking, but passing is much different than searching or looking in.

Cheers,

Mike

Hello Mike,

Thank you on both counts. :-) Wouldn't part of his duty on the beat be glancing into doorways? "passing" could include a quick glance in - implied if not spoken.

Best wishes,
C4

[The Good Michael]

Hello Mike,

Thank you on both counts. :-) Wouldn't part of his duty on the beat be glancing into doorways? "passing" could include a quick glance in - implied if not spoken.

It should be part of his duty. I suggest that police were looking for suspicious people more than anything because that's why some of them were transferred to the division, to find a killer. If no one was around, why not just pass by on one's rounds? Later when Long found out something was amiss, he doesn't say he passed the spot. This is just the use of a few words of course, but the people that think Long couldn't have been mistaken, will not have anything implied. That's my point on this issue.

Cheers,

Mike

[Sam Flynn]

However, half of it would still be considerably larger than a tea-towel (or at least those we have in the States). It would take at least 3 or 4 normal size tea towels, but more like 6 or 8 -- to reach from the waist to the floor and from the navel to the mid back and worn over other clothing.

Perhaps it is a "cultural" thing. I'm a slightly overweight, average height male, but I could easily make a serviceable apron from two of my mother's (British) tea-towels. Granted, it would not reach the floor, nor wrap around my front and back, but I'm not aware of any rule that says that an apron must do so. Certainly, in my time as a chef and restaurant worker, I've worn aprons that only reach as far as my knees and just cover my front. We don't know the dimensions of Kate's apron anyway, so your guess is as good as mine.

It scarcely matters, because the salient points are (a) that the apron was easy to miss because it was in the passageway; (b) it was almost certainly not laid out neat and flat, and was more likely crumpled or folded to a greater or lesser extent; and (c) whatever its size or disposition, it was after all only a discarded swatch of cloth... one more piece of junk among many others on the squalid streets of an East End slum.

[Abby Normal]

We don't need this. We have a history of negligence. We have the fact that Long was expendable enough to move him to a different division for a time. We have the fact that people are often in error. We have the possibility that he wasn't in error, but simply lied. We have, according the the coroner's report in the paper, no cross-examination of Long's answers. We have a single man's sentence. We also have the amount of time that it would take for someone to get from Mitre Square to the Wentworth Buildings with the presumption that a murderer would move as quickly as manageable towards his next destination. All of that, much like all of the circumstances connected to the Hutchinson signature, should be enough to make this at least in the realm of 50/50. But we have you trying to bolster a slipshod suspect chronology which takes Long into the realm of a robotic answering machine. Great detective work.

Mike

we have the fact that Long found the only clue in the whole case. great detective work indeed!

[Sam Flynn]

we have the fact that Long found the only clue in the whole case. great detective work indeed!

It's not much of a clue, though, is it? And, if he hadn't found it, one of the residents almost certainly would have the next morning. So, in pure "sleuthing" terms, it wouldn't rate very high on the Sherlock Scale. Not that I'm knocking him, but it's all a bit "meh!", when you put it in context.

(PS: Besides, Mike's point wasn't about Long's detective work, but Fisherman's)

[Fisherman]

... the people that think Long couldn't have been mistaken, will not have anything implied.

Cheers,

Mike

Who are those people, Mike?

The best,
Fisherman

[curious4]

Fabric

Good Morning,
I do agree that Eddowes size would make her apron considerably smaller than that of MJK or Chapman's.

However, half of it would still be considerably larger than a tea-towel (or at least those we have in the States). It would take at least 3 or 4 normal size tea towels, but more like 6 or 8 -- to reach from the waist to the floor and from the navel to the mid back and worn over other clothing.

Get out a tea-towel, put it to your waist and look. It would take 3 or 4 tea towels (maybe 5), hanging vertically, then another two, stitched horizontally to take the apron from the knees to the floor. Then remember, the apron has to be worn over voluminous skirts. The piece of material from Eddowes' apron would have been substantial.

curious

Hello Curious,

I don't think we can assume that both pieces were the same size. The Gouldstone street piece was likely to have been smaller, having been roughly cut off - at least that's as I see it. In the dim distant past when I was Eddowes sized, I could easily get a dress out of a yard of a 60 inch width. Regarding the tea-towel test, (having gained in girth, but not in height) I found two (british) tea towels horizontally quite adequate from waist to floor.

Best wishes,
C4

[Fisherman]

Well, have it your way. It's pointless my responding to anything else you have to say.

My way is not you sulking about it. My way is you realizing that there is a large difference inbetween your paper example and Long´s doorway exercise.

But I seemingly can´t have it that way.

The best,
Fisherman