Would a Doctor or a Policeman participate in major crimes such as these?

[Elamarna]

The press reports are unsafe, and as can be seen often conflict with each other so I fully understand what you say but in this case, we have signed depositions and it is wrong to suggest that what is printed in a newspaper report was actually said in the way it has been reported. of reported correctly

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

The depositions in this case, lack.detail, the same is true in most cases where a deposition is available.
However, the signed depositions in this case, not withstanding a lack.of some detail clearly say that 1. Eddowes was wearing an apron at the police station.
2. That the two apron portions were the apron worn by EDDOWES.
3. When asked if it was the same apron, the reply was the witness would need to see the whole apron to be sure.
The witness was shown both pieces and agree it was the apron.
By definition the witness would not be able to do this if the apron was incomplete. Therefore it was complete, and of.

When comparing depositions to press reports, the thing to remember is a deposition was not in the 19th century a complete record of what was said, the court recorders often lacked the skills to take a full verbatim version. Fortunately that is not now the case you do not appear to take this on board

One of the skills of an historian and researcher is the ability to work with sources that may not always be consistent, Normally we look not only multiple reports, but for serperate sources( reporters)

The reports are only unsafe in your view, because you are not an historian.

[Elamarna]

and no one has produced any evidence to show that when matched they actually made up a full apron

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

There you and the majority disagree.
What is clear is no one has produced evidence to actually counter that they were.
Your image is NOT evidence, it's simply a something you have produced from your imagination, sadly for you such is not evidence

[Herlock Sholmes]

that proves nothing, other than the two pieces matched and there is no issue with that

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

But the fact that no one mentioned a missing piece does prove it though.
The fact that it was found outside of her clothing proves that she was wearing it (as opposed to how she carried the other items) which in turn proves that it was a whole apron.
The fact that three people testified that she was wearing an apron also testifies to the fact that she was wearing an apron; and not one with a big chunk missing either.
The fact of the sheer ludicrousness of the suggestion that she’d have cut up an apron whilst being in possession of 14 other items that she could have used further strengthens the point that she was wearing it.

Of all of the debates that you’ve been on the wrong side of Trevor this is the most obvious one. You really are flogging a dead horse.

[Joshua Rogan]

That doesn’t count when it works against Trevor though. You should know the rules by now Joshua.

I remain hopeful that, despite the large number of signed depositions indicating the contrary, Trevor is a rational human being and not a spambot

[Herlock Sholmes]

In that case you'll no doubt be delighted to accept Hutt's signed deposition where he says;

"I noticed she was wearing an apron. I believe the one produced was the one she was wearing when she left the station"

That doesn’t count when it works against Trevor though. You should know the rules by now Joshua.

[Joshua Rogan]

Its called using the best primary evidence :

In that case you'll no doubt be delighted to accept Hutt's signed deposition where he says;

"I noticed she was wearing an apron. I believe the one produced was the one she was wearing when she left the station"

[Trevor Marriott]

Exactly. It’s called cherrypicking Steve.

Its called using the best primary evidence

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Trevor Marriott]

Like the officially signed deposition where Brown said that he match up the two parts using the patch?

that proves nothing, other than the two pieces matched and there is no issue with that

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Herlock Sholmes]

It would help if you also stopped referring to newspaper reports when there are officially signed depositions which are far more accurate

Pc Long found the apron piece at 2.55am he would then do what he said in did in GS before taking it to Leman St police station a 7 minute walk so the GS piece could not have arrived at Leman St police station much before the body arrived at the mortuary at 3.15am

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Unlike some I have no problem admitting to an error. I should have said 2.55 instead of 2.20 of course. But it’s still nowhere near the ‘hours’ later that you tried to say. You made another non-point.

[Herlock Sholmes]

The Fisherman 'goodbye', 'just back to say, briefly' approach seems to be en vogue.

Its like bands/singers who go on a ‘final tour.’

[Herlock Sholmes]

Actually, the press often include more than the official papers, which do not by nature give full verbatim exchanges.
That you ignore such just shows how poor you methodology and actual understanding is.

Exactly. It’s called cherrypicking Steve.

[Herlock Sholmes]

But that matching doesn't show the size of the pieces or the patch and more importantly, they didn't make up a full apron

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Firstly, no one ever stated that it didn’t make up a full apron.

Secondly, as we don’t have the information perhaps you could tell us how you’ve managed to create a diagram which you claim proves your point?

[Herlock Sholmes]

Well Fiver,
We are dicussinng murders .They are decided in courts of law.Proven or unproven is a result.

That is the problem. Police didn't leave written reports,and some are lost,therefor their thoughts cannot be known

Who are these multiple witnessses you claim saw Eddowes wearing an apron? List them.

Brwns observations about the apron was at the Mortuary,not at the murder scene.What other witnesses claim to have seen him Match apron pieces.

I said apparantly took over.

Why do you need spoon feeding Harry.

PC Robinson who arrested Eddowes and walked with her to the station where she was booked in.
PC Hutt who was in charge of the prisoners in the station. He saw her several times in her cell during the course of the evening. Then he saw her being released and even spoke to her.
Wilkinson the lodging house door man.

All said that she was wearing an apron before her murder.

Now I’m expecting you to say “yes but they didn’t check the label on the apron so we can’t say it was the same one!”

She was wearing an apron. This is a fact.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Please stop using testimony from newspapers when there are officially signed depositions which are far more accurate

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Like the officially signed deposition where Brown said that he match up the two parts using the patch?

[Trevor Marriott]

You keep stating your opinion as if it was fact. So far, you have provide no evidence that the two pieces didn't make up a full apron.

Your opinion is unsafe.

and no one has produced any evidence to show that when matched they actually made up a full apron

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk