The writing - a name?

[mklhawley]

Thanks Hunter.

Mike

[Hunter]

From the inquest-

Dr. G. W. Sequeira: I am well acquainted with the locality and the position of the lamps in the square. Where the murder was committed was probably the darkest part of the square, but there was sufficient light to enable the miscreant to perpetrate the deed...

[mklhawley]

How Dark Was it?

Does anyone know more about how well lit this particular location was?

Mike

[Edward]

Davey Mac and Edward,

You guys seem to be struggling to explain why the Ripper couldn't have written the graffiti. Of course he could have. In fact, he's the only person we can for certain place in that spot in that hour with a motive to write the graffiti.

Tom Wescott

Tom -

I have great respect for your knowledge about this mystery. I am a relative newcomer to the Casebook, but I am not "struggling" to prove or disprove anything. I believe that those who are certain that Jack wrote the message are the ones who are "struggling". There is absolutely no proof that the killer wrote that message.

Who knows the motive for writing that message? The message does not directly (or even indirectly) refer to any specific act. (including murder) Anybody in that overcrowded area of London could have any number of motives for writing such a message.

The message itself, according to some of the police officials looked "recent". Recent? The term itself is subject to interpretation. Recent could have been the morning or even the day before the murder ever occurred. Additionally, if that particular message was the only graffiti in the East end, I would probably feel that more then likely, the killer wrote it.

The fact that the piece of apron landed near some graffiti does not necessarily link the two. There is no proof of a connection. There is absolutely no proof of when the message was chalked (especially within that particular hour). There is no reference to the murder(s) within the message itself.

Respectfully,
Edward

[JacknJill]

Hello Everyone,

This dissertation offers some plausable explainations tha have been discussed here for the apron and grafitti.

http://www.casebook.org/dissertations/dst-graffito.html

Hey Hunter!
Thanks heaps for that. It's a rather interesting read. I recommend anybody coming back here to take a read of that. ^

[Hunter]

message

Hello Everyone,

This dissertation offers some plausable explainations tha have been discussed here for the apron and grafitti.

http://www.casebook.org/dissertations/dst-graffito.html

[JacknJill]

I'll probably be shot down for this - but I think that even if the Ripper did not write the graffiti, he was at least aware of it. Because, as before mentioned, it is unlikely to have been pure coincidence that the Ripper took the apron piece and dropped it there. I don't think he would have been careless enough to do it by accident.

[Phil Carter]

Hello all,

Please correct me if I am wrong, but I think Halse is the only person known to have been at both places, Mitre Square and Goulston St.

best wishes

Phil

[Tom_Wescott]

Hi Dave,

The mob outside Dutfield's Yard was nowhere near Goulston Street, so I don't get your point there. As for opportunity, there was over 30 minutes from when the Ripper left Mitre Square to when the graffiti was discovered. That's ample opportunity.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[DaveMc]

Davey Mac and Edward,

You guys seem to be struggling to explain why the Ripper couldn't have written the graffiti. Of course he could have. In fact, he's the only person we can for certain place in that spot in that hour with a motive to write the graffiti. And, as Dave points out, the Ripper came prepared and had not removed an apron portion from Chapman, so what then would his purpose for the apron piece have been if not to accompany the graffiti? Sure, it would have been nice and neat for us all had he left it in Mitre Square, but he may have used up his alotted time and didn't want to risk it. Or, it may have been too dark in Mitre Square to allow for his writing. The investigating officers, for the most part, felt the graffiti was written by the Ripper, and perhaps that's for good reason.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

Hi Tom,

I have to reject that he was "the only person" to be placed in that spot.
There was a reported "mob" at the Stride scene just an hour before.
In several reports and accounts, there are people out doing the normal night's business, even with the rain.

According to the killers prior actions, he's long gone from the area by the time the message is placed.

With Halse and his officers prowling the streets between Mitre and Goulston (as he reports) it's beyond your own scope of reasoning that "the only man" in the location was not stopped by him while the killer has 15 minutes of lingering time on hand to avoid detection.
How cold Halse miss just ONE man.

I don't feel that I "struggled" to explain anything. There was no wild fancy in my argument.
I presented the absolute minimum times for loitering and placement.

If I did anything, I left the argument open to challenge by as much as I could.

I can't find a motive for the killer to have left the message.
I can't find a repetition of the act.
I can't find a reasonable opportunity for him to have done so.
I can't find reasonable risk for the killer to challenge avoiding the Police the that minimum 15 minute period of time to make the message.

The message is not that important and unfitting to any other act of the killer.
The message makes no statement, whatsoever, as to why he's killing.
In short?
It's makes no sense that the killer left that message.

There is some sense, however, in believing a frustrated citizen considered it a worthy act and that person could have more likely had the opportunity, time and means to do it.

The stretch of the argument is that the message and piece weren't found until 2:55. Allowing 5 minutes to write the message and get out of sight, the time for the killer's travel time extends 25 minutes and his loiter time increases from 15 minutes to 40 minutes.
The time he carries the piece reported still "wet with blood" extends to over an hour's time.

If I struggled to do anything, it was to err on the side of a counter-argument.
The weight of the matter clearly favors that someone other than the killer made that message.

[Tom_Wescott]

Davey Mac and Edward,

You guys seem to be struggling to explain why the Ripper couldn't have written the graffiti. Of course he could have. In fact, he's the only person we can for certain place in that spot in that hour with a motive to write the graffiti. And, as Dave points out, the Ripper came prepared and had not removed an apron portion from Chapman, so what then would his purpose for the apron piece have been if not to accompany the graffiti? Sure, it would have been nice and neat for us all had he left it in Mitre Square, but he may have used up his alotted time and didn't want to risk it. Or, it may have been too dark in Mitre Square to allow for his writing. The investigating officers, for the most part, felt the graffiti was written by the Ripper, and perhaps that's for good reason.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[JacknJill]

Hi JacknJill,

I don't understand. What is a policeman supposed to have done ?

Amitiés,
David

Depending on which one you are replying to -
* It seems to me that if no policeman could copy down twelve words correctly then they weren't taking it all that seriously.
* If you were referring to the policeman protecting JTR, I've heard/read theories before that perhaps JTR had inside men (namely policemen) that somehow tampered with the case. In this instance - by pretending to copy down the message but really by copying it falsely. It's a bit far-fetched but it could be possible.

[DaveMc]

And then we have Stephenson peculiar French solution...while re Lusk letter, an Irishman (if I'm correct) has been suggested...

Bingo, you're right.

They said "Irish" in the video I got that from.
I just assumed since it had to with insanity, they made a mistake and meant to say it was a Scot.

[DVV]

Hi JacknJill,

I don't understand. What is a policeman supposed to have done ?

Amitiés,
David

[JacknJill]

I've actually heard some people comment that perhaps a policeman did it on purpose. Something about how if it was linked to the Ripper then a policeman could have been protecting him.