Annie's scarf

[Sam Flynn]

Taken over from the Goulston Street Graffito thread

Taken in isolation this will always be a debatable point but, knowing Chapman's scarf was missing from her body

This could be the shortest thread ever, but... was her scarf really missing?

[Jon Guy]

Taken over from the Goulston Street Graffito threadThis could be the shortest thread ever, but... was her scarf really missing?

Hi Sam

Timothy Donovan: I recognise the handkerchief produced as one which the deceased used to wear. She was wearing it three corner wise round her neck with a black woollen sort of scarf underneath. It was tied in front in a knot.
The Standard 14th Sept 1888

and a list of Annie's Clothes and Possessions showing no scarf:
Long black figured coat that came down to her knees.
Black skirt
Brown bodice
Another bodice
2 petticoats
A large pocket worn under the skirt and tied about the waist with strings (empty when found)
Lace up boots
Red and white striped woolen stockings
Neckerchief, white with a wide red border (folded tri-corner and knotted at the front of her neck. she is wearing the scarf in this manner when she leaves Crossingham's)
Had three recently acquired brass rings on her middle finger (missing after the murder)
Scrap of muslin
One small tooth comb
One comb in a paper case
Scrap of envelope she had taken form the mantelpiece of the kitchen containing two pills. It bears the seal of the Sussex Regiment. It is postal stamped "London, 28,Aug., 1888" inscribed is a partial address consisting of the letter M, the number 2 as if the beginning of an address and an S.

[Sam Flynn]

Thanks, Jon

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't that list of possessions culled from various newspaper reports, primarily (but not entirely) from Inspector Chandler's inquest testimony as reported in more than one newspaper? As such, he was responding, in piecemeal fashion, to various questions raised at the inquest; he was never asked to recite a structured inventory, and neither did he. As such, the list can't be considered definitive, so we can't really be sure whether Chapman's scarf was missing or not.

[Joshua Rogan]

So her black scarf had apparently disappeared, good spot Jon! I suppose there's a possibility she pawned or sold it shortly before her death, but a remote one. It might shed some light on a puzzling newspaper report (I think from Davis), about thinking her killer was so appalled at nearly cutting her head off that he had tried to cover the wound with the kerchief. But if the kerchief had simply been pushed up as the scarf was removed from beneath it...?

I've always wondered how we would know if any items had been taken from the victims unless they were found elsewhere (like the apron piece) or left marks from being forcefully removed (like Annie's rings). Would the police have been able to obtain a complete list of personal effects from those who knew the victims? Would they, for instance, have asked John Kelly if Kate habitually wore no drawers or stays (as per list of clothing) or whether the killer might have made off with these (or any other item)?

Interesting to note in James Kent's evidence that he says "Deceased's clothes were disarranged, and her apron was thrown over them.", when, if the skirts were thrown up as with Kate, you might expect the apron to be under the skirts.
So perhaps the killer used it to wipe his hands in this case too?

[Jon Guy]

Thanks, Jon

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't that list of possessions culled from various newspaper reports, primarily (but not entirely) from Inspector Chandler's inquest testimony as reported in more than one newspaper? As such, he was responding, in piecemeal fashion, to various questions raised at the inquest; he was never asked to recite a structured inventory, and neither did he. As such, the list can't be considered definitive, so we can't really be sure whether Chapman's scarf was missing or not.

Oh no, don`t say that, Gareth
I`ve already written this chapter in me bok.

I took the possessions list off Casebook, as I`m at work at the moment.
I assumed the possessions list was from the police files in the Ultimate ?

[Jon Guy]

So her black scarf had apparently disappeared, good spot Jon!

Hang fire, JR !!
Sam Flynn is about to destroy a year`s work ;-)

[Joshua Rogan]

Hang fire, JR !!
Sam Flynn is about to destroy a year`s work ;-)

That is a bit disappointing...I may have missed it, but can't see any complete list in the Ultimate, just a few items being mentioned....so Sam may have a point.

[Jon Guy]

That is a bit disappointing...I may have missed it, but can't see any complete list in the Ultimate, just a few items being mentioned....so Sam may have a point.

But... it`s not mentioned as being around her neck, and it would have been noted if it was lying around the yard.

I think my chapter on the scarf is safe ....

[Sam Flynn]

According to Davis, who found the body, "Her throat was cut open in a fearful manner, so deep, in fact, that the murderer... tied a handkerchief round it so as to keep it on" (The Star, 8th Sept). According to Donovan, the scarf was worn under the neckerchief. So, unless the killer took off her neckerchief, removed her scarf, then re-tied the neckerchief, it's likely that the scarf was still in place.

[Wickerman]

I think in this context, "under" means below, as in 'lower down' on the neck.
It wouldn't make sense to tie a handkerchief over the top of a woollen scarf.

Besides, Dr Phillips is reputed to have said:
"The handkerchief produced was tied loosely round the deceased's neck. It did not seem to have been disturbed when the throat was cut, and I do not think it was placed round the neck after the murder was committed."
Morning Advertiser, 14 Sept. 1888.

[Sam Flynn]

I think in this context, "under" means below, as in 'lower down' on the neck.
It wouldn't make sense to tie a handkerchief over the top of a woollen scarf.

To secure it in place, perhaps? For extra warmth (she was ill, after all)? Besides, unless she had a giraffe's neck, it's hard to see how a neckerchief and scarf could not be one on top of the other.

[Jon Guy]

The woollen scarf is certainly conspicuous by it`s absence.

The other item around her neck, the neckerchief, certainly gets lots of mentions by witnesses and medical staff, but no mention of the scarf.
No mention of it in Inspector Chandlers run down of what Chapman was wearing.

Also, considering it`s position around the neck, did the killer have to remove it ?

[Sam Flynn]

Also, considering it`s position around the neck, did the killer have to remove it ?

He doesn't seem to have felt the need to remove her neckerchief.

[Jon Guy]

He doesn't seem to have felt the need to remove her neckerchief.

A neckerchief wouldn`t be the same volume as a woollen scarf.

[Sam Flynn]

A neckerchief wouldn`t be the same volume as a woollen scarf.

True, but a woollen scarf shouldn't have posed much of an obstacle for a very sharp knife.