Apron soaked in blood

[SirJohnFalstaff]

Hello there.

Watching one of many documentaries on JtR, I was surprised to see one talking about an apron (leather? can't remember) that was found in a water container type just a few feet from Chapman's body.

I can't find anything about this in the documents I read.

Was this a serious clue, or is it something that got distorted over time?

Thank you.

[Natasha]

Hello there.

Watching one of many documentaries on JtR, I was surprised to see one talking about an apron (leather? can't remember) that was found in a water container type just a few feet from Chapman's body.

I can't find anything about this in the documents I read.

Was this a serious clue, or is it something that got distorted over time?

Thank you.

Hi Sir John

I think reference about leather apron came from a report in the newspapers

[Fisherman]

There was a leather apron in the back yard of 29 Hanbury Street, but it belonged there and was accounted for as belonging to John Richardson. It had been washed and hung out to dry. So it was soaked in water, not in blood.

The one apron that WAS to some extent soaked in blood was the apron piece belonging to Eddowes, and found in Goulston Street. That piece of apron - not a leather one - had one corner of it that was "wet with blood".

The best,
Fisherman

[SirJohnFalstaff]

There was a leather apron in the back yard of 29 Hanbury Street, but it belonged there and was accounted for as belonging to John Richardson. It had been washed and hung out to dry. So it was soaked in water, not in blood.

The one apron that WAS to some extent soaked in blood was the apron piece belonging to Eddowes, and found in Goulston Street. That piece of apron - not a leather one - had one corner of it that was "wet with blood".

The best,
Fisherman

I'm talking about the apron on Hanbury Street.

A recent documentary, going back to the sites of the murder, even though most of them don't exist anymore, had a ripperologist talking about the wet apron, but hinting that it was the murderer's.

I'll look up the Richardson fellow.

Thank you.

[SirJohnFalstaff]

Hi Sir John

I think reference about leather apron came from a report in the newspapers

Yeah, I think it was the newspaper but also the rumors among prostitutes themselves about the abusive man.

But this was not what I was referring to.

So post above.

Cheers.

[SirJohnFalstaff]

There was a leather apron in the back yard of 29 Hanbury Street, but it belonged there and was accounted for as belonging to John Richardson. It had been washed and hung out to dry. So it was soaked in water, not in blood.

The one apron that WAS to some extent soaked in blood was the apron piece belonging to Eddowes, and found in Goulston Street. That piece of apron - not a leather one - had one corner of it that was "wet with blood".

The best,
Fisherman

You were right. It was Richardson's. And the apron was quickly dismissed as evidence. It's strange how they brought it back on the documentary.

Thanks Fisherman.