The Apron

[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.

[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

[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.

[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.

[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

[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.

[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.

[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.

[curious]

Wasn't it one kidney?

Maybe under his hat.

The police wouldn't search there.

might be a problem if he tips his hat.

[Fleetwood Mac]

might be a problem if he tips his hat.

Secret compartment in the top of the hat.

Failing that, I reckon I could talk my way out of it......

"I'm just making my way home from a dinner party with the Countess of Wessex, Sir William Gull, Prince Eddie, known as Jack The Ripper to his intimate friends, and Princess Mary of Tech. I must have picked up the wrong hat on my way out".

or

"It's a pig's bladder. I'm taking it home for my son and his mates to play football".

or

"What's it to you? Mind your own."

[Fleetwood Mac]

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.

Still think the chances of Bundy being stopped in his car were slim.

There's a much better chance the poet laureate would have been stopped.

[lynn cates]

email

Hello Maria. Sure!

Cheers.
LC

[GregBaron]

Carrying evidence...

Still think the chances of Bundy being stopped in his car were slim.

Actually, I believe Bundy was arrested twice in his car, both after his escape from prison. He was apparently a bad driver.

He was pulled over in Florida for erratic driving and was found with "burglary" tools.

On another occasion he could have been caught with a head or a hand in his trunk. Again, boldness is a hallmark of the disorder.

Head in the trunk, kidney in the pocket - what's the difference among friends...


Greg

[Carol]

Hi everyone!

If the apron was tied at the back and was difficult to untie, thus making the killer decide to slit it at the front and then take one piece away with him, how come each 'string' was still individually attached to it's apron piece? Why were the two strings suddenly 'untied'? How did that happen?

Perhaps Eddowes had untied her apron, cut it herself, and used one half for a really thick piece of good absorbing cloth to 'mop' up a heavy flow of menstrual blood. The other piece was still reasonably clean for using as a menstrual 'rag' and was tucked away on her body along with the other smaller rags and everything else she carried around with her. After all, the second piece of apron wasn't noticed until the body was in the mortuary (I think I've remembered correctly here). (I think Trevor and Norway Phil will have some comments on this!).

Looking forward to your views, everyone - and corrections!

Carol

[Fleetwood Mac]

Hi everyone!

If the apron was tied at the back and was difficult to untie, thus making the killer decide to slit it at the front and then take one piece away with him, how come each 'string' was still individually attached to it's apron piece? Why were the two strings suddenly 'untied'? How did that happen?

Perhaps Eddowes had untied her apron, cut it herself, and used one half for a really thick piece of good absorbing cloth to 'mop' up a heavy flow of menstrual blood. The other piece was still reasonably clean for using as a menstrual 'rag' and was tucked away on her body along with the other smaller rags and everything else she carried around with her. After all, the second piece of apron wasn't noticed until the body was in the mortuary (I think I've remembered correctly here). (I think Trevor and Norway Phil will have some comments on this!).

Looking forward to your views, everyone - and corrections!

Carol

I suppose the point I'm making Carol, is that he had two options: untie or cut the apron. In the event he does one, he doesn't need to do the other.

Having that, this 'cutting of the apron for convenience' is an idea of mine that could do with some meat on the bones.

For example: the remaining piece of the apron was attached to 'the strings'. Do we know what is meant by 'strings'. I've been trying to determine this without success. Is it the strings around the waist or the strings around the neck?

Regardless, we know he needs access. We know he's ripping clothes apart. Would be impossible to rip apart an apron tied at the waist unless cut from the front.