Lack of blood on No.29 Hanbury Street doors

[lynn cates]

punctus contra punctum

Hello Jon.

"Well Lynn, seeing as how none of these women were found with the price of a liason on their person, as might be expected if he had won their confidence by paying them up front."

Quite right. My interpretation of this phenomenon in the last 3 cases, however, entails a quite different interpretation.

"In that case then not necessarily a delusional afterthought to simply rummage to retrieve his fee?"

No. But I have something VASTLY different in mind.

"Though this hardly counts as robbery, but still demonstrates a cool confidence, especially if he heard the Davis family stirring upstairs."

Possibly. Or else total dissociation.

"Wasting precious time mugging your victim before you murder her when you have no idea how many seconds you have is to say the least counterproductive."

Yes. One would have to be mad to do so. (heh-heh)

Cheers.
LC

[RedBundy13]

Mugged or not

But arent most muggings generally noisey anyways? Usually in my thought the person with the knife or gun raises their voice to intimidate the victim. Again generally, not always, Im sure there are cases where the perp came up behind the victim and wispered to them, or maybe the mugger was just hushed anyways? But my opinion is either, if she was mugged, it would have to have been before Cadoche was making his trips and in that case she would have already been dead before he made his first trip to the privy. Or if she was killed when Cadoche says he heard something then she wasnt mugged. Just my guess

[Wickerman]

Well Lynn, seeing as how none of these women were found with the price of a liason on their person, as might be expected if he had won their confidence by paying them up front.
In that case then not necessarily a delusional afterthought to simply rumage to retrieve his fee? Though this hardly counts as robbery, but still demonstrates a cool confidence, especially if he heard the Davis family stiring upstairs.

Wasting precious time mugging your victim before you murder her when you have no idea how many seconds you have is to say the least counterproductive.

Regards, Jon S.

[lynn cates]

delusion

Hello Jon. Well, if the lad that I have in mind killed Annie, it would have been a delusional afterthought.

Cheers.
LC

[Tom_Wescott]

How would you convince Annie to willingly empty her pockets without her taking that opportunity to scream her head off?

That's remarkably naive. You DO understand this is how mugging has been such a successful source of income for millenia, right? Most people who are held at the end of a weapon and told to give up their cash, or do whatever, do what they're told in hope the bad guy will get what he wants and leave. The prospect of injury is all to real if you scream under those circumstances. Sure, the guy might be seen, might even get caught, but that would be little solace to Annie as she lay there bleeding from the hole in her gut.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Wickerman]

Which then must beg the question, what could an aging common prostitute like Annie have in her pockets worthy of risking capture by asking her to empty them?
Less risky to slice them open once she has been silenced, nevertheless robbery is hardly the motive.

Regards, Jon S.

[lynn cates]

moot?

Hello Jon. Don't know. But it may be a moot point given the sliced pocket.

Cheers.
LC

[Wickerman]

How would you convince Annie to willingly empty her pockets without her taking that opportunity to scream her head off?
They're in someone's backyard, they are surrounded by people, all she has to do is make a disturbance...

Regards, Jon S.

[lynn cates]

redundant?

Hello Jon. Well, if Annie did--and she might have--would not the cutting be redundant? Perhaps there is another reason?

Cheers.
LC

[Jon Guy]

Sounds sensible, Lynn, although it could add credence to the pertinent theory that she was made to empty her own pockets?

[lynn cates]

cut pocket

Hello Jon. Good point. If I recall properly, Annie's pocket was cut through before it was ransacked.

May imply that she was strangled, then her rings wrenched away and her pocket ransacked. THEN her throat cut and mutilations perpetrated.

Cheers.
LC

[Jon Guy]

The stain discovered by Laura Sickings (Siekings) at No. 25 was also discussed at the Inquest:

[Coroner] Was it (blood) on any of the other yards?
[Inspector Chandler] No
[Coroner] Were there no other marks?
[Inspector Chandler] There were marks discovered on the wall of No. 25. They were noticed on Tuesday afternoon. They have been seen by Dr. Phillips.


[Coroner] You were shown some staining on the wall of No. 25, Hanbury-street?
[Dr Phillips] Yes; that was yesterday morning. To the eye of a novice I have no doubt it looks like blood. I have not been able to trace any signs of it. I have not been able to finish my investigation. I am almost convinced I shall not find any blood.


Also, there does not appear to be any traces of blood on the portion of envelope, and other items of Chapman`s found near the body.

What does that imply?

That the Ripper didn`t place them there by design after the onslaught?
The items just fell from a pocket or purse as the Ripper was throwing her skirts up?
Her pockets were emptied at some point before he cut her throat?

[RedBundy13]

Tom

Yes! That was exactly it! Nice job on finding it!! I looked a little yesterday but couldn't come up with where I'd seen it. And your also right it was urine not mud that the blood was determined to be, which now that I think about it makes even less sense but what do I know I wasn't there and never got a chance to see it. The only thing I can say is that what in the heck was going on with that persons kidneys if it looked like blood he was pissing? Thanks again, nice research!

[Tom_Wescott]

Hi Red,

The 'marks' on the wall were determined to be urine, but I think these might have given rise to the rumor of the Ripper having left graffiti. Combined with the bloody newspaper, and the other rumor circulating the day of Chapman's murder (that the Ripper had killed another woman) foretell the events of Sept. 30th and I'm not convinced that's coincidence.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Wickerman]

Hi Red, this might be one of the news articles you read, there are several versions.

"A discovery, which may prove of importance, was made yesterday afternoon in connection with the recent murder in Whitechapel. A little girl happened to be walking in the back garden, or yard, of the house, 25 Hanbury street, the next house but one to the scene of the murder, when her attention was attracted to peculiar marks on the wall and on the garden path. She communicated her discovery to Detective Inspector Chandler, who had just called at the house to make a plan of the back premises of the three houses, for the use of the Coroner. The yard was then carefully examined, with the result that a bloody trail was found distinctly marked for a distance of five or six feet in the direction of the back door of the house. The appearances suggested that the murderer, after his crime, had passed through or over the dividing fence between Nos. 29 and 27, and thence into the garden of No. 25. On the wall of the last house was a curious mark, between a smear and a sprinkle, as if the murderer, alarmed by the blood soaked state of his coat, had taken it off, and knocked it against the wall. Abutting on the end of the yard of No. 25 are the works of Mr. Bailey, a packing case maker. In the yard of this establishment, on an out of the way corner, the police yesterday afternoon found some crumpled paper, stained, almost saturated, with blood. It is supposed that the murderer found the paper in the yard of No. 25, wiped his hands with it, and threw it over the wall into Mr. Bailey's premises. the house No. 25, like most of the dwellings in the street, is let out in tenements direct from the owner, who does not live on the premises, and has no direct representative therein. The back and front doors are always left either on the latch or wide open, the tenant of each room looking after the safety of his own apartment. The general appearance of the trail of blood and other indications seem to show that the murderer intended to make his way into the street through the house next door but one, being frightened by some noise or light in No. 29 from retreating by the way which he came. On reaching the yard of No. 25, he made for the back door, and then suddenly remembering his blood stained appearance, he must have stopped, and, catching sight of the pieces of paper lying about, he doubtless retraced his steps to the end of the yard, and then performed his gruesome toilet. He might have had some thought of retreating by way of Bailey's premises, but the height of the walls made such a course somewhat perilous, and he finally made his way into Hanbury street through the house. He could have met with no difficulty, as both back and front doors were open, and he could wait in the passage if any one was passing down the street. These matters suggest that the murderer was alive to the risk of detection, and acted with so much circumspection as to dispel the idea that he was a reckless maniac."
Evening Standard, 12 Sept. 1888.

Regards, Jon S.