The Apron

[lynn cates]

conspiracy afoot

Hello Malcolm. Technically, suggesting that there was anyone else "with him" labels one as a "conspiracy theorist." (heh-heh)

Cheers.
LC

[Malcolm X]

Except it isn't obvious.

Let's say the writing stated: "oranges and apples, 5 for a pound, theft will not be tolerated, get them here".

Would you claim the writing was Jack's work?

dont me silly

hang around yes i would..... 5 for a pound means 5 victims, but i dont steal from them and get the victims here in Whitechapel...... hay, this is better than the actual graffiti.... well done

[Malcolm X]

Hello Malcolm. Technically, suggesting that there was anyone else "with him" labels one as a "conspiracy theorist." (heh-heh)

Cheers.
LC

well just look at Stride, very strange isn't it..... as for conspiracy theories all i say is ``face palm``

[curious]

Hi curious

I believe you speak some truth. We probably don't have any conception of how the killer's mind worked. When we say "that's illogical" or "that doesn't make sense" we are not taking allowance of a type of mentality we can't really comprehend. There's the mindset of the killer but there's also the fact that the man was on the run and making quick decisions with an ongoing manhunt ramped up on the night of the Double Event because a hue and cry was on following the murder of Stride, shortly to be multiplied with the finding of the body of Eddowes.

Best regards

Chris

On the run in a hurry yet he still apprently has time to stop and write the graffiti which as it stands has absolutley nothing to suggest it is connected to the murder or any of the murders. He dumps the apron piece not really knowing if it is going to be found or not.

Does anyone really belive that ?

Far more easier options open to him if he wanted to make it known the first being get the hell out of the immediate area not stop to write a cryptic message.Its easy to say we dont know the mind of the killer thats a cop out statement for those who want to belive in this theory.

Hello, Gentlemen,
Thanks for the replies.

I don't know what happened the night Stride and Eddowes were killed. It's that simple.

But IF the same man killed them both, you have someone who delights in taking chances and was revv'd from two murders.

Do you really believe that a man who would cut the throat of a woman in an area as crowded as Dutfield's Yard or surrounded by policemen as he was at Mitre Square would stop to consider the danger of going back out, dropping the apron piece then writing something incoherent?

Really, he would be afraid? He would be hesitant?

I think he might be glorying in it.

Have you ever been around actors after a "standing ovation" show? Do you have any idea how "UP" people get and for how long it lasts before they crash?

I am beginning to believe this killer (IF it is just one, and I'm not sure) would have likely have taken especial delight in pulling this one last thing off. He had only to drop the apron. If accosted by police while writing, he could simply disavow even having noticed the piece of debris at his feet. It was simply there, had nothing to do with him. BUT he was not caught . . .

I don't believe we can apply logic here, gentlemen. You have a crazy person, drunk with success and blood, he eluded the authorities and everyone else in a crowded yard and even under the noses of several policeman.

He was invincible!

curious

[Ben]

But, I'm scratching my head thinking on how on earth can someone think that this is Jack attempting to deflect suspicion.

It's a screamingly simple premise, Fleets, and "deflecting suspicion" has been a tactic resorted to by many serial killers. I'm "scratching my head" in disbelief that anyone should resist this possibility so staunchly. By depositing the apron in a very Jew-concentrated locality, and writing a message explicitly mentioning the Jews (if the killer was responsible for both expedients), he may well have been seeking to implicate the Jews, and some of the police seniority believed that this was precisely what the author was trying to achieve. They certainly didn't rule out the possibility for the reason you do, i.e. that nobody would be "stupid" enough to deflect suspicion in such a fashion, and I personally go with the stupidity-barometer used by the police at the time.

[Malcolm X]

i'm banking on there being other clues, because my theory is that he went to the police after MJK on purpose.

i think he's telling us that he's JTR, but this is quite well disguised, he's like a ``thrill attention seeker`` serial killer, that inserts himself into a case, by pretending to help the police, there's been quite a few of these in America.

i think he's saying, ``my witness statement is so damned rediculous that it's obvious that i'm JTR, now are you smart enough to detect this``

``i only signed the witness statement once, you lot signed the other two pages, now did i do this on purpose?``...( it's easy to modify your signature once)

there is something really odd about GH statement and i think the clues will be most of all in his letters.... but if they're not by him then it doesn't really matter, because he might have adjusted his statement to suit someone elses letters.

i'm not sure, but it's all very interesting.

you see, if GH was JTR, there is no need for him to go to the police, because this lot cant catch a cold, they're like DUMB DUMBER and DUMBEST, so he must have gone to the police to torment them only.

if GH isn't JTR, then he's simply doing this for a cash reward, or simply to be a total f*** Wit, but the trouble is his statement reveals far too much.

it's more likely that Toppy isn't GH, he only pretended to be years later, and to honest, it looks like his son REG is the only person that's saying this, Toppy looks far weaker to me as GH, than he did 4 years ago.

[Phil H]

there is something really odd about GH statement and i think the clues will be most of all in his letters.... but if they're not by him then it doesn't really matter, because he might have adjusted his statement to suit someone elses letters.

Malcolm - are you really suggesting that the "Letters from Hell" correspondence was from "Jack"?

It seems to take us back to thinking in the 60s. I thought we had got beyond that.

Phil

[Steven Russell]

Getting back to the apron piece, I'm sure I read recently that it was so filthy that it was originally thought to be black. But I can't find the reference now and it's bugging the life out of me. Can anyone help?

Best wishes,
Steve.

[Malcolm X]

what makes everyone think that JTR was in a mad hurry all the time !!!

is this because he saw the policeman at range and thus only had enough time to quickly cut off the apron, or was he always intending to remove the apron piece !

there must have been a dry piece of wall somewhere in mitre square/ leave the apron too, but this means that he's too close to the body whilst he's searching for a dry spot, he needs to escape Mitre square but not to run, because this attracts attention.

what he did next doesn't matter one bit, but it's still very interesting, he either dumped the apron soon after, or later on as discussed, if so; he almost definitely returned to Dutfields.

finally, the writing was neat and very small, this was not done in a mad rush either.

[Phil H]

what he did next doesn't matter one bit, but it's still very interesting, he either dumped the apron soon after, or later on as discussed, if so; he almost definitely returned to Dutfields.

Oh come on! There's no "almost certainly about it - even if "Jack" killed Stride, which is open to question.

Phil

[Malcolm X]

there is something really odd about GH statement and i think the clues will be most of all in his letters.... but if they're not by him then it doesn't really matter, because he might have adjusted his statement to suit someone elses letters.

Malcolm - are you really suggesting that the "Letters from Hell" correspondence was from "Jack"?

It seems to take us back to thinking in the 60s. I thought we had got beyond that.

Phil

we havent gone beyond much i'm afraid, we are as clueless now as we were back then..

i need to see if i can detect anything, that's all

[Phil H]

The arguments for dismissing the key letters have been well-rehearsed, and the facts seems to support the views of senior police officers of the time.

There is no NEED to link letters and murderer UNLESS one is seeking tolink to an individual who COMMUNICATES. There is no evidence, whatsoever, this was the case or is necessary to explain the murders or identify at least the type of man who might have done it.

Phil

[Malcolm X]

what he did next doesn't matter one bit, but it's still very interesting, he either dumped the apron soon after, or later on as discussed, if so; he almost definitely returned to Dutfields.

Oh come on! There's no "almost certainly about it - even if "Jack" killed Stride, which is open to question.

Phil

i havent made myself clear, i mean if JTR killed stride and if the apron was left at say 2.20am, if this is so..... IF...... then he almost definitely returned to Dutfields first.

[Malcolm X]

The arguments for dismissing the key letters have been well-rehearsed, and the facts seems to support the views of senior police officers of the time.

There is no NEED to link letters and murderer UNLESS one is seeking tolink to an individual who COMMUNICATES. There is no evidence, whatsoever, this was the case or is necessary to explain the murders or identify at least the type of man who might have done it.

Phil

you're missing what i'm saying, did GH in his statement refer to the letters in any way, is there any cryptic clues..... i dont think there is, but it's worth a look

[Phil H]

i havent made myself clear, i mean if JTR killed stride and if the apron was left at say 2.20am, if this is so..... IF...... then he almost definitely returned to Dutfields.

It is still nonsense, Malcolm.

If it's your idea then OK, but don't try to market it as fact.

The timing of the leaving of the apron-piece in Goulston St (which must inevitably be speculative) has no bearing on where Jack was at any point - excpet that he was MOST PROBABLY in Goulston St when the material was dropped (whenever that was).

Afterwards he could and probably did, go home. ut he could have wandered the streets, he could even remotely) have gone home first and then returned to leave the material (though personally I doubt it).

My concern here is that you are building up complicated chronologies of events without any foundation nor real evidence to support a word of it.

Phil