Jack the Ripper: The Secret Police Files by Trevor Marriott Page B
Authors: Trevor Marriott
Ads: Link
Knife and Spoon.
“One Red leather Cigarette Case and Tin Matchbox (Empty).
“One Ball of Hemp.
“One Piece of Red Flannel Containing Pins and Needles.
“One Piece of Old White Apron.”
Note the item listed at the end, “one piece of old white apron”, clearly this must be an indication that she was not wearing an apron but as I suggest, originally been in possession of two apron pieces. It should also be noted that this piece of apron found with the body was not described as being cut or torn of had any traces of blood as you might expect if she had have been wearing it around her waist at the time of her death.
It can be seen that they removed from the body all of the clothing as they came to it as it was on the body. From the descriptions of the clothing it would appear that the killer stabbed Eddowes at least four times through her outer clothing, before lifting the lower clothing up above her abdomen.
This can be seen by the descriptions of the downward cuts as described on some of the items of clothing, which ran from the waistline down towards the lower abdomen, and across the midline of the abdomen. This also goes to show that the killer had no design on the organs, otherwise why would he risk damaging organs by thrusting a long-bladed knife wildly and blindly into the stomach and drawing it down and across into the abdomen.
As with the apron piece found in Goulston Street, there are conflicting accounts and descriptions given by the police officers and doctors, both in their official statements, and as reported by the press in the various newspapers with regards to the apron piece from the mortuary.
The official statement of Dr. Brown I believe adds real corroboration to the fact that she wasn’t wearing an apron . “My attention was called to the apron it was the corner of the apron with the string attached.” This shows that the apron piece from the mortuary was of the type which originally had two strings attached.
However, he describes it as a corner piece with a string attached, so that would mean that it was either the left or right hand corner nearest to the waistband. So that would have meant that if she had been wearing the apron at the time of her death and the killer had cut or torn the apron piece found in Goulston Street then the rest of the apron would be left behind still attached to her body and still fixed with the two strings still attached, and would have been described as an old white apron with piece missing, not as was described as old white apron piece, and would have been of significant size for the doctors and police to document it as just that. But because the piece found in Goulston Street matched the piece from the mortuary what was accounted with the two pieces was in effect one half of an apron.
However, as previously stated there were discrepancies and conflicting reports both from official statements of officers and doctors alike.
Dr. Brown as quoted in The Telegraph Inquest report:
“Coroner: Was your attention called to the portion of the apron that was found in Goulston-street?
“Dr. Brown: Yes I fitted that portion which was spotted with blood to the remaining portion, which was still attached by the strings to the body .”
Note he refers to strings suggesting that the apron was still fixed to the body. This press report is incorrect and misleading. As has been previously stated the body arrived at the mortuary at 3.15am and was then stripped. The Goulston Street apron piece was at that time in the hands of Dr. Phillips who was at Leman Street Police Station and after receiving it later on, took it to the mortuary for it to be matched with the mortuary piece, but he did not arrive at the mortuary till after 5.20am so Dr. Brown could not have fitted the Goulston Street piece at the mortuary while the mortuary piece was affixed to the body.
Again with the police officers there are inconsistencies with the reports, Inspector Collard’s official statement:
“One Red leather Cigarette Case and Tin Matchbox (Empty).
“One Ball of Hemp.
“One Piece of Red Flannel Containing Pins and Needles.
“One Piece of Old White Apron.”
Note the item listed at the end, “one piece of old white apron”, clearly this must be an indication that she was not wearing an apron but as I suggest, originally been in possession of two apron pieces. It should also be noted that this piece of apron found with the body was not described as being cut or torn of had any traces of blood as you might expect if she had have been wearing it around her waist at the time of her death.
It can be seen that they removed from the body all of the clothing as they came to it as it was on the body. From the descriptions of the clothing it would appear that the killer stabbed Eddowes at least four times through her outer clothing, before lifting the lower clothing up above her abdomen.
This can be seen by the descriptions of the downward cuts as described on some of the items of clothing, which ran from the waistline down towards the lower abdomen, and across the midline of the abdomen. This also goes to show that the killer had no design on the organs, otherwise why would he risk damaging organs by thrusting a long-bladed knife wildly and blindly into the stomach and drawing it down and across into the abdomen.
As with the apron piece found in Goulston Street, there are conflicting accounts and descriptions given by the police officers and doctors, both in their official statements, and as reported by the press in the various newspapers with regards to the apron piece from the mortuary.
The official statement of Dr. Brown I believe adds real corroboration to the fact that she wasn’t wearing an apron . “My attention was called to the apron it was the corner of the apron with the string attached.” This shows that the apron piece from the mortuary was of the type which originally had two strings attached.
However, he describes it as a corner piece with a string attached, so that would mean that it was either the left or right hand corner nearest to the waistband. So that would have meant that if she had been wearing the apron at the time of her death and the killer had cut or torn the apron piece found in Goulston Street then the rest of the apron would be left behind still attached to her body and still fixed with the two strings still attached, and would have been described as an old white apron with piece missing, not as was described as old white apron piece, and would have been of significant size for the doctors and police to document it as just that. But because the piece found in Goulston Street matched the piece from the mortuary what was accounted with the two pieces was in effect one half of an apron.
However, as previously stated there were discrepancies and conflicting reports both from official statements of officers and doctors alike.
Dr. Brown as quoted in The Telegraph Inquest report:
“Coroner: Was your attention called to the portion of the apron that was found in Goulston-street?
“Dr. Brown: Yes I fitted that portion which was spotted with blood to the remaining portion, which was still attached by the strings to the body .”
Note he refers to strings suggesting that the apron was still fixed to the body. This press report is incorrect and misleading. As has been previously stated the body arrived at the mortuary at 3.15am and was then stripped. The Goulston Street apron piece was at that time in the hands of Dr. Phillips who was at Leman Street Police Station and after receiving it later on, took it to the mortuary for it to be matched with the mortuary piece, but he did not arrive at the mortuary till after 5.20am so Dr. Brown could not have fitted the Goulston Street piece at the mortuary while the mortuary piece was affixed to the body.
Again with the police officers there are inconsistencies with the reports, Inspector Collard’s official statement:
Similar Books
