The Apron

[Fleetwood Mac]

Fleetwood,

I'm sure the Tom and Maria show, as irritating as it must be, is still funnier than a dead woman.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

I said entertaining, Tom, which stands alone from hilarity.

Certainly not irritating, by the way. A spot of human interaction between two people who seem well matched brightens up an otherwise macabre subject.

[Fleetwood Mac]

Good one Fleet Street............that gave me a chuckle....

Where does the uterus go? In the left pocket?

Greg

In his left sock.

Maybe Kate had a bag.

All of that cloth and sewing stuff, where did she put it?

Maybe she had a sewing bag?

Jack emptied the bag, popped in his spoils, and made off into the night like a laughing hyena.

[mariab]

Hello Maria. Well, there is a good deal to be said about monogamy--some day I shall figure out just what. (heh-heh)

Just don't book me for this philosophy. :-) (Or for the “Tom and Maria“ show.)

Regarding your proposal, I really don't understand it. Email me?

I'll email you Lynn, maybe after Halloween? Just arrived at the hills and hope to be riding the park all day for the next few days.

[GregBaron]

Funny...

Wasn't it one kidney?

Maybe under his hat.

The police wouldn't search there.

Good one Fleet Street............that gave me a chuckle....

Where does the uterus go? In the left pocket?



Greg

[Supe]

Tom,

I'm sure the Tom and Maria show, as irritating as it must be, is still funnier than a dead woman.

I wouldn't bet on that proposition if I were you.

Don.

[Fleetwood Mac]

it isn't important but it would be very interesting to know where he put the kidneys

Wasn't it one kidney?

Maybe under his hat.

The police wouldn't search there.

[Tom_Wescott]

Hi Lynn, thanks for that. And I completely understand your trepidation, as I also would hate to be the first poster to go off-topic on a Casebook thread. As for your theory, I didn't expect you to be so candid, as I know you're still working it up, but thanks.

Fleetwood,

I'm sure the Tom and Maria show, as irritating as it must be, is still funnier than a dead woman.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Malcolm X]

The upper part of the dress had been torn open Dr Brown.

I have a list of articles of clothing more or less stained with blood and cut Inspector Collard.

So, Jack is tearing and cutting at her clothes to make way for his objective.

The difference with the apron, of course, is that it could not be torn open from the front, as it was tied from the back (he couldn't simply pull the buttons and pop), so how does he gain access for his objective: he cuts the one item that is tied from the back.

Makes sense: the one item that was cut in two, was the one item that can't be ripped open from the front.

Edited to add: this idea would move away from the pre-planned knife wiping/organ carrying theory.

yes exactly....

i expect if JTR was planning a mutilation, that he had along with the chalk, rags in his pocket too, because you also have to consider, how did he carry the other organs from the other victims too?....so he maybe, simply carried the organs as before in his pockets, who knows!

he wiped his hands/knife on the apron, because he had this apron piece in his hands and why not!...... if not, he would probably have used a rag from his pocket.

if he hadn't ripped off a piece of apron, he probably would have ripped off part of her dress, because he needs evidence that this and the graffiti belongs to him.

there is no evidence that this graffiti belongs to JTR, even so, i'm still convinced that it does.

[Malcolm X]

Or if in fact the killer did cut the apron piece ?

Because if you elminate the organs being taken away, the handwiping and the knife wiping what are you left with ?

oh for Gods sake, this is what you think, not the vast majority .

answer this
1..... who cut the apron piece off
2......who removed the organs
3......who the bloody hell dumped it in Ghoulston st.

logic tells you..... ONLY THE KILLER.

[Malcolm X]

it isn't important but it would be very interesting to know where he put the kidneys

[Malcolm X]

Hi Greg,

A psychopath displays instinct, as we all do.

Bundy may have drove around with body parts, and others may have kept them at home, but the police would have had to have stopped them to work this out, and there was little chance of that happening.

The point with Jack is that it's being suggested that he deliberately walked into a place where the police were stopping people, he walked into that place an hour so after the murder, he walked into that place with incriminating evidence.

In other words, the argument goes that Jack was putting himself into a position where there was a good chance he would be caught and would hang.

Using Ted Bundy as an example, as bizarre as it is, the police would have had no reason to stop him and therefore the risk he was running was minimal (except perhaps a head rolling out the car door or something when he parked up and tried to get out, much to the consternation of Mrs Brown who's only popped out for some fish and is looking forward to a fish pie when she gets home and so she rings CSI Miami to sort it out).

Anyway, do you know of anyone who has pulled such a stunt? If you want to understand human beings then look at whay they do, and if something is so unusual it means that there's an exceedingly good chance that Jack was no different in that he wouldn't have done such a thing either (unless of course he had no other viable option).

not quite, with regards to Bundy, the police were already searching for his Volkswagen Beetle ( cream/ yellow colour ?), plus they also had a rough description of him too.

but with JTR, they had absolutely nothing to go on, he is therefore far safer returning to Dutfields ( and remaining at range ) than is Bundy turning up in his Adolf Hitler car.

this is quite interesting, because Sutcliffe was stopped in a similar manner, to what JTR would've been, if he was driving a Ford Cortina too and cruising the streets of Whitechapel looking for Eddowes.

it's easy to trace the owners of cars/ DNA/ weapons inside etc, so it's no good running off is it, but it's bloody hard to catch this same criminal that's running off back in 1888 and impossible to trace him later, especially if you went up to him on your own and he's just stabbed you !......because JTR would definitely stab you if you stopped him and said, ``i need to search you sir`` and it's highly unlikely that he'd leave you alive, you're a witness, he'd have to kill you.

JTR was therefore relatively safe, if confronted by one policeman only, but at huge risk at a road barrier etc...... so yes, as i've said, if he did return to Dutfields, there is no way that he could get close......fact!

but this doesn't mean that he didnt try, he might have thought... ``this place will be crawling with police, you need to try again tomorrow, oh well i'll just have a quick look``.

plus, if there's a huge crowd that's gathered behind the barriers, then JTR is safe, he can watch for the next 1/2 hour, but i'm quite happy with the apron/ graffiti being dumped soon after he killed Eddowes, because this makes the most sense.

[lynn cates]

reply, sort of

Hello Maria. Well, there is a good deal to be said about monogamy--some day I shall figure out just what. (heh-heh)

Regarding your proposal, I really don't understand it. Email me?

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

respondeo quod

Hello Tom. In regards of your other question, I answer with trepidation being aware that this could be considered off topic.

I am not far from your 3 & 4. I am confident that Jacob Isenschmid killed Polly and Annie. I am also confident that Kate was a fairly well done copy cat crime. MJK, collateral damage due to the meeting a few days earlier between Sir Edward Jenkinson and Michael Davitt when Sir Ed needed Davitt to promise to keep quiet about Frank Millen in the Parnell Commission meeting about to begin. He kept his word, but in return Davitt was able to extract information from Sir Ed--ostensibly about Sir Ed's array of spies (many of whom were barmaids, etc.)--for use at the Commission meeting.

Actually, this was the same way that Clan-na-Gael was able to finger Dr. Cronin, and Davitt was involved in that too. (No I don't think that Davitt intentionally spilled the beans--but information thus obtained has a way of leaking.) To cut a long story short, you recall how Dr. Cronin was assassinated? He was butchered by an ice axe by a Clan-na-Gael "removal" team.

For Liz I am still researching the Okhrana/Anarchist interface.

Now, I'd better shut up before being chastised for being off topic.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

"Cut!"--take 2

Hello Tom. Just had another go at Evans and Skinner's "Ultimate Companion."

Kent and Davis both reported clothes disarranged--but no mention of cutting. No mention, either, by Holland.

What of the coppers? Well, Inspector Chandler noted that:

"The pocket produced was found worn under the skirt. It was torn down the front and also at the side and did not contain anything." (p. 84) So, apparently she had a torn pocket. I submit that the pocket was torn when her assailant rummaged for her belongings.

Later, Chandler adds:

"None of the clothing was torn." (Loc. cit.) I presume he means other than the pocket?

Barry, no mention. Bagster, the same.

Was this in a press report?

(I'll try to answer your other question separately.)

Cheers.
LC

[Fleetwood Mac]

After “alternative Ripperology“, "minimalist Ripperology“, it's time for a new approach, “monogamous Ripperology“.


Lynn, you've also “evaded“ deciding about the second translator and the macro-key search too. Are you interested in these ideas? Care to help out, perhaps? Please?



Don't try so hard Tom, your head is smoking.

I'm not sure which is more entertaining: The Maria and Tom Show, or the murder of a poor, defenceless, cloth obsessed woman.