Pc Long and the piece of rag.

[Fisherman]

Trevor Marriott: But according to some with the description of the rag thats just what someone did wipe there hands and knife on it. But of course experiments have shown that to be questionable in any event.

Even if the killer wiped his hands on the rag, it still remains that such a thing would only result in some of it getting removed - to get his hands really clean, he would need to wash them. I pointed that out to you when you called me deluded, remember?


And how do you know the killer had blood and faeces on his hands when he left the crime scene. Some suggest he may have been wearing gloves.

And who is "some"?

Of course, we cannot be sure that he did NOT wear gloves. But if he did, it seems he wiped his gloves on the rag...

There are numerous examples of serialists who have procured innards from their victims.I cannot think of one single example when it was done using gloves. But of course, that does not prove that the Ripper did not do that! He may have used a cow´s udder on each hand for all I know.

[Kattrup]

Did a quick search without finding anything. Maybe I am just remembering the discussion having been up before, I don´t know.

Harvey began his beat at 9.45pm on the 29th of September, but he was a City police, and I have no idea if the forces matched up in this context.

If somebody has the answer, I´d be grateful if it was posted!

I haven't yet found anything, besides his testimony:

I was on duty in Goulston-street, Whitechapel, on Sunday morning, Sept. 30,

and his answer, quoted earlier, about passing the spot once before:

[Coroner] Had you been past that spot previously to your discovering the apron?
- I passed about twenty minutes past two o'clock.

[Fisherman]

I haven't yet found anything, besides his testimony:

and his answer, quoted earlier, about passing the spot once before:

Yep. So until further notice, we can´t tell either way - although Long does only specifically admit to having passsed the spot once before. To my mind, that is no guarantee that he had not passed it X times before on the same beat. Until we know when the beat commenced, it remains an open matter.

[Trevor Marriott]

Trevor Marriott: But according to some with the description of the rag thats just what someone did wipe there hands and knife on it. But of course experiments have shown that to be questionable in any event.

Even if the killer wiped his hands on the rag, it still remains that such a thing would only result in some of it getting removed - to get his hands really clean, he would need to wash them. I pointed that out to you when you called me deluded, remember?


And how do you know the killer had blood and faeces on his hands when he left the crime scene. Some suggest he may have been wearing gloves.

And who is "some"?

Of course, we cannot be sure that he did NOT wear gloves. But if he did, it seems he wiped his gloves on the rag...

There are numerous examples of serialists who have procured innards from their victims.I cannot think of one single example when it was done using gloves. But of course, that does not prove that the Ripper did not do that! He may have used a cow´s udder on each hand for all I know.

I dont invent some of these farcical suggestions I just disprove them !

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Fisherman]

I dont invent some of these farcical suggestions I just disprove them !

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

You have not managed to disprove anything but the misconception that people with a police background are knowledgeable.

Then again, you´ve done that thoroughly enough!

[Jon Guy]

. Some suggest he may have been wearing gloves.

How do you then explain the scratches and abrasions caused by fingernails, found on some of the victims (Nichols, Chapman, Eddowes and McKenzie) ?

Fingerless gloves perhaps ?

[Trevor Marriott]

You have not managed to disprove anything but the misconception that people with a police background are knowledgeable.

Then again, you´ve done that thoroughly enough!

Of course we are not as knowledgeable as you, but then again its a good job we are not, as god knows what a state the world would be in. Maybe you should form a political party, and call yourself the numpties, the worrying thing is some would vote for you.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Trevor Marriott]

How do you then explain the scratches and abrasions caused by fingernails, found on some of the victims (Nichols, Chapman, Eddowes and McKenzie) ?

Fingerless gloves perhaps ?

It was not my suggestion just another wild theory created some other deluded poster I was using it as an example

Where does it refer to these scratches on these victims and who identified them as fingernail scratches?

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Jon Guy]

It was not my suggestion just another wild theory created some other deluded poster I was using it as an example

Where does it refer to these scratches on these victims and who identified them as fingernail scratches?

They can be found in the inquest reports.

[Trevor Marriott]

They can be found in the inquest reports.

Not the ones I looked at !

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Fisherman]

Trevor Marriott: Of course we are not as knowledgeable as you...

"We"?

... but then again its a good job we are not, as god knows what a state the world would be in.

So if you had been more knowledgeable, the world would be in a state?

I see.

Maybe you should form a political party, and call yourself the numpties, the worrying thing is some would vote for you.

How do you know that? You have no idea about where I stand politically, and consequentially you can have no idea who would vote for me.

But you can do me a favour and tell me why discussions with you always end up in this kind of a smelly bog. My own suggestion is that it is because you resort to insults and mockery when you have been outmanouvred in a discussion, but maybe there is another reason altogether.

Do tell me, Trevor.

[Fisherman]

Not the ones I looked at !

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

As uninformed as ever, and as willing to flaunt it as ever...

[John G]

Not the ones I looked at !

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Chapman Inquest:

Dr Phillips:

"On the last occasion, just before I left the court, I mentioned to you that there were reasons why I thought the perpetrator of the act upon the woman's throat had caught hold of her chin. These reasons were that just below the lobe of the war were three scratches, and there was also a bruise on the right cheek."

Source: Marriott, T, Jack the Ripper: The 21st Century Investigation, 2005, p57.

Alice McKenzie Inquest:

Dr Phillips and Dr Bond noted the following wounds:

..." Seven or eight scratches, beginning at the navel, and pointing towards the genitalia (this could suggest the killer clawed at her clothing in an attempt to expose her body before mutilating it.")

Source: ibid, p182

Eddowes Inquest:

Dr Brown:

"There were abrasions under the left ear."

Source: ibid, p141

[jerryd]

Alice McKenzie Inquest as reported by the Times.


Dr. Phillips

There were five marks on the abdomen, and, with the exception of one, were on the left side of the abdomen. The largest one was the lowest, and the smallest one was the exceptional one mentioned, and was typical of a finger-nail mark. They were coloured, and in my opinion were caused by the finger-nails and thumb nail of a hand. I have on a subsequent examination assured myself of the correctness of this conclusion.

[John G]

Correction: post 328 Line 6 should, of course, read "just below the lobe of the ear". Predictive text issue!