Brady St bloodstains Aug 31st

[The Rookie Detective]

It is an interesting thread Chris. The only point that comes to mind for me is this…


LLOYD'S WEEKLY NEWSPAPER

LONDON: SUNDAY, SEPT. 2, 1888.

"Shortly after noon on Friday some men while searching the pavement in Buck's-row, above the gateway, in a different direction to that from which the woman came, or was brought, found two large spots of blood, and each about the size of a shilling. The first was about 25 feet from the gateway and the second 10 feet beyond. Both were a few inches from the kerb in the roadway and clearly defined.”

It has been suggested that these spots might have been caused by blood dripping from the ambulance but is this really very likely given the time that would have elapsed between the time of the murder and the removal of the body from Buck’s Row at around 4.30 (around an hour or so) Could it have been the case that the killer heard something that spooked him and he panicked (it was probably his first murder after all) He then fled carrying the bloodied knife in his hand and the two spots came from it.

Pushing it further could it be possible for further drips as the killer perhaps ran into Brady Street? I’m unsure about this? Then (also from Lloyd’s):

“The trail was easily followed down Brady-street for 150 yards to Honey's-mews. In front of the gateway there was a large stain, looking as if the bleeding person had fallen against the wall and lain there.”

Might our killer have also got some blood on his clothing at the scene and as he ran into Brady Street he crosses the road (twice according to the papers) to keep out of sight of someone perhaps, or to get to a street lamp which would have made it easier for him to check himself for blood before getting to his eventual destination. Out of breath he drops down and sits in front of the gateway for a short rest, inadvertently transferring blood from his clothing to the ground

Great Post Herlock


I think that Mr Blomer may have something to say regarding this little mystery.


For me there have lways been unexplained anomalies surrounding the Nichols murder scene.

None of which have anything to do with Lechmere.


Which is ironic really.

[GBinOz]

It is an interesting thread Chris. The only point that comes to mind for me is this…


LLOYD'S WEEKLY NEWSPAPER

LONDON: SUNDAY, SEPT. 2, 1888.

"Shortly after noon on Friday some men while searching the pavement in Buck's-row, above the gateway, in a different direction to that from which the woman came, or was brought, found two large spots of blood, and each about the size of a shilling. The first was about 25 feet from the gateway and the second 10 feet beyond. Both were a few inches from the kerb in the roadway and clearly defined.”

It has been suggested that these spots might have been caused by blood dripping from the ambulance but is this really very likely given the time that would have elapsed between the time of the murder and the removal of the body from Buck’s Row at around 4.30 (around an hour or so) Could it have been the case that the killer heard something that spooked him and he panicked (it was probably his first murder after all) He then fled carrying the bloodied knife in his hand and the two spots came from it.

Pushing it further could it be possible for further drips as the killer perhaps ran into Brady Street? I’m unsure about this? Then (also from Lloyd’s):

“The trail was easily followed down Brady-street for 150 yards to Honey's-mews. In front of the gateway there was a large stain, looking as if the bleeding person had fallen against the wall and lain there.”

Might our killer have also got some blood on his clothing at the scene and as he ran into Brady Street he crosses the road (twice according to the papers) to keep out of sight of someone perhaps, or to get to a street lamp which would have made it easier for him to check himself for blood before getting to his eventual destination. Out of breath he drops down and sits in front of the gateway for a short rest, inadvertently transferring blood from his clothing to the ground

Hi Herlock,

If the perpetrator made his escape towards Brady St, wouldn't he have run into Paul and/or Cross?

Might I suggest that perhaps these blood drops may have related to the Colville incident rather than the Nichols murder?

Cheers, George

[Herlock Sholmes]

Hi Herlock,

If the perpetrator made his escape towards Brady St, wouldn't he have run into Paul and/or Cross?

Might I suggest that perhaps these blood drops may have related to the Colville incident rather than the Nichols murder?

Cheers, George

Hello George,

I’m guessing that he could have turned into Brady Street before Cross arrived but you’re right that these spots were likelier from an unconnected incident. Unless he was running with a full cup of blood I wouldn’t have thought it likely that a bloodied knife would have kept dripping for that long or that he would have gone so far without putting the knife away, also it’s unlikely that the killer became so saturated in blood that he kept dripping 170 yards into Brady Street. The blood spots in Buck’s Row are interesting though. I need to have a look at the reports and see what might have been Sid about them.

[The Rookie Detective]

Hi Herlock,

If the perpetrator made his escape towards Brady St, wouldn't he have run into Paul and/or Cross?

Might I suggest that perhaps these blood drops may have related to the Colville incident rather than the Nichols murder?

Cheers, George

The evidence given by multiple female witnesses, suggests that the assault on Nichols may have commenced in Brady Street, before the Ripper finally dispatched Nichols in Bucks Row.

In other words, rather than the killer flee towards Brady St, there's a possibility that it was the other way around, and that the assault commenced in Brady St (near the Jewish cemetery) and then culminated in Bucks Row.


Cue the onslaught...

[Geddy2112]

Found on Reddit of all places... it states it's from Reynolds 2nd of Sept 1888

[Herlock Sholmes]

If only we knew the exact location of these bloodstains.

[GBinOz]

The evidence given by multiple female witnesses, suggests that the assault on Nichols may have commenced in Brady Street, before the Ripper finally dispatched Nichols in Bucks Row.

In other words, rather than the killer flee towards Brady St, there's a possibility that it was the other way around, and that the assault commenced in Brady St (near the Jewish cemetery) and then culminated in Bucks Row.


Cue the onslaught...

Hi RD,

Are you referring to "multiple female witnesses" as Mrs Colville and her daughter. At one time I thought that the Colville incident may be related but it turned out that that incident was a little after midnight, so the connection would seem unlikely.

Cheers, George

[GBinOz]

Found on Reddit of all places... it states it's from Reynolds 2nd of Sept 1888

Interesting! Some more conjecture that the mutilations preceded the throat cut. Could the sequence have been a strangulation followed by the abdominal mutilations, an interruption, the commencement of an escape delayed by the victim showing signs of life? Then a throat cut before or after the witness(es) depart? Just brainstorming - no need for alarm.

[The Rookie Detective]

Hi RD,

Are you referring to "multiple female witnesses" as Mrs Colville and her daughter. At one time I thought that the Colville incident may be related but it turned out that that incident was a little after midnight, so the connection would seem unlikely.

Cheers, George

But if this assault that was heard did occur before midnight, then that could imply that the Ripper attacked another woman prior to murdering Nichols.

Could the bloodstains have been made by another woman having been attacked before Nichols?

The important thing to remember here is that unless mother and daughter both lied, then a woman was indeed heard being attacked/running from her attacker, and who headed from the northern section of Brady Street, and who then ran south towards the witnesses location, when the woman outside was heard hitting the shutters of their shop.

There is no reason to suggest that the 2 witnesses lied, and on that basis, there was another woman attacked prior to Nichols having been murdered.

What are the chances of 2 women being attacked within such close proximity and within a relatively small time frame, and the assailant being a different man?

Could the Ripper have been stalking the area around Brady Street/Bucks Row and Nichols met her fate by walking towards her killer?

There's no evidence to support the idea that Nichols met her killer and accompanied him to somewhere secluded.

Otherwise, she wouldn't have been found left in the street.

Could this then explain why the Ripper moved to murdering Chapman in a back garden; away from the public street?

It seems to me that Nichols was so intoxicated that she went off wandering and the Ripper spotted her and killed her impulsively after assessing she would be easy prey.

Could there have been a woman who was assaulted in Brady St, who never came forward?

Could Nichols have been a rebound kill after the Ripper made such a mess of the woman he attacked closer to midnight?

Ultimately, the assault on the woman that was heard by mother and daughter, cannot be dismissed as irrelevant to the Ripper case, because even if this wasn't Nichols being initially attacked, it still suggests that the Ripper attacked another would be victim before he even saw Nichols.

Were there any records of any women who went to the hospital, and who were reported as having any stab wounds or cuts to their torso?

The London Hospital would be the obvious first port of call.

Fascinating.

[Tom_Wescott]

Hi RD,

Are you referring to "multiple female witnesses" as Mrs Colville and her daughter. At one time I thought that the Colville incident may be related but it turned out that that incident was a little after midnight, so the connection would seem unlikely.

Cheers, George

The timing of the Colwell event was not established. They weren't certain of the time.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[The Rookie Detective]

The timing of the Colwell event was not established. They weren't certain of the time.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

That's what I thought Tom.

One thing that can be said with some confidence, is that the shop downstairs was closed, as someone (or something) was (allegedly) heard to have hit the shutters downstairs, shortly after a woman was heard in some kind of distress.

The shop was closed, so the incident must have occurred after hours.

Which of course depends on what kind of shop they ran, and also if they had opened during the previous day.

[Geddy2112]

What are the chances of 2 women being attacked within such close proximity and within a relatively small time frame, and the assailant being a different man?

The double event?

[Tel]

The double event?

What double event?

[GBinOz]

But if this assault that was heard did occur before midnight, then that could imply that the Ripper attacked another woman prior to murdering Nichols.

Could the bloodstains have been made by another woman having been attacked before Nichols?

The important thing to remember here is that unless mother and daughter both lied, then a woman was indeed heard being attacked/running from her attacker, and who headed from the northern section of Brady Street, and who then ran south towards the witnesses location, when the woman outside was heard hitting the shutters of their shop.

There is no reason to suggest that the 2 witnesses lied, and on that basis, there was another woman attacked prior to Nichols having been murdered.

What are the chances of 2 women being attacked within such close proximity and within a relatively small time frame, and the assailant being a different man?

Could the Ripper have been stalking the area around Brady Street/Bucks Row and Nichols met her fate by walking towards her killer?

There's no evidence to support the idea that Nichols met her killer and accompanied him to somewhere secluded.

Otherwise, she wouldn't have been found left in the street.

Could this then explain why the Ripper moved to murdering Chapman in a back garden; away from the public street?

It seems to me that Nichols was so intoxicated that she went off wandering and the Ripper spotted her and killed her impulsively after assessing she would be easy prey.

Could there have been a woman who was assaulted in Brady St, who never came forward?

Could Nichols have been a rebound kill after the Ripper made such a mess of the woman he attacked closer to midnight?

Ultimately, the assault on the woman that was heard by mother and daughter, cannot be dismissed as irrelevant to the Ripper case, because even if this wasn't Nichols being initially attacked, it still suggests that the Ripper attacked another would be victim before he even saw Nichols.

Were there any records of any women who went to the hospital, and who were reported as having any stab wounds or cuts to their torso?

The London Hospital would be the obvious first port of call.

Fascinating.

Hi RD,

I cannot think of any reason for Colville or her daughter to have lied. But I don't see any evidence for the suggestion that the Colville incident occurred at a time in any way coincident with the Nichols murder. Your suggestion that the incident reported by Colville was a failed attack by the ripper prior to the Nichols murder is interesting conjecture, but no more than that. But fascinating, never the less.

Cheers, George

[Geddy2112]

What double event?

The one that happened 137 years ago yesterday, Liz Stride and Catherine Eddowes.