1 red leather cigarette case with white metal fittings

[KatBradshaw]

It is possible that he found something to transport the kidney in in the area and so decided to dump the soiled cloth. I have to say I have always wondered why, if the graffito was genuine why was there no sign of blood on the wall. Surely Jack would have still been covered in the stuff even if it was only transfer from the apron.

[Observer]

Hi Caz

Hi Observer,

It was more like half Kate’s apron that ended up beneath the message and a substantial piece of material, not just a corner. Like others I cannot see why the killer would have needed or wanted a foul-smelling, 100% incriminating article about his person as far as Goulston St if he had merely set out to transfer the poo from his hands to the cloth. The poo was still with him all the way.

Yes, I realised that it was a substantial piece of apron, the only other reason for it's removal other than as a substitute for a towel has already been mooted here in the past, namely as a means of transporting the organs that the killer removed from Kate Eddowes. This has it's problems of course, for what did the killer do with the organs once he discarded the apron section?

all the best

Observer

[Suzi]

Hi Caz-
Perhaps that 'kidney' should have been delivered to No 21 Millers Ct!!!! A seriously grateful Dids would have woomped down 'The Evidence'!!! Hmmm
Good point- drop the pinny in Goulston St and then bugger off in the opposite direction-PRONTO!

(Off thread- and as an aside- How WONDERFUL is the thing about Aberystwyth showing Life of Brian for the first time!!!!!!!!! the PC mayor played Judith Iscariot ( Brian's girlfriend) heeeeeeeeeeeeeeee WHAT an image 'eh!!!!)

He's not The Messiah he's a VERY naughty boy!!!

He heeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeee

Suz x

[caz]

I've just had a thought. (Don't groan at the back there.) Everyone looks at this from the point of view of the apron piece being found and subsequently matched to the piece left on Kate. But maybe the killer was looking at it the other way round, fully expecting the cops at the murder scene to start the ball rolling by saying: "Look chaps, he has taken half her pinny. Find that and we will find the killer!"

If he assumed the cops would be actively searching for the missing half when he dropped it, and buzzing around it like flies upon finding it, it would make so much more sense of the false trail theory than if he was merely hoping that someone might come across it by accident and then decide to investigate, and keeping his fingers crossed that it wouldn't be missed, ignored or swept away as rubbish.

Hi Fisherman,

I suspect that nailing the apron to the door would rather effectively scupper any plan to nail the murder on someone behind it.

And the kidney, at a pinch, could be passed off as a pig's kidney for his supper, or a treat for his cat. I doubt he took it to wipe his hands on though. I would imagine it was important enough to him to risk taking it all the way home too.

Love,

Caz
X

[Fisherman]

How about that kidney...? Or, perhaps most effective, how about nailing the apron to the door with his knife - and attending that linquistic course he obviously missed if he needed the GSG to be understandable.

The best,

Fisherman

[caz]

If this was his intention then it certainly worked, it didn't take the police long to link the cut off portion of apron with the apron as worn by Kate Eddowes. However the more I think about the scenario i.e. the killer purposely cut off a corner of Kate Eddowes apron in order to justify the message, the less likely I favour it. Sam and Bailey are probably right in stating that the killer cut the apron just prior to fleeing the scene, his sole intention being to wipe his hands they being soiled with faeces.

Hi Observer,

It was more like half Kate’s apron that ended up beneath the message and a substantial piece of material, not just a corner. Like others I cannot see why the killer would have needed or wanted a foul-smelling, 100% incriminating article about his person as far as Goulston St if he had merely set out to transfer the poo from his hands to the cloth. The poo was still with him all the way.

Imagine his horror when he learned just how easily the cops had picked up the bloody rag and associated it with some violent crime having been committed, and had soon matched it exactly to the piece of apron left on his victim. He would surely have sighed with relief but cursed himself for stupidly carrying it for so long after fleeing the scene - unless of course the intention was to take something that could only have come from the murder scene so he could lay a false trail.

Actually, I can think of very few other items he could have chosen to take that would have done a better job, if that was the purpose - or indeed a more thorough job of hanging him had he been stopped and searched before reaching Goulston. One of Kate's boots, for example, might have done the trick. But it could have proved tougher to remove and a bit too obvious for a false trail, and more instantly incriminating to boot (ha ha!). Anything else?

Love,

Caz
X

[Sam Flynn]

Hi Rain,

Thanks, Observer, one corner wet with blood shows that he probably only held the cloth and did not wipe his hands with it.

A wet corner does not mean that the rest of the apron fragment wasn't used for hand-wiping. In fact, the apron fragment was described at the Inquest as looking "as if a bloody hand or knife had been wiped on it" (Dr Brown's testimony). It appears, therefore, that it's likely that the apron fragment had been used for wiping (either hand, knife or both) and also had a bloody corner.

This quite possibly came about due to its resting in one of the puddles of blood near Eddowes' head, after being hoisted out of the way to give the killer access to her abdomen. The corner would thus have absorbed a quantity of blood whilst the killer was performing his abdominal mutilations.

[rain]

Hi Rain

If you're refering to the piece found in Goulston Street PC Long satated that one corner of the apron was wet with blood.


all the best

Observer

Thanks, Observer, one corner wet with blood shows that he probably only held the cloth and did not wipe his hands with it.

You are so kind to answer my question.

[Observer]

Hi Rain

If you're refering to the piece found in Goulston Street PC Long satated that one corner of the apron was wet with blood.

Hi Jon

I kew that other items belonging to Kate Eddowes lay beside her body but couldn't find reference to them, thanks for that. I'm pretty sure the killer looked through her pockets, as he did Chapman.

all the best

Observer

[rain]

Was the cut cloth in good condition or was it covered in blood?

[Sam Flynn]

Hi Jon,

I don`t think it was taken to clean his hands, we don`t know if he had faeces on his hands.

He almost certainly did, unless he'd used a paintbrush to smear the faecal matter over Eddowes' extruded entrails.

He could have cleaned his hands on her clothes in Mitre Sq in the same time it would have taken to cut a piece off

I doubt that he could - that stuff is really clingy, plus he was pushed for time. Had he lingered to wipe his hands in Mitre Square, chances are he'd have been caught brown-handed by PC Watkins.

[Jon Guy]

Hi Sam

Off topic perhaps but

How did the thimble come to rest just by Kate Eddowes finger? It's my contention that her killer placed it there, and to place it there he must have looked through Kate Eddowes belongings, as he did Chapmans. If he did root through Kate Eddowes pockets he would have been aware of the various pieces of fabric. Why then cut off a section of Kate's apron to take with him on his journey to Goulston Street when there was ample loose material which would have served the same purpose?
Observer

Hello Observer

The thimble was amongst other items found by the left side of her body, as described by Insp Collard at the inquest :

in my presence Sergeant Jones picked up from the foot way by the left side of the deceased three small black buttons, such as are generally used for boots, a small metal button, a common metal thimble, and a small penny mustard tin containing two pawn-tickets. They were handed to me.

He took half the apron so that it could be reconciled with the piece still on Eddowes. I don`t think it was taken to clean his hands, we don`t know if he had faeces on his hands. He could have cleaned his hands on her clothes in Mitre Sq in the same time it would have taken to cut a piece off, and to clean on the move is suspicious enough, without having the dead womans apron on his person too. But, just, as they say, my opinion !!

[rain]

A piece of cloth would be pretty crumpled and covered in blood if jtr used it to wipe his hands, and it would be a complete mess.

Was it mentioned in the police reports that it was covered in blood and all crumpled up?

[Bailey]

Hi Sam


Hi Bailey,certainly, time was paramount if the killer wished to remain a free man, but he took the time to go through Chapman's pockets, he also removed her two rings from her finger.
Observer

Hey Observer

Absolutely! But (aside from those who might be inclined to argue for different killers) we don't know what kind of time pressure was influencing his actions at each scene. He seems to have had a fairly small window in which to do a great deal of work on Eddowes, and perhaps either by virtue of hearing approaching footsteps, or even knowing the officer's beat, he found himself having to take off sooner than he'd hoped. Maybe he felt a little more secure at Hanbury St? Or possibly, his interest in the mutilations was obviously growing, so he decided to spend more of his limited time on that and was less concerned with laying out trinkets.

Alternatively, if his hands are as messy as we'd think, maybe getting them clean was first priority before starting to root around through her possessions for his little exhibition. However, in this instance I'd expect the piece of apron to be dropped after use and left behind, rather than taken away.

B.

[Observer]

Hi Rain

If he wanted to link the murder to the cloth, he wanted to make sure that there was no mistaking that the piece of cloth came from Kate. If he had taken a whole uncut cloth, and put it there, it could be overlooked as something dropped by someone merely walking by.

He thought it would be like the missing piece of the apron... or in his mind, maybe the missing peice of the puzzle.

If this was his intention then it certainly worked, it didn't take the police long to link the cut off portion of apron with the apron as worn by Kate Eddowes. However the more I think about the scenario i.e. the killer purposely cut off a corner of Kate Eddowes apron in order to justify the message, the less likely I favour it. Sam and Bailey are probably right in stating that the killer cut the apron just prior to fleeing the scene, his sole intention being to wipe his hands they being soiled with faeces.

all the best

Observer