The Apron

[Rob Clack]

Maria, your a$$ is off topic.

Rob

[mariab]

Both my a$$ and the Paris Police Archives, actually. And I wish that the $$ were real.

[Wickerman]

Subtlety is sometimes lost on some people.....

Marie, look back at post #227

[mariab]

Just a little silly joking, Wickerman, and apologies. Going back to work now, and leaving the thread to its apron-y subject (as Joss Whedon would say).

[Hunter]

Hunter,

I'll start by saying that the most likely explanation is Jack took the apron, but it isn't a dead fish.

For a start, your proposition rests on the value of the apron.

Well:

1) Eddowes was part of a couple who pawned a pair of boots. Surely of greater value than an apron.

2) Eddowes had the pawn ticket. Presumably because she was going to retrieve the boots. By what means would she pay?

3) Which of these were of greater value: the boots, the apron, clients (perhaps cleaning herself made the difference between having clients or otherwise)?

It would be an interesting turn of fate if Eddowes walked up with Jack and asked if she could borrow his knife to cut the apron in order to clean up.

Hi Fleetwood,

Long story short...here are the cloth items (other than the clothes she was wearing) found in Catherine Eddowes' possession by Inspector Collard:

1 large white handkerchief
2 unbleached calico pockets with tape strings
1 blue stripe bed ticking pocket
1 white cotton pocket handkerchief
12 pieces of white rag
1 piece of white coarse linen
1 piece of blue and white shirting
2 small bed ticking bags
1 piece of flannel
1 piece of red flannel containing pins and needles
1 ball of hemp

Kate Eddowes was a walking fabric shop. If you notice some of the items most of these women were carrying on the nights they died (excluding Kelly) handkerchiefs and rags were common and were carried for obvious reasons. Laying waste to an apron worn everyday wasn't necessary.

Poor Kate probably drank the money for the boots and thus, expected a 'damned fine hiding' when she faced Kelly. The hours she was in the Bishopgate jail only compounded her situation and is probably why she was concerned about the time when Henry Hutt escorted her out at 1 a.m. She was in a desperate situation with only one recourse to rectify it.

It was a fatal decision.

This is a dead fish.

[Trevor Marriott]

Hi Fleetwood,

Long story short...here are the cloth items (other than the clothes she was wearing) found in Catherine Eddowes' possession by Inspector Collard:

1 large white handkerchief
2 unbleached calico pockets with tape strings
1 blue stripe bed ticking pocket
1 white cotton pocket handkerchief
12 pieces of white rag
1 piece of white coarse linen
1 piece of blue and white shirting
2 small bed ticking bags
1 piece of flannel
1 piece of red flannel containing pins and needles
1 ball of hemp

Kate Eddowes was a walking fabric shop. If you notice some of the items most of these women were carrying on the nights they died (excluding Kelly) handkerchiefs and rags were common and were carried for obvious reasons. Laying waste to an apron worn everyday wasn't necessary.

Poor Kate probably drank the money for the boots and thus, expected a 'damned fine hiding' when she faced Kelly. The hours she was in the Bishopgate jail only compounded her situation and is probably why she was concerned about the time when Henry Hutt escorted her out at 1 a.m. She was in a desperate situation with only one recourse to rectify it.

It was a fatal decision.

This is a dead fish.

You go to great lengths to keep mentioning the 12 white rags had it not occured to you that these might have come from the half apron that had been cut. and what in fact was found was a piece which would have them made 13 white rags. The white rags have to have eminated from somewhere in those days it would have been old clothes i.e aprons being white.

There is no logic for beliveing the killer cut or tore half an apron and then just walked off with it only to dump it a short time later.

Clearly there are many ambiguities with some of these witnesses regarding this apron piece and that is a serious worry.

[Fleetwood Mac]

Hi Fleetwood,

Long story short...here are the cloth items (other than the clothes she was wearing) found in Catherine Eddowes' possession by Inspector Collard:

1 large white handkerchief
2 unbleached calico pockets with tape strings
1 blue stripe bed ticking pocket
1 white cotton pocket handkerchief
12 pieces of white rag
1 piece of white coarse linen
1 piece of blue and white shirting
2 small bed ticking bags
1 piece of flannel
1 piece of red flannel containing pins and needles
1 ball of hemp

Kate Eddowes was a walking fabric shop.

Fair comment, Hunter, I'm struggling to counter that with anything sensible.

It does beg a related question: why didn't Jack take some of this cloth to wipe the knife or wrap the organs? Seems it was common knowledge that women walked round with this stuff on their belonging. Particularly as it seems her pockets were rifled.

[The Grave Maurice]

You go to great lengths to keep mentioning the 12 white rags had it not occured to you that these might have come from the half apron that had been cut. and what in fact was found was a piece which would have them made 13 white rags.

It's been a long week and I'm tired and may not be reading this correctly. Trevor, are you saying that, in the time available, JtR not only killed and mutilated Eddowes but also cut half her apron into 13 pieces?

[Trevor Marriott]

Hello again Trevor

First why would you eliminate the theory that the piece of apron was cut to carry organs or to wipe his knife or hands? I see no particular reason to eliminate any of those ideas as plausible.

If the graffito was written by the killer, the apron might have been taken to validate the inscription as being written by him....so the police would know the writing was by him. Of course the apron might have also been used for the above stated reasons as well as to validate the cryptic chalk inscripton.

Another reason the apron might have been taken was to put the police off his track. That is, I am going to leave the piece of apron in this location, some blocks east of my last murder, to make you think I live in Whitechapel or somewhere further east, e.g., Bethnal Green, but I am really heading home to the West End.

Best regards

Chris George

But all of that is reliant on the apron piece being found and the chances of that and it being connected to the murder I think very remote. Did Pc Watkins just get lucky ?

Did he say that up until the point in time when he was looking in doorways and alleyways for such items and as a result came across it, and if he had been why was he doing that what or whom had given him the notion to look.

It is also not clear how he found about about the murder.

Signature killers will leave a signature at the scene of a crime not that distance away. After all no one knew the apron piece was missing till later and all the rubbish etc which would have been scattered and littered in doorways and alleyways would have been immense. Not to mention graffiti written everywhere.

The graffiti doesnt even relate to the murder or any other murder for that matter has anyone cracked the code yet -No, so how can anyone say the killer wrote it.

[Trevor Marriott]

It's been a long week and I'm tired and may not be reading this correctly. Trevor, are you saying that, in the time available, JtR not only killed and mutilated Eddowes but also cut half her apron into 13 pieces?

No not at all she could have done it herself even before she was arrersted for being drunk. Sadly we dont have the records from the City police detailing her property in full when she was booked in at the police station.

That might explain the clean cut after all would a killer in almost total darkness be able to make a clean cut with a knife. Go an experiment its not so easy to do even in the day light let alone in the dark. Dont forget if she was wering an apron at the time she was murdered it would have been drawn up with the rest of her clothes making it even more difficult.

[Garza]

It's been a long week and I'm tired and may not be reading this correctly. Trevor, are you saying that, in the time available, JtR not only killed and mutilated Eddowes but also cut half her apron into 13 pieces?

No he is saying she cut it into parts, used one for her monthly cycle. She was then killed and a rat/dog picked it up with its teeth and carried it two streets over to set it down below the graffito. I'm I right Trevor?

[The Grave Maurice]

No not at all she could have done it herself even before she was arrersted for being drunk.

We know she was wearing the apron when she was found. So, Eddowes cut up half the apron herself earlier in the day, stuck the pieces in her pocket, and spent the rest of the day, and the early part of the next morning, wearing half an apron? Is that the theory?

[Trevor Marriott]

We know she was wearing the apron when she was found. So, Eddowes cut up half the apron herself earlier in the day, stuck the pieces in her pocket, and spent the rest of the day, and the early part of the next morning, wearing half an apron? Is that the theory?

Well she had the 12 pieces of rag/apron for some purpose and she had to have acquired them from somewhere.They would have to have been cut at some point from something of size so why not half her apron.

She could have easily been carrying a knife when arrested and the knife confiscated by the police as is still the case today.

The reality is that the taking of the organs by the killer and cutting her apron and then taking them away in the apron piece. and the killer then discarding the piece and writing the graffiti does not stand up to close scrutiny.

[Tom_Wescott]

To me, the simplest explanation is that Long was mistaken. Although it's not beyond the realms of reason that Tom is correct.

Apologies to all police apologists. Could it be that Halse was somehow involved?

Just for the record, my hypothesis makes perfect sense of all the evidence, and does not require PC Long to have been ‘mistaken’ (how is dismissing police testimony the ‘simple’ explanation for anything?), or DC Halse to have been complicit. And yet, I feel as though I’m the ‘fringe’ Ripperologist out of this bunch.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[The Grave Maurice]

Well she had the 12 pieces of rag/apron for some purpose and she had to have acquired them from somewhere.They would have to have been cut at some point from something of size so why not half her apron.

And then she walked around wearing the other half? Like I say, I'm tired and will now stretch out on the chesterfield and watch some Canadian football. Maybe I'll understand your argument better tomorrow. At the moment, it seems, well, silly.