Was Mitre Square being watched that Double Event night?

[Michael W Richards]

Indeed. Similarly, how many people said "I think I know who [the Ripper] is" as Catherine Eddowes is supposed to have done?

The numbers wouldn't negate the possibility one or more of them was correct Sam, and I don't see a plethora of street women lining up at the station to see if they can claim any reward. Kate apparently did claim just that and the intention of claiming the reward, I would imagine if the person or persons she had in mind caught wind of this little betrayal, and were the bad dudes she imagined, they might want her shut up. Maybe even mark her face for others to see what happens when you stick your nose into other peoples business.

[Joshua Rogan]

Indeed. Similarly, how many people said "I think I know who [the Ripper] is" as Catherine Eddowes is supposed to have done?

Exactly. Subsequent events can give some remarks a significance they may not otherwise merit.

[Sam Flynn]

But how many other men in London made similar statements, yet their words were never recorded or remembered because the Ripper never came anywhere near them?

Indeed. Similarly, how many people said "I think I know who [the Ripper] is" as Catherine Eddowes is supposed to have done?

[Joshua Rogan]

Possibly nobody at all. What Morris is said to have said has more than a whiff of post-hoc bragging about it.

Possibly, though I find it quite plausible that Morris might have made such a remark. But how many other men in London made similar statements, yet their words were never recorded or remembered because the Ripper never came anywhere near them?

[Sam Flynn]

I wonder who else Morris told about wanting to come face to face with the killer?

Possibly nobody at all. What Morris is said to have said has more than a whiff of post-hoc bragging about it.

[Busy Beaver]

I wonder who else Morris told about wanting to come face to face with the killer - to do him? Just coincidence or a bit more?

[Michael W Richards]

If I may, you are saying that its tardy appearance at Goulston Street argues a deliberate placement (not merely being discarded) therefore giving the graffito currency?

OK, I will say this is the best logic I have heard arguing that the graffito isn't incidental. In giving credence to the missive it in turn explains the apron's tardy appearance. Why not?

I have always been an advocate of the belief that PC Long didn't make his 2:20 round and at 2:55 he needed to claim the apron wasn't earlier there. By claiming the graffito was also new served two purposes: it helped make his observation skills sound keen, and it served as the perfect distraction, with no one thinking to question the apron's (very bizarre) tardy appearance.

I think the Ockham's razor here is that: PC Long got away with being incompetent, but accepting the graffito makes the apron's tardy appearance reasonable.

If PC Long is telling the truth of it, then your argument is sound, there really is no other reason to go back to Goulston except to leave a message.

This does then necessitate that this guy walked back (or remained) close to the murder site with the bloody apron on his person for at least 20 minutes after Kate is found; your Ripper has big ones.


P.S. How come the Casebook Police Official's page doesn't include a short bio of PC Alfred Long? I would think his discovery (and all that goes with it) would warrant an inclusion.

PC Long said "It was not there" at his earlier pass, that's not ambiguous. If he was lying to cover his lack of attention, or his not actually making that pass, he is doing so with emphasis. I think he told the truth. In which case, as you note, there is good reason to presume it was left intentionally there. To marry with the GSG? Or did he also add the GSG?

[Michael W Richards]

"It was only on that night that he remarked to some policeman that he wished the "butcher" would come round Mitre square, and he would give him a doing; yet the "butcher" had come, and he was perfectly ignorant of it."

Are you suggesting that the killer was that very policeman?

Edit: From the Times "His door had not been on the jar more than two or three minutes before Watkins called him"

No. Im not. Im suggesting the irony of him saying that and then having the Ripper kill someone almost right under his nose without his being aware of it.

[APerno]

That apron section....there were Police at both scenes that night, Mitre and Goulston, it always troubles me. The ambiguity in the recollections of the time it was placed there, the specific way the message was written, the spelling of the word Jews for example. The inference of the location suggesting a return from the city to the East End.

That apron section could have been discreetly disposed of very easily by whomever took it. No-one need ever find it. And by the evidence, it could have been placed there within about an hour of the murder, not just within minutes as the killer fled...which again raises the question of whether this is strategically placed evidence.

If I may, you are saying that its tardy appearance at Goulston Street argues a deliberate placement (not merely being discarded) therefore giving the graffito currency?

OK, I will say this is the best logic I have heard arguing that the graffito isn't incidental. In giving credence to the missive it in turn explains the apron's tardy appearance. Why not?

I have always been an advocate of the belief that PC Long didn't make his 2:20 round and at 2:55 he needed to claim the apron wasn't earlier there. By claiming the graffito was also new served two purposes: it helped make his observation skills sound keen, and it served as the perfect distraction, with no one thinking to question the apron's (very bizarre) tardy appearance.

I think the Ockham's razor here is that: PC Long got away with being incompetent, but accepting the graffito makes the apron's tardy appearance reasonable.

If PC Long is telling the truth of it, then your argument is sound, there really is no other reason to go back to Goulston except to leave a message.

This does then necessitate that this guy walked back (or remained) close to the murder site with the bloody apron on his person for at least 20 minutes after Kate is found; your Ripper has big ones.


P.S. How come the Casebook Police Official's page doesn't include a short bio of PC Alfred Long? I would think his discovery (and all that goes with it) would warrant an inclusion.

[Joshua Rogan]

I assuming you mean George Morris, the nightwatchman at the tea company based in Mitre Square? His door was open apparently and he heard nothing. Funny that earlier that week he suggested that if the Ripper were to show up where he was he'd give it to him. He challenged the killer.

"It was only on that night that he remarked to some policeman that he wished the "butcher" would come round Mitre square, and he would give him a doing; yet the "butcher" had come, and he was perfectly ignorant of it."

Are you suggesting that the killer was that very policeman?

Edit: From the Times "His door had not been on the jar more than two or three minutes before Watkins called him"

[Sam Flynn]

I assuming you mean George Morris, the nightwatchman at the tea company based in Mitre Square? His door was open apparently and he heard nothing.

Well, he was inside the building, busy sweeping up and stuff.

Funny that earlier that week he suggested that if the Ripper were to show up where he was he'd give it to him.

I might be doing him a disservice, but I always imagine Morris as something like Corporal Jones from Dad's Army

[Michael W Richards]

I assuming you mean George Morris, the nightwatchman at the tea company based in Mitre Square? His door was open apparently and he heard nothing. Funny that earlier that week he suggested that if the Ripper were to show up where he was he'd give it to him. He challenged the killer.

[Busy Beaver]

Any interesting information thrown up about George Morrison? Or is he up there with Lech- going about his business as usual when suddenly S**t happens?

[Michael W Richards]

That apron section....there were Police at both scenes that night, Mitre and Goulston, it always troubles me. The ambiguity in the recollections of the time it was placed there, the specific way the message was written, the spelling of the word Jews for example. The inference of the location suggesting a return from the city to the East End.

That apron section could have been discreetly disposed of very easily by whomever took it. No-one need ever find it. And by the evidence, it could have been placed there within about an hour of the murder, not just within minutes as the killer fled...which again raises the question of whether this is strategically placed evidence.

[JeffHamm]

Did the Police officer who arrested Kate notice what she was wearing when he took her away? Also the officer at the station must have got a look at her clothing as well. I doubt very much she had a stash of clothing hidden somewhere to change in to and that's were she went instead of going home. I don't think she had a pre-planned meeting, but just perhaps she had got it in her head, that the man she thought was the Ripper hung out in that location, or near too it and she went there.

Yes, the police at the station indicated they noticed she was wearing the apron. There's some reference to this in the police files (Evans and Skinner's book). More than one of the police at the station indicate they believed it was her as I recall (haven't got the book in front of me to pull up the exact details, sorry).

- Jeff