Tweet
If you look at the drawing of Eddowes's body in situ, you'll see that her clothing has been ripped off and pulled aside by the killer. The apron--which according to the police report was visible at Bishopsgate cop shop--was still tied to her waist when she was found. When she was standing, it sat on top of a chintz skirt, an alpaca skirt, a blue skirt and a petticoat and that's a lot of layers of cloth. But she was supine when found and her clothes had been thrown back to get at her body. That means the apron now lies below all the other garments and becomes the most inaccessible piece of clothing available to the killer should he need a portmanteau/blade-wiper/bandage. More easily got at would be the stuff petticoat or the chemise either of which could have served the same purpose as the apron and would have been on top of the rest of the clothing. So he really wants that piece of apron. Why? Is it stronger material than the chemise or the petticoat? Maybe it will be a better carrier for his trophies? Maybe it's easier to cut than her skirts because he goes along a previous seam. But that's not easy to determine in the dark of Mitre Square.
The more I think about it, the more I believe that the apron was sliced away before he cut the clothing off the body and pushed it back. The apron was the first thing he wanted not the last, and he cut it off with specific intent. This means that whatever else he used if for--carrying the organs, binding up a figure--was secondary to his original purpose. He may even have bloodied it up himself just to highlight where it had come from. That may explain the odd blood pattern.
The graffito may or may not have been written by the Ripper, it's a blind alley. But the apron was definitely left there by someone who had taken it off the victim very close to her death, and it wasn't all that easy to get at in the circumstances. If it was taken to put suspicion on someone else, then that suggests that the killer believed that the police might be on to him. Or at least might have asked some questions that he believed might lead to him. We don't see this behaviour on any of the other killings, just this one. So what was going on around the time of the Eddowes killing that might lead the Ripper to think the police were a lot better-off looking at the Jews? I very much doubt it was just anti-semitism on his part. It's more likely, in my mind, that he felt a net closing in and took steps to move it on further down the lake. I would love to know what interviews had been done just before the Eddowes killing. I would really love to know that!
The more I think about it, the more I believe that the apron was sliced away before he cut the clothing off the body and pushed it back. The apron was the first thing he wanted not the last, and he cut it off with specific intent. This means that whatever else he used if for--carrying the organs, binding up a figure--was secondary to his original purpose. He may even have bloodied it up himself just to highlight where it had come from. That may explain the odd blood pattern.
The graffito may or may not have been written by the Ripper, it's a blind alley. But the apron was definitely left there by someone who had taken it off the victim very close to her death, and it wasn't all that easy to get at in the circumstances. If it was taken to put suspicion on someone else, then that suggests that the killer believed that the police might be on to him. Or at least might have asked some questions that he believed might lead to him. We don't see this behaviour on any of the other killings, just this one. So what was going on around the time of the Eddowes killing that might lead the Ripper to think the police were a lot better-off looking at the Jews? I very much doubt it was just anti-semitism on his part. It's more likely, in my mind, that he felt a net closing in and took steps to move it on further down the lake. I would love to know what interviews had been done just before the Eddowes killing. I would really love to know that!
Comment