The Apron

[Trevor Marriott]

Odd, that's what the girls say about your....

...You gonna answer the question about the question?

Or shall we continue this base exchange? Don't want you getting outta your comfort zone.

Fleetwood,

Actually its fairly easy to expain. However some just can't accept the simplicity as it doesn't correspond with their outlandish theories.

It doesn't sell books.

Monty

The only outlandish theory here is the one you subscribe to and that is the fact that the killer of Chapman and Edddowes removed the organs after killing them.

And I will treat with contempt the personal insults you have now resorted to you are really showing your true colours now shame on you.

[lynn cates]

good points

Hello Mac. Good points.

"It's a mystery, not easy to explain whatever you go with."

Now you're talking.

Cheers.
LC

[ChrisGeorge]

I love the knife-drying theory, but it doesn't jibe with the description of the bloodstains on the cloth. If he wiped his knife on the cloth there would be a line of blood where the edge of the knife is drawn against the blade. The description of the blood, which I believe is mainly in one corner, suggests to me more that he wound it round a wound to stop it bleeding. It's a big swatch of cloth but he may not have realized, in the darkness, how much he was cutting off.

If you are a man on the run, cutting off some cloth that is a big size I should imagine you'd have a good idea how big it is because it could encumber your escape. He either took that big a swathe of cloth for some practical reason or to make a point with the graffito, if he indeed wrote it.

[Chava]

I love the knife-drying theory, but it doesn't jibe with the description of the bloodstains on the cloth. If he wiped his knife on the cloth there would be a line of blood where the edge of the knife is drawn against the blade. The description of the blood, which I believe is mainly in one corner, suggests to me more that he wound it round a wound to stop it bleeding. It's a big swatch of cloth but he may not have realized, in the darkness, how much he was cutting off.

[Fleetwood Mac]

Fleetwood,

Actually its fairly easy to expain. However some just can't accept the simplicity as it doesn't correspond with their outlandish theories.

It doesn't sell books.

Monty

Fair enough, Monty.

Presumably he drops the apron.

Does he come back onto the street?

[Monty]

and yours diminishes just as quick great isnt it

Odd, that's what the girls say about your....

...You gonna answer the question about the question?

Or shall we continue this base exchange? Don't want you getting outta your comfort zone.

Fleetwood,

Actually its fairly easy to expain. However some just can't accept the simplicity as it doesn't correspond with their outlandish theories.

It doesn't sell books.

Monty

[Trevor Marriott]

So you have no answer to my cartel question.

Your reputation grows and grows.

Monty

and yours diminishes just as quick great isnt it

[Fleetwood Mac]

actually i'm not quite right am i, because you said that someone else might have taken Eddowes kidneys other than JTR..... FLIPPING HECK, get real please, who took them then.... the Tooth Fairy ?

The issue here is that whatever theory is subscribed to on the apron, it takes a fair bit of explaining and assuming, and it follows holes can be punched through the theory quite easily.

So, I suppose we're talking degree/probability.

If you believe he returned to the street: then that would be an unnecessary risk.

If you believe he never left the street: then where is he between 1.45 and 2.55?

If you believe he dropped the apron prior to 2.20: do we ignore PC Long?

If you believe he didn't drop the apron: then where is anything remotely approaching evidence to point towards someone else?

Even if you believe Jack took the apron: why didn't he use Eddowes' material (after all, he rifled her pockets, and instead of taking something readily available he decided to do it the hard way)?

It's a mystery, not easy to explain whatever you go with.

[Monty]

Well I am sure John is quite capable of listening to who he chooses.The worst thing he could do though is listen to you.

So you have no answer to my cartel question.

Your reputation grows and grows.

Monty

[Trevor Marriott]

yes he wasn't looking in the doorways etc..... and why should he be !

he therefore didn't notice anything out of the ordinary, because a piece of cloth lying there means nothing to you, just a mess on the floor.

my guess is it was there, with only a very slim chance that JTR returned to Dutfields with it first...... i personally would have dumped it back at Dutfields, any time within the next week, with the graffiti too.

There was no need for him to dump it all in Ghoulston st, but i expect he didn't fancy stolling around for too long with that crucial evidence about his person, mind you; it looks like he kept his knife all the time, plus the organs too/ including the other organs on other nights (with regards to the other murders)

oh dear, yes JTR walked around with evidence of his crimes about his person didn't he.... so i'm not right am i

so why did he dump the cloth/ graffiti in Ghoulston st ? ..... i dont know, because i dont think the answer is that simple, i think i'm reading too much into this

. i saw you on tv the other day Marriott and you seemed quite sensible, but i cant believe that this is you right now making such a fool of yourself, and you've also ruined this thread !!!!

but it's not crazy theories that's your problem, because this is what the mystery of JTR needs, it's the childish bickering between you two that's killed this thread.

actually i'm not quite right am i, because you said that someone else might have taken Eddowes kidneys other than JTR..... FLIPPING HECK, get real please, who took them then.... the Tooth Fairy ?

The same person who removed your brain and prevented logical and sensible reasoning from prevailing

[Malcolm X]

.
Halse actually said, in full....

At twenty minutes past two o'clock I passed over the spot where the piece of apron was found, but did not notice anything then. I should not necessarily have seen the piece of apron.

Thus indicating he wasnt looking in doorways.
.
Monty

yes he wasn't looking in the doorways etc..... and why should he be !

he therefore didn't notice anything out of the ordinary, because a piece of cloth lying there means nothing to you, just a mess on the floor.

my guess is it was there, with only a very slim chance that JTR returned to Dutfields with it first...... i personally would have dumped it back at Dutfields, any time within the next week, with the graffiti too.

There was no need for him to dump it all in Ghoulston st, but i expect he didn't fancy stolling around for too long with that crucial evidence about his person, mind you; it looks like he kept his knife all the time, plus the organs too/ including the other organs on other nights (with regards to the other murders)

oh dear, yes JTR walked around with evidence of his crimes about his person didn't he.... so i'm not right am i

so why did he dump the cloth/ graffiti in Ghoulston st ? ..... i dont know, because i dont think the answer is that simple, i think i'm reading too much into this

. i saw you on tv the other day Marriott and you seemed quite sensible, but i cant believe that this is you right now making such a fool of yourself, and you've also ruined this thread !!!!

but it's not crazy theories that's your problem, because this is what the mystery of JTR needs, it's the childish bickering between you two that's killed this thread.

actually i'm not quite right am i, because you said that someone else might have taken Eddowes kidneys other than JTR..... FLIPPING HECK, get real please, who took them then.... the Tooth Fairy ?

[John Bennett]

As far as policemen are concerned I have been around them for 30 years or more i think I ought to know a bit a about them so when I say policemen can be less than liberal with the truth you should listen and take note.

Irony?

Well I am sure John is quite capable of listening to who he chooses.

Oh, I am.

[Trevor Marriott]

Cartel? Wow, Do you really want to tread that path again?

OK, have you any evidence supporting your false belief I am a member of a cartel? You sulked off before answering last time, you man enough to front up now or will you be using the avoidance tactic again?

Yeah, only plebs deal with you....and even my pateince is wearing thin.



I can imagine I am the last person you'd want to deal with. Even Im getting tired of showing you up. Then again, you seem to do a great job yourself, I really dont have to try.



There John, youve been told to listen to Trevor, end of.

Betcha glad you came back.

Monty

Well I am sure John is quite capable of listening to who he chooses.The worst thing he could do though is listen to you.

[Trevor Marriott]

Cartel? Wow, Do you really want to tread that path again?

OK, have you any evidence supporting your false belief I am a member of a cartel? You sulked off before answering last time, you man enough to front up now or will you be using the avoidance tactic again?

Yeah, only plebs deal with you....and even my pateince is wearing thin.



I can imagine I am the last person you'd want to deal with. Even Im getting tired of showing you up. Then again, you seem to do a great job yourself, I really dont have to try.



There John, youve been told to listen to Trevor, end of.

Betcha glad you came back.

Monty

You show me up, in your dreams

[Monty]

Originally Posted by Monty, quoted by Trevor Marriott

Trevor,

Oh I'm in the kitchen, roasting me a Marriott hog.

Its obvious you have no idea re the case basics, as shown above re Halse. To question you must have a full understanding of both the statements and the policing of the time.

What you do is apply the modern to the old. You do not consider why things were done and for what reason.

Sure, shake up this 120 odd year old case. You have done so far, and proven?.....well, nothing really. Just ill thought out theories and half baked suggestions. And its gotten you a few buddies on the way.

However, when you really look beneath the bluff and bluster, there's nothing substantial. Heck, even Stewart and Paul have given up on you, only plebs like me will engage you now.

A pleb well I couldnt have decsribed you better

Come back to me when you've familiarised yourself with the facts.

Then we do business.

If I ever needed to do that you would be the last person I would come back to.

You clearly do not understand policing full stop.

Monty

Cartel? Wow, Do you really want to tread that path again?

OK, have you any evidence supporting your false belief I am a member of a cartel? You sulked off before answering last time, you man enough to front up now or will you be using the avoidance tactic again?

Yeah, only plebs deal with you....and even my pateince is wearing thin.

If I ever needed to do that you would be the last person I would come back to.

You clearly do not understand policing full stop

I can imagine I am the last person you'd want to deal with. Even Im getting tired of showing you up. Then again, you seem to do a great job yourself, I really dont have to try.

John

As I said before its not a case of nobody being trusted its a case of asking serious questions about all of the issues you highlighted including police officers who were involved in this either in a minor role or those right at the top.

As far as policemen are concerned I have been around them for 30 years or more i think I ought to know a bit a about them so when I say policemen can be less than liberal with the truth you should listen and take note. In many case over the years it has been proved that police officers have in fact lied and have resorted to sharp practices in order to obtain a conviction.

There John, youve been told to listen to Trevor, end of.

Betcha glad you came back.

Monty