Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Some Kate things...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • perrymason
    Guest replied
    I mentioned this on another post but I believe if you review the data that is available concerning this apron section youll find that the piece taken had one of the 2 strings that was used to fasten the apron round her waist on it. It wasnt the key to matching the pieces,...the recently repaired portion was cut through during this theft and they were able to match the pieces by those repairs, was.

    I think if the killer had the means to fasten the apron with him on the section he took, the remaining portion may not have been "on" her precisely when the police find her.

    Sad that in Kates case we have a few examples of "partial" clues that are figuratively and physically matched with what was left with her body....if indeed From Hell and the contents were representing this murder, hoax or not.

    Best regards all.
    Last edited by Guest; 12-26-2009, 06:13 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • DVV
    replied
    Originally posted by Suzi View Post
    DVV- Kate may have been down to Kent 'opping along with most of the East End off for a 'holiday' to earn a little bit of coin- Bloody hard work it was though and the poor crop in 1888 made Kate and Kelly head for home early- walking back to- The East End.
    Hi Suzi,

    thanks for the correction. They cut their trip short, as it seems.

    Amitiés,
    David

    Leave a comment:


  • Suzi
    replied
    Here's a rather famous picture showing the size of the apron in question
    Click image for larger version

Name:	ds.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	25.0 KB
ID:	658249

    Taking the possible average size of this woman- 5' - 5' 2" ish that apron should work out about 3'6" long and probably the same across, once it's wrapped around.

    The apron- as used from the C17th was a coverall and hid 'pockets'- small bags hung by strings- hence Kates 'pockets' containing precious (to her) things .
    Last edited by Suzi; 12-26-2009, 05:48 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Suzi
    replied
    Originally posted by Jon Guy View Post
    Hi Maggyann

    The remaining apron was attached to Eddowes by the draw string.

    The apron was probably not mentioned as it had been removed as evidence (to show that the pieces match)
    Exactly Jon

    Leave a comment:


  • Suzi
    replied
    Originally posted by Maggyann View Post
    The piece of apron is in the list of 'scattered about her person' not the list of her clothing.
    Not???-- it's in the Golden Lane list!

    Leave a comment:


  • Suzi
    replied
    OK- on the list of Kate's possessions taken at Golden Lane Mortuary amongst the sad list we have '1 piece of old White Apron'- which at first glance was 'so dirty it seemed black' according to Walter Dew- which OK may be a little dubious- [no pun intended!] BUT to be honest seems to have been worn by Kate for some time.

    OK it doesn't directly say that the pinny was wrapped around what remained of Kate's abdomen- but to be honest would that be likely!
    The list mentions 'A piece of red gauze silk....found on neck' very likely!
    The 'black straw trimmed with black and green velvet and black beads bonnet' wasn't found on Kate's head either -but there is no real doubt that that belonged to her!

    Leave a comment:


  • Maggyann
    replied
    The piece of apron is in the list of 'scattered about her person' not the list of her clothing.

    Leave a comment:


  • Jon Guy
    replied
    Hi Maggyann

    The remaining apron was attached to Eddowes by the draw string.

    The apron was probably not mentioned as it had been removed as evidence (to show that the pieces match)

    Leave a comment:


  • Maggyann
    replied
    The point as I see it is that she was NOT wearing the apron. In the list of her 'effects' it is listed as a piece of old white apron.

    In the description of the body when found there is no mention of any apron whole or otherwise. Black cloth jacket, brown linsey bodice, chintz skirt, black straw bonnet, silk scarf, mens boots, grey petticoat etc no mention of any apron.

    The piece of apron is listed with the tin box of sugar, empty tin matchbox etc.

    Just because a piece of apron is found by her body does not mean it was her apron. The fact that it fitted with the other piece of apron found in GS does not mean it was her apron.

    There were two pieces of an apron found that night that is 'fact' those pieces as a whole belonging to Kate is not a 'fact'.

    Leave a comment:


  • Suzi
    replied
    Hi Gareth

    EXACTLY!!

    The apron piece found in G S matched 100% with the remaining piece on Kate's body- There isn't a prob here at all- apart from how the hell it ended up in GS! The game is afoot....so they say

    The rumour that Kate came home because she knew something and the ''Dont Fear for me' comment are pure conjecture from the press at the time who were always up for a good line at this time!

    Yes it is Goulston Street!!!

    DVV- Kate may have been down to Kent 'opping along with most of the East End off for a 'holiday' to earn a little bit of coin- Bloody hard work it was though and the poor crop in 1888 made Kate and Kelly head for home early- walking back to- The East End.
    Last edited by Suzi; 12-26-2009, 05:02 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Sam Flynn
    replied
    Originally posted by Maggyann View Post
    The two pieces fitted but that does not mean it belonged to Kate does it?
    The piece found in Goulston Street exactly fitted the remainder of the apron attached to Kate's body when found.

    In short, Maggyann, it was Kate's.
    but she 'knew' something? She said so.
    No, a witness speaking to a niche paper said that she'd said so. That's not quite the same.

    Leave a comment:


  • DVV
    replied
    No Magyann,

    it has been said that she said she knew something...
    That makes a difference!

    Amitiés,
    David

    Leave a comment:


  • Maggyann
    replied
    The piece found at Goulstone St matched exactly the mended (patched/stitched) part of her apron.
    The two pieces fitted but that does not mean it belonged to Kate does it?

    I've personally never lost my shoes in a fight
    Nobody lost their shoes just some buttons

    she knew less than any other Londoner about the murders.
    but she 'knew' something? She said so.

    Leave a comment:


  • Sox
    replied
    a) how sure can we be that the apron piece found by Kate was actually hers? Obviously she was not 'wearing' it because one piece with tie was missing so surely it is just as viable a suggestion that the piece left beside her belonged to or was at least brought to the scene by the attacker.

    The apron had been mended. The piece found at Goulstone St matched exactly the mended (patched/stitched) part of her apron.

    Leave a comment:


  • DVV
    replied
    Hi Magyann,

    In a deconstruction mood?

    a) and b): ithe shoes and apron (not a leather one) more likely belonged to Kate, don't you think? I've personally never lost my shoes in a fight!

    c) and d): there are doubts about Watkins these days, but dismissing both Watkins and Lawende is too much for me...

    e) the story about Kate and the Ripper is most probably an embellishment. Kate was just back from the country side, she knew less than any other Londoner about the murders.

    Amitiés Magyann,
    David
    Last edited by DVV; 12-26-2009, 03:59 PM. Reason: fatigue intense

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X