View Single Post
  #7  
Old 06-23-2017, 04:08 AM
Michael W Richards Michael W Richards is offline
Assistant Commissioner
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 3,243
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Charles Daniels View Post
Just an idea floating through my head this morning --

Perhaps the placement of the bloody apron at the exact place it was left was meant to intimidate a specific person?

I mean if you want to drop off a bloody apron an hour after a murder, then a location 5 minutes away from the scene makes little sense or is hard to understand at the best of times.

The killer also had seemingly endless potential dump sites for the apron in the area.

Just got me wondering if there was someone in the building the killer wanted to scare or send a message to.

I mean, it could well be that the apron and graffiti have been terrible red herrings all these years -- the killer used the apron for some purpose and dumped it next to some graffiti. That's actually been my default assumption for years now.

But I think it's good to go back and look again and question...

I'm assuming the police probably checked out that property very thoroughly and spoke to residents there. So who was living there?

It could be just to unsettle the Jewish tenants there, but, I can imagine a killer getting his jollies dropping such an item at the doorstep of someone he had some personal direct beef against...
Hi Charles,

The occupancy at the Model Homes off Goulston was almost 100% Jewish, and there may be a link to the International Club on Berner hidden in there. The cloth as a message, or as a sample of proof of the authors authenticity, is something Ive considered for sometime now. And an interpretation of the GSG would support that idea..." The Jewes(on Berner St at the club) are not the ones who will be blamed for nothing (no good reason)". Or they should be blamed, for good reason.

The apron section would be the proof that the killer of Mitre Square left the message, and coupled with the message, proof that he claimed to have only killed one person that night. When looking at The Lusk Letter it seems to me to have that kind of message...one woman killed by the man everyone suspects was Jack on the night Kates kidney was taken.

I tend to support Longs assertion that "It was not there" when he first passed the entrance.
__________________
Michael Richards
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote