Casebook: Jack the Ripper - Main
   

Introduction
Victims
Suspects
Witnesses
Ripper Letters
Police Officials
Official Documents
Press Reports
Victorian London
Message Boards
Ripper Media
Authors
Dissertations
Timelines
Games & Diversions
Photo Archive
Ripper Wiki
Casebook Examiner
Ripper Podcast
About the Casebook

Most Recent Posts:
Maybrick, James: One Incontrovertible, Unequivocal, Undeniable Fact Which Refutes the Diary - by Simon Wood 1 hour and 6 minutes ago.
Maybrick, James: One Incontrovertible, Unequivocal, Undeniable Fact Which Refutes the Diary - by Scott Nelson 1 hour and 10 minutes ago.
Witnesses: Sarah and Maurice Lewis - by Paddy 2 hours ago.
Maybrick, James: Diary Quirks - by Mike J. G. 2 hours ago.
Maybrick, James: Acquiring a Life - by Mike J. G. 2 hours ago.
Maybrick, James: One Incontrovertible, Unequivocal, Undeniable Fact Which Refutes the Diary - by Mike J. G. 2 hours ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Witnesses: Sarah and Maurice Lewis - (13 posts)
Hutchinson, George: Any updates, or opinions on this witness. - (12 posts)
Maybrick, James: One Incontrovertible, Unequivocal, Undeniable Fact Which Refutes the Diary - (8 posts)
Maybrick, James: And This Is Factual! - (4 posts)
Maybrick, James: New Thoughts On The “diary” - (2 posts)
Maybrick, James: Acquiring a Life - (1 posts)

Wiki Updates:
Robert Sagar
Edit: Chris
May 9, 2015, 12:32 am
Online newspaper archives
Edit: Chris
Nov 26, 2014, 10:25 am
Joseph Lawende
Edit: Chris
Mar 9, 2014, 10:12 am
Miscellaneous research resources
Edit: Chris
Feb 13, 2014, 9:28 am
Charles Cross
Edit: John Bennett
Sep 4, 2013, 8:20 pm

Most Recent Blogs:
Mike Covell: A DECADE IN THE MAKING.
February 19, 2016, 11:12 am.
Chris George: RipperCon in Baltimore, April 8-10, 2016
February 10, 2016, 2:55 pm.
Mike Covell: Hull Prison Visit
October 10, 2015, 8:04 am.
Mike Covell: NEW ADVENTURES IN RESEARCH
August 9, 2015, 3:10 am.
Mike Covell: UPDDATES FOR THE PAST 11 MONTHS
November 14, 2014, 10:02 am.
Mike Covell: Mike’s Book Releases
March 17, 2014, 3:18 am.

Go Back   Casebook Forums > Ripper Discussions > Victims > Catherine Eddowes

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 12-26-2009, 03:27 PM
Maggyann Maggyann is offline
Constable
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Nottingham
Posts: 56
Default Some Kate things...

I know a lot of the 'facts' in all the cases are not actual 'facts' - we often have conflicting reports for example or we have delved so deeply into the tiniest element that it all becomes greatly confused. I add to that now by asking

a) how sure can we be that the apron piece found by Kate was actually hers? Obviously she was not 'wearing' it because one piece with tie was missing so surely it is just as viable a suggestion that the piece left beside her belonged to or was at least brought to the scene by the attacker.

b) the boot buttons. Kate was wearing mens boots (lace ups?) why did she have boot buttons? Again isnt it feasible that they were left by the (an) attacker. Perhaps popping off in a struggle?

c) the timings as I have said before with all the tight timelines perhaps we lose sight of the fact that 'time' was not that precise in that period. If Kate left the police station at approx 0100 and it would have taken approx 10 mins to get to the square she could have been dead long before we believe. I know the PC (Watkins) says there was nothing to see at 0130 but it is possible he didnt check that closely into the corner - he does state he shone his lantern to each corner but that doesn't mean he was scanning as low as the pavement. I would imagine he was checking for loiterers so a scan around waist height or so perhaps. He did not actually walk that section of the pavement so could easily have missed the body.

d) the couple spotted at the end of Church Passage, the women in front and with her back to the witnesses placing her hand on the chest of the man perhaps saying something like 'stay back in the shadows there are people coming'. The couple possibly being involved in the murder - trying to leave the scene? The apron - the boot buttons...

e) Kate being totally penniless earlier in the day but drunk enough in the afternoon to be arrested? Kate supposedly claiming she 'knew who JTR was' or 'knew about the murders'. Mentioning a 'reward' though there had been no talk of a reward yet? Perhaps she was thinking more of a spot of blackmail? Meeting 'X' (her suspect?) who bought her drinks, enough to get her drunk for some nefarious purpose. Telling her if anyone asks you anything just say nothing. Which she later does even when asked her name. Then 'X' has to hang around waiting till she is released from custody. She spots this person or persons as she leaves Bishopsgate Station and goes to meet them which would explain why she took the direction she did on leaving the station. A whispered 'Kate, Kate over here'. Then off to collect her 'reward' blackmail fee or whatever and death.

I know most of you are extremely well versed in all aspects (known) of the murders, the times etc so I hope I am not repeating already suggested themes and/or boring you. There is so much information on this great site and I do read it every spare minute but I have a lot still to do.

Thank you

Maggyann
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 12-26-2009, 03:56 PM
DVV DVV is offline
Suspended
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: To the right of President Sunday
Posts: 6,014
Default

Hi Magyann,

In a deconstruction mood?

a) and b): ithe shoes and apron (not a leather one) more likely belonged to Kate, don't you think? I've personally never lost my shoes in a fight!

c) and d): there are doubts about Watkins these days, but dismissing both Watkins and Lawende is too much for me...

e) the story about Kate and the Ripper is most probably an embellishment. Kate was just back from the country side, she knew less than any other Londoner about the murders.

Amitiés Magyann,
David

Last edited by DVV : 12-26-2009 at 03:59 PM. Reason: fatigue intense
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 12-26-2009, 03:59 PM
Sox Sox is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: England.
Posts: 242
Default

a) how sure can we be that the apron piece found by Kate was actually hers? Obviously she was not 'wearing' it because one piece with tie was missing so surely it is just as viable a suggestion that the piece left beside her belonged to or was at least brought to the scene by the attacker.

The apron had been mended. The piece found at Goulstone St matched exactly the mended (patched/stitched) part of her apron.
__________________
protohistorian-Where would we be without Stewart Evans or Paul Begg,Kieth Skinner, Martin Fido,or Donald Rumbelow?

Sox-Knee deep in Princes & Painters with Fenian ties who did not mutilate the women at the scene, but waited with baited breath outside the mortuary to carry out their evil plots before rushing home for tea with the wife...who would later poison them of course
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 12-26-2009, 04:07 PM
Maggyann Maggyann is offline
Constable
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Nottingham
Posts: 56
Default

Quote:
The piece found at Goulstone St matched exactly the mended (patched/stitched) part of her apron.
The two pieces fitted but that does not mean it belonged to Kate does it?

Quote:
I've personally never lost my shoes in a fight
Nobody lost their shoes just some buttons

Quote:
she knew less than any other Londoner about the murders.
but she 'knew' something? She said so.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 12-26-2009, 04:12 PM
DVV DVV is offline
Suspended
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: To the right of President Sunday
Posts: 6,014
Default

No Magyann,

it has been said that she said she knew something...
That makes a difference!

Amitiés,
David
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 12-26-2009, 04:39 PM
Sam Flynn Sam Flynn is offline
Casebook Supporter
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Wales
Posts: 10,266
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maggyann View Post
The two pieces fitted but that does not mean it belonged to Kate does it?
The piece found in Goulston Street exactly fitted the remainder of the apron attached to Kate's body when found.

In short, Maggyann, it was Kate's.
Quote:
but she 'knew' something? She said so.
No, a witness speaking to a niche paper said that she'd said so. That's not quite the same.
__________________
Kind regards, Sam Flynn

"Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 12-26-2009, 04:48 PM
Suzi Suzi is offline
Superintendent
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Wickham
Posts: 2,167
Default

Hi Gareth

EXACTLY!!

The apron piece found in G S matched 100% with the remaining piece on Kate's body- There isn't a prob here at all- apart from how the hell it ended up in GS! The game is afoot....so they say

The rumour that Kate came home because she knew something and the ''Dont Fear for me' comment are pure conjecture from the press at the time who were always up for a good line at this time!

Yes it is Goulston Street!!!

DVV- Kate may have been down to Kent 'opping along with most of the East End off for a 'holiday' to earn a little bit of coin- Bloody hard work it was though and the poor crop in 1888 made Kate and Kelly head for home early- walking back to- The East End.
__________________
'Would you like to see my African curiosities?'

Last edited by Suzi : 12-26-2009 at 05:02 PM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 12-26-2009, 05:01 PM
Maggyann Maggyann is offline
Constable
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Nottingham
Posts: 56
Default

The point as I see it is that she was NOT wearing the apron. In the list of her 'effects' it is listed as a piece of old white apron.

In the description of the body when found there is no mention of any apron whole or otherwise. Black cloth jacket, brown linsey bodice, chintz skirt, black straw bonnet, silk scarf, mens boots, grey petticoat etc no mention of any apron.

The piece of apron is listed with the tin box of sugar, empty tin matchbox etc.

Just because a piece of apron is found by her body does not mean it was her apron. The fact that it fitted with the other piece of apron found in GS does not mean it was her apron.

There were two pieces of an apron found that night that is 'fact' those pieces as a whole belonging to Kate is not a 'fact'.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 12-26-2009, 05:14 PM
Jon Guy Jon Guy is offline
Superintendent
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Blighty
Posts: 2,747
Default

Hi Maggyann

The remaining apron was attached to Eddowes by the draw string.

The apron was probably not mentioned as it had been removed as evidence (to show that the pieces match)
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 12-26-2009, 05:26 PM
Maggyann Maggyann is offline
Constable
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Nottingham
Posts: 56
Default

The piece of apron is in the list of 'scattered about her person' not the list of her clothing.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 04:47 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.