Apron placement as intimidation?

[Robert St Devil]

the line leads to a scribble mark over those buildings. could that indicate that there wete no buildings?

[Wickerman]

the line leads to a scribble mark over those buildings. could that indicate that there wete no buildings?

The layout Foster copied to make that plan is a 1873 Ordnance Survey map which did not show the Model Dwellings, so Foster just scribbled out those buildings that had been demolished by 1888.

If you look back at that enlargement of the Dwellings (post #357) there are two houses (132 and 131) fronting on to Wentworth street that back on to the first block of the Model Dwellings (90-107).
The depth of those houses looks about 30 feet. I wonder if that is what the line is intended to indicate.
Though I fail to see the significance of pointing that out in notes.

[Robert St Devil]

maybe he means...

with houses 131 and 132 ,not there,
30' from the edge of 90-107

so walking south on goulston
in 10' youre next to the lamp
20' after the lamp is doorway
i used the 31' street at the bottom of post 357 as reference

any ideas what star and A mean?

[Wickerman]

maybe he means...

with houses 131 and 132 ,not there,
30' from the edge of 90-107

so walking south on goulston
in 10' youre next to the lamp
20' after the lamp is doorway
i used the 31' street at the bottom of post 357 as reference

any ideas what star and A mean?

The big red 'A' is where the apron was found.
What looks like a star is made up of unrelated marks, one being the 'L' in "Goulston", the other being some kind of indicator which begins by the "L" and leads back to the building - its a pointer of sorts.

[Wickerman]

[Robert St Devil]

i had my thoughts that the A meant Apron... only that looks like the apron is beside the lamp, not 20' away.

[Robert St Devil]

is the indicator an X... as in X marks the spot where A was found. yes, i see the L in GOULSTON now.

[Varqm]

It comes down to, did Long,at 2:20 AM, do his job and checked the Wentworth doorway.And/or was asked by higher-ups (most likely/believable) and said he did checked and the apron was not there,which made the police believe even more that the apron was placed in the doorway deliberately,together with the "fresh" graffito,trying to place the blame on the Jews ( Lawende and co. did not say if the killer was a "foreigner" or not) because why would the killer hang about and/or return to deposit the apron.
I do not know if the police's answers were somewhat screened before an inquest.
If Long did not check it's easier to believe that the apron was just randomly discarded,which is the simplest explanation.
In the inquest it was not asked, so we do not know if it was intentionally placed or not for intimidation ,lashing out or whatever reason,or if the napkin theory is viable.

[Varqm]

Thus ''Constable Alfred Long =
[Coroner] Had you been past that spot previously to your discovering the apron? - I passed about twenty minutes past two o'clock.
[Coroner] Are you able to say whether the apron was there then? - It was not.'' was correct with no objections from the police in the inquest
or after.

If Long told superiors he did not actually checked the doorway his expected answer would be similar to Daniel Halse's
''By Mr. Crawford: At twenty minutes past two o'clock I passed over the spot where the piece of apron was found, but did not notice anything then. I should not necessarily have seen the piece of apron. ''
and Long's ''It was not.'' was certain and vastly incorrect and a lie.

[Varqm]

Unless he was cautious transferring from street to street and reached the Wentworth doorway past 2:20 am.

[Robert St Devil]

questions, questions...

The apron opens up the possibility that his bolthole (or man-cave) was in the vicinity of Goulston Street if you put any stock in Jack the Ripper returning to his bolthole after murdering Elizabeth Stride.

Where was he going after murdering Elizabeth Stride? No certainties but could "bolthole" be among the tops answers. Catherine Eddowes' murder is generally understood as occurring as an afterthought; something that happened because he was unable to get what he wanted from Elizabeth. Did he meet Kate on his way back to his bolthole?

With blood on his hands and being in possession of a kidney, uterus, bloody apron, bloody knife and the alarm of the police on the streets of the East End... what's the probability that his bolthole was actually back in the vicinity of Buck's Row or Berner Street? Meaning, what was the purpose of trekking to Mitre Square if his bolthole was on the other side of Whitechapel in an area he had just come from [45 minutes/an hour] earlier?

He could have continued westward from Mitre Square after murdering Catherine Eddowes, thru City of London. I'm sure there were plenty of doorways in that direction where he could leave her apron. But, the aspect of the apron has him doubling-back and/or stagnating in the vicinity of Mitre Square and Goulston Street, lending to the idea that he had reached the neighborhood of his bolthole.

[Wickerman]

The apron opens up the possibility that his bolthole (or man-cave) was in the vicinity of Goulston Street if you put any stock in Jack the Ripper returning to his bolthole after murdering Elizabeth Stride.

Where was he going after murdering Elizabeth Stride? No certainties but could "bolthole" be among the tops answers. Catherine Eddowes' murder is generally understood as occurring as an afterthought; something that happened because he was unable to get what he wanted from Elizabeth. Did he meet Kate on his way back to his bolthole?

With blood on his hands and being in possession of a kidney, uterus, bloody apron, bloody knife and the alarm of the police on the streets of the East End... what's the probability that his bolthole was actually back in the vicinity of Buck's Row or Berner Street? Meaning, what was the purpose of trekking to Mitre Square if his bolthole was on the other side of Whitechapel in an area he had just come from [45 minutes/an hour] earlier?

He could have continued westward from Mitre Square after murdering Catherine Eddowes, thru City of London. I'm sure there were plenty of doorways in that direction where he could leave her apron. But, the aspect of the apron has him doubling-back and/or stagnating in the vicinity of Mitre Square and Goulston Street, lending to the idea that he had reached the neighborhood of his bolthole.

Hi Robert.

Are you familiar with this story by Robert Spicer?

http://www.casebook.org/press_reports/daily_express/310316.html

The only point worthy of note that I observe is that he claimed to arrest a suspect on the night of the double murder, over in Heneage-street, by Brick Lane. People were being stopped, arrested, and let go on what we today might consider the flimsiest of reasons.
It would be consistent with a killer moving eastward from Mitre Sq., through Goulston Street, and on towards Brick Lane.

We don't know if he intended there to be a third victim that night.

I just mention it as a point of trivia.

[Abby Normal]

I would posit that the killers bolt hole would be no more than an approx. half hour distance from miter square/goulston street-the time of about an hour from when eddowes was murdered and the GSG was discovered. the time it would take for the killer to go to his bolt hole, clean up, drop off and return to write the GSG.

[Robert St Devil]

I would posit that the killers bolt hole would be no more than an approx. half hour distance from miter square/goulston street-the time of about an hour from when eddowes was murdered and the GSG was discovered. the time it would take for the killer to go to his bolt hole, clean up, drop off and return to write the GSG.

So instead of walking directly from Berners to Doveton, he took the long route via Mitre Square, Abby? (sorry, bad joke)

[Robert St Devil]

Hi Robert.

Are you familiar with this story by Robert Spicer?

http://www.casebook.org/press_reports/daily_express/310316.html

The only point worthy of note that I observe is that he claimed to arrest a suspect on the night of the double murder, over in Heneage-street, by Brick Lane. People were being stopped, arrested, and let go on what we today might consider the flimsiest of reasons.
It would be consistent with a killer moving eastward from Mitre Sq., through Goulston Street, and on towards Brick Lane.

We don't know if he intended there to be a third victim that night.

I just mention it as a point of trivia.

i've wondered wickerman how the police cleared a witness, and this article doesn't give me much faith in the process.

"Are you Jack the Ripper?"
"No, I'm a doctor."
"Free to go."

I have the maps so I'll find Brick Lane. Did the police need a warrant to search a suspect's bag?