The Goulston Street Apron

[Phil H]

Is Eddowes dress still extant - if so where?

I am aware of an alleged shawl?

Where would relevant DNA come from for suspects?

Phil

[pinkmoon]

It's was tested to see if it matched Fredrick deemings DNA it didn't .It was also tested against saliva on back of stamps and came back female.The deeming video is on you tube it's worth a watch.They were not able to get a full profile of d.n.a however as science improves that could be distinct possibility.

[I'veBeenToMitreSquare]

Forgive me for what I'm about to ask. This is my first post on Casebook, I have spent a short while rummaging around the site, listening to podcasts etc. and it's been very enjoyable (If "enjoyable" is the right word) I must say.
Anyhow, to the question....... Given that Catherine Eddowes' dress is still extant, if not the apron? Why hasn't it been DNA tested? Maybe it has been, without me noticing. I doubt it though.
I saw that programme, some time ago, where a small part of the dress was sent to Australia, looking for DNA from some suspect or other. Why then, can't it be tested for DNA from anyone and everyone?
I'm sure there must be many people's DNA on there but maybe just maybe JTR's is there too.
It's just a thought but one that's been nagging at me for some time. I realise that there are different kinds of DNA, at least I think that there are so any information that anyone can give me would be very much appreciated.

[pinkmoon]

I would like to thank you all tonight for not mentioning freemasons and royal coaches when discussing goulston street message

[Digalittledeeperwatson]

Hullo pinkmoon.

By taking chalk with him the killer obviously has planned to write a message

Okay fair enough.

so this must have been important to him.

Why must it? Could it not simply have been a lark or to cause confusion?
Why not write message nearer to victim also make it clear in the message that it is from him it wouldn't have been that hard to do this

Because it might of been much riskier to do so. Why would the killer feel oblidged to do anyone any favours? Agreed it would've been pure simplicity to make it crystal clear. One more thing to curse him for.
.If the police really thought this message was genuine then why did they erase it it makes no sense.

I believed that message was genuine for years it adds a nice bit of drama and mystery to the whole case but when you start to ask the question why write anything it makes no sense

It is peculiar indeed. But why not write something ambiguous? Because it might benefit the readers.

[pinkmoon]

By taking chalk with him the killer obviously has planned to write a message so this must have been important to him.Why not write message nearer to victim also make it clear in the message that it is from him it wouldn't have been that hard to do this.If the police really thought this message was genuine then why did they erase it it makes no sense.I believed that message was genuine for years it adds a nice bit of drama and mystery to the whole case but when you start to ask the question why write anything it makes no sense

[Abby Normal]

Yes I have never believed the message was work of the killer for the simply fact if he had gone prepared to write it than write something that proves its genuine

Hi PM
Maybe to the killer it was obvious in his mind that the message (along with the apron) was from him.

Or perhaps he wanted it to be ambiguous.

What you or anyone else thinks he "should" have done is meaningless really.
Post mortem serial killers are unusual creatures.

[Digalittledeeperwatson]

Hullo pinkmoon.

Yes I have never believed the message was work of the killer for the simply fact if he had gone prepared to write it than write something that proves its genuine

So, the message is more likely to have not been written by the killer because it fails to satisfy authenticity to the reader?

[pinkmoon]

Yes I have never believed the message was work of the killer for the simply fact if he had gone prepared to write it than write something that proves its genuine

[Jon Guy]

You`re assuming the GSG was written by the killer.

Killing people makes no sense whatsover either, and if it was Eddowes killer who wrote the message, you have to remember that he was a nut of the highest order and had been rummaging around inside someone`s tummy only an hour or so earlier.

[pinkmoon]

the message

Our killer has just killed one women possibly two in a very short space of time stops to chalk a message on the wall having of course going to the trouble to take some chalk with him to write the message so this message must be important to him.Surely to God he would write something about his latest murders just to prove message was genuine.A rag under a message that makes no sense isn't going to prove that message is genuine.

[Jon Guy]

Hi Pinkmoon

Indeed, we all love Trevor you know, and it`s good practise for his theory to be put under close scrutiny on the message boards, as has been done.

All Trevor Marriott is doing is challenging the so called facts nothing wrong with that to many people interested in this case have a closed mind to this.

If having a closed mind means not been persuaded by his theory, then yes.
Most will have their own theories based on what evidence we do have and obviously need a bit more persuasion in changing their views.

Like I've said before if the killer was going to chalk a message on a wall just after a murder surely to God he would leave no doubt it was from him .

You mean, like a bloodied piece of a victim`s clothing lying below it?

[pinkmoon]

questioning the so called facts

All Trevor Marriott is doing is challenging the so called facts nothing wrong with that to many people interested in this case have a closed mind to this.To much has been made of the goulston street graffiti and the letters sent to the police .Like I've said before if the killer was going to chalk a message on a wall just after a murder surely to God he would leave no doubt it was from him .Our killer has decided to start writing to the police so why didn't he make sure they can be no doubt that the letters are from the killer it wouldn't have been to hard.As for the organ removal it is good that Trevor challenges this he might be right and if he is it certainly puts a big question mark over what we have believed for years

[The Good Michael]

I even emailed trevor marriot the other week with the query regarding the fact he may have used the apron for a cut hand and potentially went to seek medical attention shortly after. He replied with this...

Thank you for taking the time to reply.

I would like to explain briefly where I now stand with this investigation and the issues you have highlighted.

First of all my research tends to show that perhaps the killer did not cut or tear the apron piece and that at some point before her death Eddowes was simply in possession of two old pieces of white apron. One of which she could have deposited herself under the archway
before her death after leaving the police station.

You are quite right to question the issues surrounding the killer cutting it for wiping his knife or for taking the organs away in. Personally i do not believe the killer removed the organs from any of the victims at the crime scene. And I dont subscribe to your view.

I have a new book coming out in kindle form only at the beginning of September in that can be found all my latest research and conclusions on the whole mystery.

I have no idea if Feigenbaum carried a scar

I will forward you details in due course.

Regards
Trevor Marriott


I personally think Trevor Marriott's ideas are "respectfully" proposterous!! But anyway.

Bad etiquette! You don't post private emails here. It just isn't done.

Mike

[Trevor Marriott]

I even emailed trevor marriot the other week with the query regarding the fact he may have used the apron for a cut hand and potentially went to seek medical attention shortly after. He replied with this...

Thank you for taking the time to reply.

I would like to explain briefly where I now stand with this investigation and the issues you have highlighted.

First of all my research tends to show that perhaps the killer did not cut or tear the apron piece and that at some point before her death Eddowes was simply in possession of two old pieces of white apron. One of which she could have deposited herself under the archway
before her death after leaving the police station.

You are quite right to question the issues surrounding the killer cutting it for wiping his knife or for taking the organs away in. Personally i do not believe the killer removed the organs from any of the victims at the crime scene. And I dont subscribe to your view.

I have a new book coming out in kindle form only at the beginning of September in that can be found all my latest research and conclusions on the whole mystery.

I have no idea if Feigenbaum carried a scar

I will forward you details in due course.

Regards
Trevor Marriott


I personally think Trevor Marriott's ideas are "respectfully" proposterous!! But anyway.

Kettle calling the pot black and I didn't give you permission to print my e mail to you.