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 caz 31 minutes ago.
Maybrick, James: One Incontrovertible, Unequivocal, Undeniable Fact Which Refutes the Diary - by caz 45 minutes ago.
General Suspect Discussion: Suspect battle: Cross/Lechmere vs. Hutchinson - by Fisherman 1 hours ago.
Maybrick, James: One Incontrovertible, Unequivocal, Undeniable Fact Which Refutes the Diary - by caz 1 hour and 18 minutes ago.
Maybrick, James: One Incontrovertible, Unequivocal, Undeniable Fact Which Refutes the Diary - by caz 1 hour and 22 minutes ago.
Maybrick, James: One Incontrovertible, Unequivocal, Undeniable Fact Which Refutes the Diary - by ChrisGeorge 1 hour and 24 minutes ago.

Most Popular Threads:
General Suspect Discussion: Suspect battle: Cross/Lechmere vs. Hutchinson - (40 posts)
General Suspect Discussion: What if Lechmere wasn't Cross - (20 posts)
Hutchinson, George: Hutchinson The Sailor Man - (15 posts)
Maybrick, James: One Incontrovertible, Unequivocal, Undeniable Fact Which Refutes the Diary - (11 posts)
Conferences and Meetings: American Conference 2016 - (1 posts)
Motive, Method and Madness: Musing on Muti Killings... - (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 > Letters and Communications > Goulston Street Graffito

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 02-25-2012, 08:10 PM
Monty Monty is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Leicestershire
Posts: 5,116
Default The Halse version

Yes, I know, yet another wall writng thread....yawn.

Its confession time. The wall writing has many variations with the most common one, 'The Juwes are the men that will not be blamed for nothing" being the most favoured.

However, I personally take Halses version, "The Juwes are not the men that will be blamed for nothing". Don Rumbelow is of similar mind and cites his reason for taking Halses version as the fact Halse was at the scene for some time, and her also argues this version conforms to the 3 lines described.

Now I know Warren had it copied and to be honest, my conviction isn't 100%. Also, as some of you are aware, I do not feel the killer wrote it.

The versions change little but what I'm interested in is if Halses version is the correct one, does it change peoples interpretation of its meaning?

I'm just merely curious.

Monty
__________________
Leicester City F.C. - Champions of England



Author of Capturing Jack the Ripper.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/aw/d/1445621622
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 02-25-2012, 08:24 PM
ChrisGeorge ChrisGeorge is offline
Inspector
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,382
Default

Hi Monty

Frankly whichever version was the correct one, and I do think you make a good argument for Halse being right with his rendering, there is still the same double negative. Thus, the statement remains rather nonsensical and hard to interpret in either version.

All the best

Chris
__________________
Christopher T. George
Co-Organizer, RipperCon in Baltimore
Editor-at-Large, Ripperologist
http://www.ripperologist.biz
http://blog.casebook.org/chrisgeorge
For info about RipperCon, in Baltimore, MD,
April 8-10, 2016, go to http://rippercon.com/
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 02-25-2012, 08:25 PM
lynn cates lynn cates is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 13,841
Default versions

Hello Neil. I think you have an astonishingly good idea here.

You are right that Halse spent a good deal of time looking at the graffito and, if I recall properly, made a good bit of noise concerning Sir Charles' proposed deletion of it.

As regards meaning, I think Halse's version makes a good bit more sense than the standard one. Whatever one's view of the GSG, the standard version is all but meaningless.

Cheers.
LC
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 02-25-2012, 10:39 PM
Stephen Thomas Stephen Thomas is offline
Chief Inspector
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,727
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Monty View Post
The versions change little but what I'm interested in is if Halses version is the correct one, does it change peoples interpretation of its meaning?
Both versions have exactly the same meaning and the same number of words. Only the word 'not' is in a different place and this does not affect the meaning of the message. I imagine that the officer who was ordered to transcribe the message before it was erased would have taken care to get it dead right. In my opinion the sentence includes a simple double negative (not/nothing) and hence means 'stop blaming the Jews for everything' and a frenzied disemboweller who had killed one or two women not a million miles away would not, I think, play silly word games.
__________________
allisvanityandvexationofspirit
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 02-26-2012, 02:39 AM
Premium Member
The Grave Maurice The Grave Maurice is offline
Premium Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Western Canada
Posts: 1,671
Default

Interesting, Neil. I had forgotten about Rumbelow's endorsing the Halse version. However moving the "not" doesn't aid in my interpretation of the message. I still don't understand it and, in any event, like you, I don't believe that it was written by JtR.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 02-26-2012, 02:58 AM
Wickerman Wickerman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 7,953
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephen Thomas View Post
..... a frenzied disemboweller who had killed one or two women not a million miles away would not, I think, play silly word games.
And for those he think he might, then he had ample space and time in Kelly's room to scribble to his hearts content, but nothing....

Well, besides the FM, lets say


But to the question of the thread, Longs' version, which incidently appears to have been witnessed by the Inspector, who corrected his spelling, tends to suggest to me that, "The Jews will not accept blame for anything they do". Whereas, Halse's version reads like, "The Jews are not the people to be blamed for just anything".
So I think the placement of the "not" does influence the intended meaning, but in any case, the small size of the scribble is not consistent with a "hey, look what I did!" attitude argued to be the reason behind the writing in the first place. So, no, not written by the killer.

Regards, Jon S.
__________________
Regards, Jon S.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 02-26-2012, 03:37 AM
lynn cates lynn cates is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 13,841
Default connotation

Hello Stephen, Ken, Jon. Although logically there is no difference, yet the Halse version seems to connote, "If you blame us, then we'll give you a reason to do so."

Cheers.
LC
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 02-26-2012, 10:55 AM
Stephen Thomas Stephen Thomas is offline
Chief Inspector
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,727
Default

I'm constantly amazed at people here who don't understand the use of the double negative which is used in common English speaking for emphasis and has been for hundreds of years. As Spock might have said 'It's grammar, Captain, but not as we know it'. Here's Elvis with a fine double negative in the middle eight of this song.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hNNYFdklVJI
__________________
allisvanityandvexationofspirit
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 02-26-2012, 02:53 PM
Robert Robert is offline
Casebook Supporter
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 4,421
Default

"I ain't never did no wrong" - that's a triple negative, isn't it?
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 02-26-2012, 03:51 PM
DVV DVV is offline
Suspended
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: To the right of President Sunday
Posts: 6,015
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lynn cates View Post
Hello Stephen, Ken, Jon. Although logically there is no difference, yet the Halse version seems to connote, "If you blame us, then we'll give you a reason to do so."

Cheers.
LC
Hi Lynn, excellent observation.
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 07:47 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.