Chalk users

[Errata]

So geology is certainly no specialty of mine, but isn't half of England made of chalk? It was my impression that London was about an equal mix chalk, clay and sandstone. Consequently any rock that just happened to be lying about had a pretty good chance of being chalk, and being unprocessed it would be less fragile and wouldn't dull at the same rate.

[Steven Russell]

Good point, Errata. I remember as kids we woul "chalk" stuff on walls using bits of stone or rock.

Best wishes,
Steve.

[drstrange169]

Various Dock workers also used chalk.

[The Grave Maurice]

Anyone excited by the murder and pumping oxygen round there blood would surely have written in large letters. As another thought I know that taylors chalk has a very thin edge for detailed marking of clothes for cutting. If the GSG was very neat then perhaps this type of chalk was used. It certainly could not have been rough playground chalk.

If you've mentioned this before, waterloo, I'm sorry I missed it because it's quite perceptive. Personally, I don't believe that JtR had anything to do with the message, but your idea of tailor's chalk is very good. Of course, the writer could have used any kind of chalk and sharpened it with, say, a KNIFE. [Cue spooky music]

[Jonathan H]

I agree with Phil H

Druitt's identity would not have become known if the official verson of the 'Report' had been requested and used by the Liberal Home Sec.

In the Commons, Asquith would have spoken in generalties.

On the other hand, Hunter, I think you raise an excellent counter-point.

eg. If you want to conceal Druitt then why take the risk of mentioning his name at all? In an official doument no less??

My theory is because Macnaghten was caught in a bind. He had learned about Druitt because the story had leaked in Dorset in 1891 (in 1892 the story was referred to again and whilst no new information was forthcoming, Farquhrarson was named!) and thus could do so again, perhaps in the wake of 'The Sun' articles of early 1894. Macnaghten could not risk not mentioning Druitt at all, especially since he, as a senior police chief, had learned about him 'some year after' (Mac, 1914).

In 1898, Macaghten began disseminating this 'solution' to the public via an alternate version of the same document -- in which Druitt's suspect status was elevated whilst the family's certainty was dimnished -- and with Druitt's identity sufficiently concealed that the tabloids could not find him, and didn't.

[drstrange169]

Tailors chalk does have a thin edge but its unusual shape makes it quite hard to write with precision.

[The Grave Maurice]

Thanks, Dusty. I was beginning to believe that we were collectively incapable of keeping a single thread on topic.

[drstrange169]

Plenty of time for drifting ... blimey, I think we just did!

[Adam Went]

Waterloo raises a good point in that one would expect the writing to be bigger and have a "nastier" appearance about it than the GSG did if it really was from the killer - not only that, one would also expect it to be scribbled in his rush to get it written and get out of there without being spotted, or even just from his adrenalin at the time, but instead it's described as being written in "good schoolboy handwriting" ??

There's little doubt that Warren made an error by ordering the writing removed before it could be photographed - that's crime scene investigation 101 in 2011, whether it's related to the crime or not - but it's pretty clear I think, from the style of the writing as much as the content of the writing as well as the location of the writing, that the killer was not responsible for it.

As for the chalk itself, walking around with chalk in your pocket in 1888 would be the equivalent of walking around with a texta/marker pen in your pocket in 2011. In other words, not that uncommon at all, and hardly a reason to embellish or diminish the case against ANY suspect/s.

Cheers,
Adam.

[drstrange169]

Yes, Waterloo is right, Adam, check out the Manson family wall scrawled graffito. It might also narrow down some of the more racial hate impromptu graffiti, which tends towards rushed scribble too.

But given the discrepancy in the two copied versions we might not be able to take the "good school boy hand" as absolute gospel either.

[PC Roadnight]

Just to drop another pebble in the pond........All Police Officers would (or at the very least should) have carried chalk with them.

Even in 1966 when parading before a shift part of our 'appointments' in Camberwell (SE London) still included the obligatory chalk stick.

[Stewart P Evans]

Graffiti

...
Even in 1966 when parading before a shift part of our 'appointments' in Camberwell (SE London) still included the obligatory chalk stick.

I have visions of Met police officers creeping about their beats at night scribbling graffiti everywhere.

[curious4]

I have visions of Met police officers creeping about their beats at night scribbling graffiti everywhere.

Yet another clue! Stewart P IS JTR!

C4

[Hunter]

Good schoolboy hand just means the text was written in cursive, instead of print. It is also the faster way to write.

[Steven Russell]

Waterloo raises a good point in that one would expect the writing to be bigger and have a "nastier" appearance about it than the GSG did if it really was from the killer - not only that, one would also expect it to be scribbled in his rush to get it written and get out of there without being spotted, or even just from his adrenalin at the time, but instead it's described as being written in "good schoolboy handwriting" ??

There's little doubt that Warren made an error by ordering the writing removed before it could be photographed - that's crime scene investigation 101 in 2011, whether it's related to the crime or not - but it's pretty clear I think, from the style of the writing as much as the content of the writing as well as the location of the writing, that the killer was not responsible for it.

As for the chalk itself, walking around with chalk in your pocket in 1888 would be the equivalent of walking around with a texta/marker pen in your pocket in 2011. In other words, not that uncommon at all, and hardly a reason to embellish or diminish the case against ANY suspect/s.

Cheers,
Adam.

Agree completely with every point. What's a texta?

Best wishes,
Steve.