The Apron

[Malcolm X]

Hello (again) Richard.

"I must stick to my initial opinion that the killer hurried away from the scene frantically attempting to rid himself of his vile work"

Alright. This helps me even more, as the more frantic, the sooner done and hence the closer the drop of the apron piece.

Cheers.
LC

no it's exactly the opposite, in my humble opinion ....... he's cool and calm, he walks into Ghoulston st and thinks ``right, where shall i leave this apron and the graffiti``, the police have missed him by about a minute.

[Tom_Wescott]

JTR killed STRIDE, EDDOWES AND KELLY.

But he was able to provide an alibi for Nichols and Chapman?

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[lynn cates]

assassin

Hello Malcolm. Cool and calm after his recent episode? Are you suggesting a sociopathic hired assassin?

Well, at least we agree about leaving Polly and Annie behind.

Cheers.
LC

[Carol]

Carol,

If you do not wish to enter into an argument then why use such imflammatory words and sentences?

Unlike the genteel Chris T, I do not stand down from such provocation.

Believe me, your theory holds no worry for me. Its groundless, improbable and ill conceived.

What is it with you newbies that you think your new theory wasn't touted 10 years ago.

Monty

Monty,

I think you're sweet, too.

Carol

[Malcolm X]

Hello Malcolm. Cool and calm after his recent episode? Are you suggesting a sociopathic hired assassin?

Well, at least we agree about leaving Polly and Annie behind.

Cheers.
LC

no i'm saying he was calm because the graffiti was small and neatly written, written slowly and carefully....also, would Eddowes have gone with JTR if he was still in a frustrated/ angry mood, because lets face it, Stride was killed much earlier on.

[lynn cates]

compare and contrast

Hello Malcolm. That was Sir Charles' opinion as well.

Wynne Baxter thought both Kate and Liz very different from Polly and Annie. He also noted the wide disparity between Kate and Liz themselves.

Cheers.
LC

[Carol]

Carol,

I will readily accept the theory was arrived at by you independently, but regardless it was quite demolished by Jane Coram writing "A Cat's Lick or Two" for Casebook Examiner Number 7 (April 2011).

Don.

Hello Don,

Thanks for your post. I would really like to read Jane Coram's 'A Cat's Lick or Two'. How do I get to it?

Contrary to some posters' opinions of me I only want the truth and any theory I arrive at is, after all, only a theory and liable to change or to being discarded according to any new 'evidence'.

Carol

[Carol]

Thanks to you, Monty, I've come up with something in the course of researching aprons. You point out that the policemen all describe Eddowes as wearing an apron. So I wondered if they might have mistaken one of her pockets for an apron and went and looked up pockets to see how big they would have been etc. Very interesting. No, it's unlikely that they would have mistaken a pocket for an apron. Chances are it wouldn't have been big enough. The way pockets worked was this: a woman had a pair of pockets on a string that would be tied around her waist and accessible to her via slits in the side of her skirt. Eddowes was wearing a bunch of skirts but it's probable that she wore her pockets over the under-skirts so that she reached them via the top skirt. These free-standing pockets were universally worn by women for centuries and the fashion only seemed to die out at the end of the 19th Century when manufacturers started to sew pockets into female garments. Men always had pockets sewn into the seams of their jackets and trousers.

Now what does this mean? Well, for a start, if the Ripper is looking for something to carry away his souvenirs, he didn't have to go to the trouble of pulling down Eddowes's skirts to cut at the apron--which she would have worn on top of her skirt by all police accounts, and so would be under all the other skirts that had been pulled up in the course of the attack. He'd still have to pull skirts around to get at the pocket-string, but it would have been much easier and way more efficient just to cut the string, shove his tidbits in the pocket and run. He's got a ready-made portmaneau. He can toss out the stuff she's carrying in there or he can keep it for kicks. It's just as throw-away-able as the piece of apron, so if he wishes to use it to implicate the Jews he can. And he would know to look for a pair of pockets. Every adult woman had them and used them to keep their stuff in and they always came in pairs.

So now I'm even less of a believer in the 'he cut it off to carry away her internal organs' theory.

Hello Chava,
Very interesting post of yours. More food for thought!
Carol

[Malcolm X]

Hello Malcolm. That was Sir Charles' opinion as well.

Wynne Baxter thought both Kate and Liz very different from Polly and Annie. He also noted the wide disparity between Kate and Liz themselves.

Cheers.
LC

yes i actually mentioned that 5 mins ago, but deleted my words

these last 3 murders do indeed look different from the first 2 or even 3, they also look different from all the other unsolved murders, simply because they are linked by anti-semetism, like a spiders web..... none of the other murders have any mention of anything! this is most odd, but unfortunately this might mean nothing, just the killer getting bolder and looking to cause rioting on the streets etc.

.

[Fleetwood Mac]

Hello Fleetwood Mac

If I was a police officer on patrol and I came across an article of clothing that had blood on it, I would tend to think that the person who had been wearing that piece of clothing had been involved in an assault or some type of accident that took place at that location. I would therefore investigate the vicinity in which I found the bloodied clothing. I should think this would have been pro forma conduct for a beat copper of the day.

Best regards

Chris George

Hi Chris,

Yes, in this day and age we surely would.

If I were a police officer in 1888, however, in an age of people wandering around with blood on their hands etc, I'm not convinced the apron would be an event out of the ordinary and one warranting an assumption of murder.

[Monty]

Monty,

I think you're sweet, too.

Carol

Carol,

Ha, excellent retort......I like you.

You'll do for me, me duck.

Monty

[Carol]

Carol,

Ha, excellent retort......I like you.

You'll do for me, me duck.

Monty

Monty,

Well, thank goodness for that! I was really getting worried about my pulling power.

Carol

[lynn cates]

anti-Semitism

Hello Malcolm. I can see anti-Semitism in Liz's case--possibly even Eddowes'. But MJK?

Cheers.
LC

[harry]

Besides the hands,there would probably be quite a deal of bloodied coat sleeve to clean,and in that case it would take more than one swipe of the apron.So I have no difficulty in believing it could have taken untill Goulston street before the killer was satisfied that outward traces of blood had been removed.

[lynn cates]

bloodied clothing

Hello Harry. Is it possible to remove blood from clothing using a piece of cloth?

Cheers.
LC