The Apron

[Hunter]

Cleaning up en roue is extremely unconvincing, in my opinion. It would have been alright if he was making his escape through fields or a deserted park, but in this case, we know he bolted through a heavily urbanized area where he could have been seen at any stage. It would have taken seconds to wipe the visible signs of gunk from his hands on the apron section as it still adhered to the body.All the best,

I can tell you from experience that its not that easy to remove that kind of stuff very quickly, but you do want it off your hands as soon as possible. If he got it on his hands he got it on his knife as well. This guy did a lot in a small amount of time and probably worked until flight was necessary. As dangerous as it may seem to walk around for a while cleaning one's hands with a big piece of cloth, It would have been worse to be caught standing over the body doing that.

Plus, this was a large piece of apron. If he used it to carry the organs, he may not have had a pocket big enough to hide it in... much less carrying it in something that had crap all over it. Wrapping the organs in a handkerchief and placing them in a pocket seems more logical.

The evidence is there. The colon was cut, then cut again and placed to the side for a reason. A large portion of the apron was cut and fecal matter was found on it... and it was discarded... the natural thing to do once you're through with something no longer needed and covered with waste... unless one is inclined to wipe their butt, then put the paper in a pocket to be used again.

[Phil H]

This thread has recently produced some very "charming" images. Thanks for that Hunter and others!!

[lynn cates]

agenda

Hello Phil.

"Planting evidence should be well down the list. It's an argument likely to be used by those theorists with a preconceived agenda, though."

Hopefully, that preconceived agenda is to ascertain precisely what happened in the autumn of 1888.

Cheers.
LC

[Wickerman]

Wasn't it Monty who kindly provided contemporary pics of Goulston St. which showed a 'grate' in front of each side of the entrance to the building?

If the killer ran passed the doorway and just threw the apron & contents aside, we might expect the organs would be found either inside or beside the apron, did the police even look down the grate?

Why would they, no policeman ever suggested the rag carried organs, only that he must have wiped his hands on it.

Was there anything down that grate?

Hey, so long as we're speculating....


Regards, Jon S.

[lynn cates]

aha!

Hello Jon.

"Was there anything down that grate?"

A sensible suggestion. That would be a perfect place to dispose of the unwanted mess.

Cheers.
LC

[Wickerman]

Hello Jon.

"Was there anything down that grate?"

A sensible suggestion. That would be a perfect place to dispose of the unwanted mess.

Cheers.
LC

It's not called a 'grate', I can't think of the correct name though. We had one right across the front of our house in England, beneath the livingroom window.
This hole was about 8ft long, maybe 2ft wide and something like 6ft deep. When we bought the house someone had made a flower bed out of it, they actually filled the thing with soil! There had been a window down there for the cellar below, but it had been bricked up years before.

Anyway, the one in front of the Goulston St. address likely contained alot of rubbish at the bottom.

Regards, Jon S.

[Steven Russell]

If you're going to bung the organs down someone's grate, why bother taking them in the first place?

Best wishes,
Steve.

[Monty]

They are called recesses.

I mentioned nigh on a year ago why no pro wall writer has picked up on this?

The recess would have been the ideal spot to toss a discarded apron piece. However its inside the stairwell.

This, to me, would obviously indicate that rather thrown from the street, Eddowes killer had to be inside the stairwell. Unless his aim was very true.

By the way, walking down Goulston St last night and overheard the Jubelo, Jubela, Jubelum rubbish. It was all explain, it was the Masons warning the police just to "clear orf".

So that's that sorted.

Monty

[Phil H]

It's not called a 'grate', I can't think of the correct name though. We had one right across the front of our house in England, beneath the livingroom window.
This hole was about 8ft long, maybe 2ft wide and something like 6ft deep. When we bought the house someone had made a flower bed out of it, they actually filled the thing with soil! There had been a window down there for the cellar below, but it had been bricked up years before.

In a private house, it would be called the "area".

The usual Victorian town-house arrangement was for the household "Offices" larder. scullery, kitchen, servants hall etc to be in the basement. To avoid "tradesmen" using th front door, there was usually a gate in the iron fence closing off the area, and steps down to basement level.

In Goulston St, I suspect no steps, and that the gap was to give light to the basement windows (more apartments, albeit subterranean ones?). There would not have been steps down in the case. There must, however, have been a railing/fence.

Phil

[Monty]

http://forum.casebook.org/showthread.php?p=193569#post193569

Hope this helps.

Monty

[Wickerman]

If you're going to bung the organs down someone's grate, why bother taking them in the first place?

Best wishes,
Steve.

And thats quite a reasonable question to ask, though if you can appreciate the size of the women's aprons which generally ran from waist to ankles and completely wrapped around the lower body, this is a sizeable piece of cloth.

The comment was made that 'half' the apron had been cut off. Even half would be a few square feet and a piece of cloth this large would hardly go into a coat pocket, especially if it contained organs.

The killer had to have been openly carrying this bundle under his arm?, or at least visible to passer's by.
If that was the case, what would cause you to throw the bundle in the nearest doorway?, perhaps seeing a policeman coming towards you?

I don't know, we're just throwing idea's around. Let's face it, there's no satisfactory solution that everyone will buy into.

Regards, Jon S.

[Steven Russell]

No indeed, Jon.

But I still don't see what's wrong with the received wisdom i.e.
1. Killer removes organs and stuffs them into his pocket or a bag or something,
2. Rips or cuts off piece of apron to wipe hands and knife,
3. Scarpers,
4. Discards apron fragment when hands and knife are cleaned.

As you rightly say though, it's all conjecture.

Best wishes,
Steve.

[Malcolm X]

No indeed, Jon.

But I still don't see what's wrong with the received wisdom i.e.
1. Killer removes organs and stuffs them into his pocket or a bag or something,
2. Rips or cuts off piece of apron to wipe hands and knife,
3. Scarpers,
4. Discards apron fragment when hands and knife are cleaned.

As you rightly say though, it's all conjecture.

Best wishes,
Steve.

plus of course it doesn't really matter because what does is:- did he write the graffiti ?

changing the subject entirely, it would be very interesting to know if the residents of Victoria homes shared a room, or a dormitory, or had their own room, this is actually very important, for obvious reasons.

[Wickerman]

No indeed, Jon.

But I still don't see what's wrong with the received wisdom i.e.
1. Killer removes organs and stuffs them into his pocket or a bag or something,
2. Rips or cuts off piece of apron to wipe hands and knife,
3. Scarpers,
4. Discards apron fragment when hands and knife are cleaned.

It's the distance Steven, if I recall the distance between SW corner of Mitre Sq. and 108-119 Goulston St. is of the order of 1500 ft.

Quote:
"...If Jack left Mitre Square by St James Place, he would be crossing the square about 100 ft, to the northern passage exit, then up the passage, 55 ft, (still wiping his hands) then diagonally across St James Place, passing the all night manned mobile Fire station and the nightwatchman at the roadworks, about 120 ft, then eastward along little Duke Street passing several houses, (still wiping his hands) crossing Hounsditch then along Stoney lane passing about 40+ houses (still wiping his hands) to Middlesex street, about another 850 ft, still carrying the rag presumably not finished wiping his hands. Turning right running down Middlesex street for about 100 ft passing another 6 houses, then left, eastward again along New Goulston street until the end, another 250 ft. At this point he crosses the road and presumably discards the rag in the doorway of 108-119 Goulston street..."

The very act of immediately wiping your hands is to remove any visible connection between you and the crime scene. This means you discard the cloth as soon as possible, certainly as you are leaving the square. Carrying it across three streets seems contra to the necessity of the act.

Regards, Jon S.

[Garza]

The very act of immediately wiping your hands is to remove any visible connection between you and the crime scene. This means you discard the cloth as soon as possible, certainly as you are leaving the square. Carrying it across three streets seems contra to the necessity of the act.

Regards, Jon S.

Hmmm interesting point, never thought of that before .