Missing hour between Mitre Square and Goulston Street

[Wickerman]

Dr Brown said,'"it was a corner of the apron with the string still attached".

But Harry, I previously showed you that Browns words reported in the press were "portion" not "corner".

[harry]

Jon.
The words I used were reportedly given by Dr Brown at the inquest.Go to victims,dissertations on Eddowes.Brown used two descriptions.I'm sure if the pieces had been square or rectangular,and could be clearly recognised as such,he would have said so.Most all the descriptions give one clean cut as separating the two parts. I believe it would be difficult,with just one clean cut,to leave a square or rectangular shape from an apron,or anything else(try a piece of paper),and the ripper didn't have the luxury of time to experiment.

[Wickerman]

Jon.
The words I used were reportedly given by Dr Brown at the inquest.Go to victims,dissertations on Eddowes.Brown used two descriptions.I'm sure if the pieces had been square or rectangular,and could be clearly recognised as such,he would have said so.Most all the descriptions give one clean cut as separating the two parts. I believe it would be difficult,with just one clean cut,to leave a square or rectangular shape from an apron,or anything else(try a piece of paper),and the ripper didn't have the luxury of time to experiment.

Harry.
I know what you used Harry.
I have the entire inquest recorded by every principal source, all collated together. Which is why the quotes I provided to you were so long, perhaps you did not read them.

The original version held (at the time) at the Corporation of London Records Office is the only version that used the word 'corner'.
All the others used 'portion', or 'piece', so it does not look conclusive for the official version.

The official version of the inquest (Eddowes or Kelly) is not always the correct version, or even the complete version.
Take some time to study them line-by-line with their respective press versions, you will see what I mean.

[K-453]

Wouldn't the word "corner", if it actually described something triangular, be accompanied by expressions like "slant", "oblique", or "diagonally cut"?

[Wickerman]

Wouldn't the word "corner", if it actually described something triangular, be accompanied by expressions like "slant", "oblique", or "diagonally cut"?

If Dr. Brown was actually describing the apron, then possibly, but we don't even know if they were Dr. Browns actual words.

Only the Daily News gave similar wording to what we read in the Coroner's version (CLRO), here are both.

(CLRO) My attention was called to the apron – It was the corner of the apron with a string attached - The blood spots were of recent origin

(DN) My attention was called to the apron which the woman was wearing. It was a portion of an apron cut, with the string attached to it (produced). The blood stains on it are recent.


The Morning Advertiser gave it differently, as if it was Coroner Langham who asked the question, instead of Brown making a statement.
In this version all Dr Brown said is, "it was".

(MA) Was your attention called to this portion of an apron which was found upon the woman?-It was. There were stains of blood upon the apron.
Are the stains of recent origin?-They are.


The Times did not even include this first debatable line, they began their coverage with the second comment.

(T) Mr. Crawford. - Could you say whether the blood spots on the piece of apron produced were of recent origin? Witness. - They are of recent origin.

The rest of Dr Brown's testimony deals with the portion found in Goulston St.
So as you can see the contention is between the words recorded by Langham, and those recorded by the Daily News reporter.
(I'm assuming Coroner Langham took his own notes)

Your point is a good one if, the apron was being described in any way.

[Michael W Richards]

Eddowes is murdered at 1:40am (approx.)
2:20am Long doesn't see apron.
2:50am Long finds apron.
Min. 40min to a Max. of 1hr 10min.
55 minutes (mean).

So it is approx. 1 hour of JtR moving from Eddowes in Mitre Square to Goulston Street.

He has a knife, bloody apron, left kidney and the major part of her uterus.

Why is he taking so long to go home? What is he doing?

Many years ago I started here with the name Batman, Im surprised it took so much time before someone else used it.

Anyway, a very simple explanation is available to explain why Long didnt see the apron until close to 3am. Using Longs own statement..."It was NOT there"...referring to his pass at 2am...it is very reasonable to conclude that the person who took the apron section did not travel directly to Goulston immediately after the Mitre Square murder. That leaves him with approx. 70 minutes to use up, enough time to travel in the opposite direction of Goulston for approx. 20 minutes before heading to the East End.

He may have gone North, or South, or as I said. West, ..but the real point here is that he did not head immediately to the East End where the cloth was dropped.

The age old assumption that the Ripper likely came from the East End can be put into question based on this murder. IF Jack the Ripper killed her at all, of course.

IF he went to put the organs somewhere I believe that gives more credibility to the Lusk letter...in that the Eddowes organs were likely set in fluids to preserve them.

Cheers

[harry]

K453,
A corner in 1888 would be no different than today.The word explains itself.You can detach a corner in a number of ways,but the corner that Dr Brown examined,was detached with one clean cut.That seems to be the only description given.It seems to have been accepted at that time without further explanation or argument.If the apron had been cut,horizontaly or vertically,I'm sure Dr brown would have been referring to a half,as tw o halves would have been the probable result,although a small portion of a sq uare or rectangular shape containing a corner can be cut,but that would require two cuts,one vertical,one horizontal.
Jon,
I do read your posts.I also read other posts.Mine are usually brief,as I tend to cut corners.

[Batman]

Another thing which could account for the missing time is this...

JtR kills Stride but doesn't go home to cool off and try again. Instead he just carries on despite having just killed someone. He has been chased off. He maybe has blood on himself. Maybe not. However he risks going to Mitre square.

JtR kills Eddowes but doesn't go home to cool off. Instead he just carries on despite having just killed 2 people. He has been chased off once tonight but got away with the second. Maybe he has some blood on himself, maybe not. However he risks going to look for a 3rd prostitute that night and have himself a hatrick.

During that time he decides that he is carrying too much evidence with him and there has been too much blood which could get him identified. He breaks his search for a third victim that night, cleans himself up and because he didn't get a third and because of Schwartz, writes the GSG, deposes the apron piece and goes home.

[Abby Normal]

Another thing which could account for the missing time is this...

JtR kills Stride but doesn't go home to cool off and try again. Instead he just carries on despite having just killed someone. He has been chased off. He maybe has blood on himself. Maybe not. However he risks going to Mitre square.

JtR kills Eddowes but doesn't go home to cool off. Instead he just carries on despite having just killed 2 people. He has been chased off once tonight but got away with the second. Maybe he has some blood on himself, maybe not. However he risks going to look for a 3rd prostitute that night and have himself a hatrick.

During that time he decides that he is carrying too much evidence with him and there has been too much blood which could get him identified. He breaks his search for a third victim that night, cleans himself up and because he didn't get a third and because of Schwartz, writes the GSG, deposes the apron piece and goes home.

Hi Batman
Yes pretty much.

I think he headed to his bolt hole right after eddowes-cleaned up a bit, dropped off the knife and goodies, and still miffed at all the interuptions/being seen by various jews, then headed out with the apron and wrote the gsg.

the night of the double event was the first time the ripper had been seen well by witnesses. remember their was none for Nichols and one sketchy sighting (Long) for Chapman. There was a slew of them this night and what better way to get back at the jewish witnesses than leave incriminating evidence against them?

He may have gone so far to think that these particular witnesses would soon be going to police with his appearance/description, so decided to make their life a little harder-heck, maybe even make them the suspects, or at least jews in general.

[K-453]

I wonder if he somehow got involved with the search parties coming from Berner Street?

To harp a little more on that idea:
I read somewhere "the search parties coming from Mitre Square met the search parties coming from Berner Street".

Stride was found dead at 1.00. Jack left Mitre Square at about 1.45. Walking distance between the two spots was 15 minutes, correct me if I'm wrong. So there could be search parties, or at least groups of excited people, roaming around in the neighbourhood of Mitre Square already, which meant, Jack found himself in an environment with more turmoil and more danger than usual.
So instead of speeding directly into his bolthole like on the other occasions,
- he hid somewhere for a while (In that staircase in Goulston Street?)
- he made a huge detour, then came back, because he lived in that area.
- he joined one of the groups. Would be a nice camouflage, wouldn't it?
- he went to Berner Street, because he was curious. Especially if it wasn't him who killed Stride.

[Michael W Richards]

Ultimately the real issue with this question is whether or not there indeed was an hour delay in the placement of the cloth. If there was, then the cloth was put at that spot deliberately, not dropped casually on the way home.

Since Jews made up about 90% or more of the Model Dwellings occupants, and since the chalk message is about Jews, I would think that message was placed there deliberately.

So...it all comes down to how you interpret "IT WAS NOT THERE". Does that mean I may have missed seeing it....or that I didn't see it....or that I don't recall seeing it...or that it may have been there at 2:20...or that I didn't look there.......?

Nope. His words are clear and absolute,.. he looked at that spot at 2:20 and it "WAS NOT THERE".

Now that opens up a a case for both objects to have been placed there purposefully. Which for me at least, suggests that both were likely placed there by the same source at the same time.

Too coincidental otherwise.

Cheers

[Wickerman]

Correct Michael, when PC Long was not sure about something he said precisely that. We have no cause to read anything else into "it was not there", than the obvious.

[Abby Normal]

Ultimately the real issue with this question is whether or not there indeed was an hour delay in the placement of the cloth. If there was, then the cloth was put at that spot deliberately, not dropped casually on the way home.

Since Jews made up about 90% or more of the Model Dwellings occupants, and since the chalk message is about Jews, I would think that message was placed there deliberately.

So...it all comes down to how you interpret "IT WAS NOT THERE". Does that mean I may have missed seeing it....or that I didn't see it....or that I don't recall seeing it...or that it may have been there at 2:20...or that I didn't look there.......?

Nope. His words are clear and absolute,.. he looked at that spot at 2:20 and it "WAS NOT THERE".

Now that opens up a a case for both objects to have been placed there purposefully. Which for me at least, suggests that both were likely placed there by the same source at the same time.

Too coincidental otherwise.

Cheers

Absolutely

It seems bordering on the ridiculous to refute the absolute surety of a policemans statement just because you can't fathom the behavior of a serial killer.

And since the ripper in all liklihood knew he had been spotted by Jews that night just adds another piece of Jewish connection that makes it all too much of a coincidence to me.

[harry]

Long's evidence doesn't exclude the possibility that the killer w as in the building as he passed,and had not then discarded the apron piece.So long could be correct..Doesn't follow that it had to be placed or dropped one hour or so after the killing.

[pinkmoon]

If we accept the police did they job properly and we have no reason to believe they didn't then the most obvious conclusion has to be our killer dropped the kidney of at home and then made his way towards the murder scene and dropped the piece of apron by then other people would be attracted to the murder scene so he could mingle with the crowd and gloat.