The Apron

[Carol]

By the way, we'll never know this, but I wonder which other victims were 'on the rag' as it used to be called when they were killed. Maybe that was a trigger...?

Hi Chava,
Fascinating thought of yours!
Carol

[Carol]

Carol,

I'm afraid you have chosen the wrong Guy to label as a 'Bully'.

Christopher T George is nothing less than a Gentlemen. One of the first to welcome me to the boards over 10 years ago.

Whilst he may disagree he hardly ever engages in heated debate and always knows where that line is, being respectful to boot.

You are more than welcome to your views, and express them at will. Just don't start mouthing off at our locals, especially a local who has paid his dues, conducted his research and who is a published author.

Chris deserved better than that.

Monty

Monty,

I don't intend to get into an argument with you, although I have to say that I think all this is to do with Trevor Marriott's theory about the apron piece being used as a menstrual 'rag'. It was Chris's 'assumption' that I had been persuaded by him that really put my back up. I THOUGHT OF THIS MYSELF AND HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO KNOWLEDGE OF WHAT TREVOR HAS PREVIOUSLY WRITTEN ABOUT.

What is it about this theory that seems to make most of you 'locals' so worried? Is it because you can see the sense in it but don't want to admit it?

Carol

[Carol]

Hi Celesta! I'm fine. Just that sometimes work gets in the way of Ripperology...

Carol, I'm originally from the North of England although I lived in London for quite a while. Now I'm in Toronto. I do go back to the UK a lot. Two or three times a year.

As for the apron, I posted about this yesterday. Apart from the policeman in Bishopsgate there are no eye-witness sightings of Eddowes wearing the apron, and given what she had on at the time I'm pretty sure she wasn't. I think it's entirely likely the cop saw her calico pocket and assumed it was an apron, and then when shown the apron said 'that's it!'. The other victims were not wearing aprons when they were killed, and there would be no reason for Eddowes to do so either. Then as now you wore an apron when you were actually doing some kind of work that might spoil your clothing. Unless you were a skivvy or a cook and so wore an apron all day every day. Eddowes was out on the razzle. She didn't need an apron for that, and if she wanted to pick up customers, an apron would have given a disturbingly domestic impression...

Hello Chava,

Thanks for letting me know where you come from. The reason I asked was because I thought you were from 'across the pond' and I found it very interesting what you said about the folding of rags so that they would soak up as much blood as possible. I wondered if this special folding was an American 'thing' as I hadn't heard of this myself. So your mother was (is) from northern England I presume. I'm from the deep south (Kent). Do you think this was a 'northern' way of folding? I know these thoughts of mine seem rather banal but I'd love to know what you think. It sounds like commonsense to me after all.

I think your last paragraph is spot-on!

Carol

[Carol]

The problem with the explanation that the Ripper saw the graffiti earlier on in the day and returned with the apron later to deliberately leave it underneath is that it implies that the location of the Eddowes murder was at least roughly predetermined in his head.
In other words he saw the graffiti and later on almost fitted the murder to facilitate leaving the apron by Wentworth Model Dwellings after leaving the crime scene.
It also implies that he set out to commit two murders
This is altogether too fantastic an explanation for me.

Hi Lechmere,

I think it possible that JTR thought he might be able to use the writing. I also think he probably went out at the weekends looking for a victim but on most occasions the circumstances were not favourable to kill.

I don't think he had necessarily 'an apron' in mind. It could have been anything that the police would have definitely associated with the murder.

I don't think he set out to commit two murders either. If he lived in the Whitechapel area he could have seen the writing much earlier in the day.

Carol

[Carol]

I've been posting here for 13 years and am still the victim of these bullies, like Chris, so it's not a newbie thing. One word of advice if I may...DON'T LET YOUR RIPPEROLOGIST SUBSCRIPTION LAPSE. You think Chris is a rough one now, wait til you see him when the money isn't coming in. I will probably have to purchase three subscriptions to make up for this post.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

Hi Tom,

Thanks for your post. I was so angry yesterday that all the pent-up feelings of disappointment that have been adding up well and truly overflowed. When I first joined Casebook I really thought it was a forum where we could air our views without worrying about feeling like idiots for getting things 'wrong'. I'm sure there are many members who do not post for fear of this. They may have some really good ideas that could lead to a greater understanding of the case and JTR himself. Which is sad.

I'm staying, and will continue to come up with daft ideas!

Take care.

Carol

[Carol]

Sorry to offend you, Carol, or to be perceived to be "bullying" you. I think most who know me in this forum will attest that I don't do that. I am only interested in the truth, just as you are.

Best regards

Chris

Hi Chris,

I've calmed down now.......

Today is another day!

Take care.

Carol

[Tom_Wescott]

Chris George-poet, author, historian, cyberbully

Through this post I would like to say to all the bullies out there who think that we 'Johnny Come Latelies' are illogical and only present ideas that 'so-called experts' find beneath them to think about - don't think that you can make us leave Casebook just to youselves to pat each other on the back and congratulate each other on how wonderful you are.

I've been posting here for 13 years and am still the victim of these bullies, like Chris, so it's not a newbie thing. One word of advice if I may...DON'T LET YOUR RIPPEROLOGIST SUBSCRIPTION LAPSE. You think Chris is a rough one now, wait til you see him when the money isn't coming in. I will probably have to purchase three subscriptions to make up for this post.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Lechmere]

The problem with the explanation that the Ripper saw the graffiti earlier on in the day and returned with the apron later to deliberately leave it underneath is that it implies that the location of the Eddowes murder was at least roughly predetermined in his head.
In other words he saw the graffiti and later on almost fitted the murder to facilitate leaving the apron by Wentworth Model Dwellings after leaving the crime scene.
It also implies that he set out to commit two murders
This is altogether too fantastic an explanation for me.

[Celesta]

Hi Carol

It sounds as if you have been persuaded by Trevor's argument that the piece of rag had been cut by the victim to use as a menstrual rag. But neither Lawende nor anyone else remarked that the woman looked odd because she was only wearing part of an apron, so I think the theory is unlikely.

Chris

It just seems that a cut apron would be noteworthy, would seem unusual and stick in a witness' mind.

[Wickerman]

If the graffito was written by the killer, he could have been just expressing his frustrations on the night, i.e., as if to say, "I tried to mutilate the woman by the side of the Jewish socialist club but the Jews interrupted me. So you see what they made me do -- kill this second woman behind the synagogue!"

Chris

Absolutely Chris, but in fewer words, howzabout..

"..and then there were two, because of the Jew!"

That would cover it...


Regards, Jon S.

[Celesta]

Hi Celesta,
Me too!
Carol

It would certainly settle some issues, wouldn't it? Having a photo, I mean.

[lynn cates]

pussycat

Hello Chris.

"I think most who know me in this forum will attest that I don't do that. I am only interested in the truth, just as you are."

Well, that was always my perception of you. Never a cross (Lechmere?) word. (heh-heh) Always a pussycat.

Cheers.
LC

[Monty]

Hi Celesta! I'm fine. Just that sometimes work gets in the way of Ripperology...

Carol, I'm originally from the North of England although I lived in London for quite a while. Now I'm in Toronto. I do go back to the UK a lot. Two or three times a year.

As for the apron, I posted about this yesterday. Apart from the policeman in Bishopsgate there are no eye-witness sightings of Eddowes wearing the apron, and given what she had on at the time I'm pretty sure she wasn't. I think it's entirely likely the cop saw her calico pocket and assumed it was an apron, and then when shown the apron said 'that's it!'. The other victims were not wearing aprons when they were killed, and there would be no reason for Eddowes to do so either. Then as now you wore an apron when you were actually doing some kind of work that might spoil your clothing. Unless you were a skivvy or a cook and so wore an apron all day every day. Eddowes was out on the razzle. She didn't need an apron for that, and if she wanted to pick up customers, an apron would have given a disturbingly domestic impression...

Robinson, Hutt and Byfield stated she wore an apron. Eddowes was found with an apron attached to her by strings.

She carried all about her.

Monty

[Monty]

Carol,

I'm afraid you have chosen the wrong Guy to label as a 'Bully'.

Christopher T George is nothing less than a Gentlemen. One of the first to welcome me to the boards over 10 years ago.

Whilst he may disagree he hardly ever engages in heated debate and always knows where that line is, being respectful to boot.

You are more than welcome to your views, and express them at will. Just don't start mouthing off at our locals, especially a local who has paid his dues, conducted his research and who is a published author.

Chris deserved better than that.

Monty

[ChrisGeorge]

Hi Chris,

I haven't actually read anything that Trevor has written (except for his recent posts). My thoughts are my own - not all of us on Casebook are sheep and we can think independently, thank you. In fact, I take offence at what you have written.

If you had read my post correctly you would have seen that I suggested the other part of her apron was carried on her body together with all her other belongings.

Through this post I would like to say to all the bullies out there who think that we 'Johnny Come Latelies' are illogical and only present ideas that 'so-called experts' find beneath them to think about - don't think that you can make us leave Casebook just to youselves to pat each other on the back and congratulate each other on how wonderful you are.

Having got that off my chest, and no doubt getting banned into the bargain,
I remain, as always

Carol

Sorry to offend you, Carol, or to be perceived to be "bullying" you. I think most who know me in this forum will attest that I don't do that. I am only interested in the truth, just as you are.

Best regards

Chris