The GOGMAGOG-letter

[MysterySinger]

And be there the slightest proof behind this hypothesis?

I suspect not.

What is known -

The newspaper was published on 6th November 1888.
The postmark had to be 29th October 1888.
The address quoted is 14 Dorset Street.

Possible inferences -
a) Look out for him on Thursday night - either 1st or 8th November.
b) at either of the piers - Yarmouth piers Britannia and Wellington - Whitechapel pubs The Britannia and Duke of Wellington.
c) where he intends to do for two Norwich women before closing time - intends to murder 2 women who are getting more than their fair share.

Seems like a letter that could have been written by someone who knew the intentions of the Ripper. No proof that it was, no proof that it wasn't.

[Pierre]

My Dear Pierre,

that is not a metaphor, your comment:

"The metaphor GOGMAGOG, if it is a metaphor (who knows),"

suggests you do not understand the difference between a coded message and a metaphor.

"The police (as a profession) should protect the people."

where does that come from?

From James Monro.

It can, and indeed has been argued that the main purpose of the law and the police is to to project property and wealth, not the people.

Haha! You are being funny now Steve! Protect "property and wealth, not the people". People are owners of property and wealth!

Go on and read Monro´s text The London Police from 1890. He writes about the "thorough recognition on the part of the citizens at large of the police as their friend and protectors".


Your view that it is about protection is based on what ? a metaphor which isn’t a metaphor, a basic misunderstanding of the purpose of the police.

So Monro had a "basic misunderstanding of the purpose of the police"? Come on Steve.

I am doing a functional historical analysis. The function of Gog and Magog are to guard, to protect. The function of the police is also to protect. So what are the "intentions" he has formed? To protect someone? If he is Gog and Magog, that is the function. If he is a policeman, that is also the function.

Without being at all rude you are being very naive.

No. It shows how the police perceived of themselves. As protectors. And if a police official wrote the GOGMAGOG-letter, he perceived of the police as protectors. That is why it must be an ironical statement when he calls himself GOGMAGOG, a "protector" - when he is a killer.

I am seriously trying to work with you at the moment, but it is not easy.

Well, I don´t think it is so bad. I think you are doing rather well. So cheer up!

Regards Pierre

[Elamarna]

My Dear Pierre,

that is not a metaphor, your comment:

"The metaphor GOGMAGOG, if it is a metaphor (who knows),"

suggests you do not understand the difference between a coded message and a metaphor.

"The police (as a profession) should protect the people."

where does that come from?
It can, and indeed has been argued that the main purpose of the law and the police is to to project property and wealth, not the people.
Your view that it is about protection is based on what ? a metaphor which isn’t a metaphor, a basic misunderstanding of the purpose of the police. Without being at all rude you are being very naive.

I am seriously trying to work with you at the moment, but it is not easy.

[Pierre]

Pierre,,
not being nasty but do you understand the difference between the City of London (1.12 Square miles.) and Greater London (611Square miles)
Only one murder took place within The City Of london.
the Commissioner Charles Warren, had nothing to do with the city of london.

The metaphor GOGMAGOG, if it is a metaphor (who knows), is connected to the City of London but the function of protecting is the important thing. The police (as a profession) should protect the people.

Regards Pierre

[Elamarna]

Pierre,,
not being nasty but do you understand the difference between the City of London (1.12 Square miles.) and Greater London (611Square miles)
Only one murder took place within The City Of london.
the Commissioner Charles Warren, had nothing to do with the city of london.

[Elamarna]

Sure. I will give you a metaphor:

The signature GOGMAGOG.

Gog and Magog were protectors of London.

The police were protectors of London.

(For the protective function of the police, see Monro, James. 1890. The London Police. )

Regards Pierre

that is not a metaphor?

coded is not the same thing, don't you know that.

anyway, the signature does not provide back up for your statement that the letter is metaphorical

[Rosella]

^ Wrong, Pierre. Gog and Magog, as they evolved from mythic figures from ancient times, were protectors of the City of London, of the Square Mile, of the financial hub of the city, not the sprawling mass of city outside.

That's why their effigies were placed at the portals of the Guildhall, which symbolised the City of London's wealth and prestige. Nothing to do with the Metropolitan Police, Monro or Scotland Yard.

The writer who signed himself GogMagog knew that and referred to it. You do know how Lord Mayors of London were elected, don't you Pierre?

[Pierre]

[B]

Hang on it can't be because in post 66 you said:


"There can be one detail in the letter pointing to him, but that is all. For me, this letter has a very low validity and reliability.

I asked you to provide an example of a methaphor from the letter.

your reply:

"Perhaps you will be able to find a metaphor in the letter yourself tomorrow or the day after tomorrow."

Pierre that not the way its done old man. when you claim something is present and are asked to point it out you don't say go find it yourself, which is what you done.

Show us a Metaphor from the letter otherwise we will all assume there are none.

Sure. I will give you a metaphor:

The signature GOGMAGOG.

Gog and Magog were protectors of London.

The police were protectors of London.

(For the protective function of the police, see Monro, James. 1890. The London Police. )

Regards Pierre

[GUT]

That was a shitty thing to say.

Mike

Yep

But true

[The Good Michael]

I'd have said he suffers from literary dioreah.

That was a shitty thing to say.

Mike

[GUT]

Pierre suffers from literary pareidolia wherein one sees things that aren't there and then cannot shake the images and they are truth. So the truth begins at an interpreted but false beginning, the lack of foundation being unable to support the following "truths" except in the mind of the pareidoliatist (new word). This the same way holy books work.

Mike

I'd have said he suffers from literary dioreah.

[The Good Michael]

Pierre suffers from literary pareidolia wherein one sees things that aren't there and then cannot shake the images and they are truth. So the truth begins at an interpreted but false beginning, the lack of foundation being unable to support the following "truths" except in the mind of the pareidoliatist (new word). This the same way holy books work.

Mike

[Elamarna]

My Dear Pierre,

Once again you answer by not answering ,

I asked you:

Now the killer would not know that the door was barricaded until he tried to open it would he?
Surely trying to force it would make some noise, if nothing else it would disturb the cat, which we know disturbed her that night when she heard the cry.
Or are you suggesting that was him trying to get into her room, surely not?

She never mentioned hearing a noise like that, either at the inquest or to the press or Police, so you are saying because she never denies it it could happen?

You replied:

"Do you think the killer was stupid, Steve? And do you think David is smarter than him? Or perhaps you are the smartest, Steve? The hypothesis of the cat. It has struck me. Congratulations on your thinking. But then again, it was just a cat, wasn´t it? A kitten. And kittens do things like that without being disturbed by killers, don´t they?"

That is not answering my questions, what has David got to do with the answers,
As normal you don't answer. and please don’t say congratulations it comes across as extremely arrogant, even if you don't mean it to

"No, my friend. It is another very small and insignificant thing. Not the latin".


Given that you posted the letter, with your comments attached including:

"The GOGMAGOG-letter may or may not be one of his letters. One thing that supports such an hypothesis is that he knew latin."

How comes you are now denying that is the link?, or are you saying more than one link?

Hang on it can't be because in post 66 you said:


"There can be one detail in the letter pointing to him, but that is all. For me, this letter has a very low validity and reliability.


I asked you to provide an example of a methaphor from the letter.

your reply:

"Perhaps you will be able to find a metaphor in the letter yourself tomorrow or the day after tomorrow."

Pierre that not the way its done old man. when you claim something is present and are asked to point it out you don't say go find it yourself, which is what you done.

Show us a Metaphor from the letter otherwise we will all assume there are none.

"You say "the numbers are not actually in the letter". If you were the killer, Steve, and were going to commit a murder, would you write the actual adress in a letter to the editor? No. You would use other words. Metaphorical words. Expressions sounding quite normal. And the point David is making is that this a very normal letter. There is nothing strange with it."

Sorry I should have been more specific, but I am sure you know what I mean
you get the numbers from the words "quarter of a mile" which of course is 1320 feet.

However the actual words are "nearly quarter of a mile" which is not 1320 feet.


"So why can we interpret this letter about Lord Mayor´s Day as giving the adress to the next crime scene and to two women by the name of Mary and Elizabeth? I am just wondering. Just asking. "

We can't , but you do

[Elamarna]

[QUOTE=Pierre;365214]Hi Rosella,

"David doesn´t know anything more than general knowledge about Lord Mayor´s Show, things everybody can read in the British Newspaper Archive or Wikipedia."


Pierre, I have some questions,

When you say "David doesn´t know anything more than general knowledge".
How do you know this?

And Could you explain why he would he need more specialist Knowledge anyway?
You appear to be saying that because his knowledge is no more than General, he should not be taken seriously! is that the intention?

What is your Level of knowledge on The Lord Mayors Show can I respectfully ask?
please note it is "The Lord Mayors Show" not Lord Mayors Show


His knowledge seems perfectly adequate for the items he was talking about to me.
I have attended the show , sometimes as a spectator, once as a participant, and have been involved in providing hospitality for those taking part on a regular basis between 1992 and 1997.




"A lot of people here have the case as a hobby. I don´t."

So What is it then to you?
It obviously is not a job is it?
You seem to spend as much time on here as most, so what do you see it as, please inform us?
You seem to have a genuine downer on many here just because they are here studying a large range of subjects coming from the Whitechapel murders just as you are doing yourself.
Your comments about Hobby seem to be aimed at demeaning lots here, do you see yourself as morally superior Pierre? if so Why?





" And so I don´t care what anyone thinks about me or what I write. For me, testing new thoughts, asking questions and trying hypotheses is important. Even if you think it is "fallacious" and "without foundation". That is no problem for me".

Going back to my point above, you sometimes come across as looking down your nose at the people here. note I do say sometimes. your comment directly above is one of those times.

Can I ask a very important question looking at the comment.

" And so I don´t care what anyone thinks about me or what I write. For me, testing new thoughts, asking questions and trying hypotheses is important. Even if you think it is "fallacious" and "without foundation". That is no problem for me".

Why are you here? i don't mean that nasty at all, what are you trying to achieve?
You don't want to listen to peoples comments that is clear in the above, if you did you would know that most of which you have suggested is not NEW at all. it has been discussed before, apart from your suspect who we do not know .

You admit you have read little on the subject, your basic knowledge of suspects appears to be very limited.
It also at times seems you have a limited amount of background knowledge with regards to Victorian Britain.

I may well be wrong in the above, if I am, I apologise, but that is the impression you give.

You come across as being very sure of yourself and your views, there is nothing wrong with that.
However it verges into Arrogance at times, are you aware of that?

This is why you get the response you do.

[GUT]

You are right. He wrote in this letter that he would kill "two Norwich women before closing time" and tried to get the police to go looking for him in the lodging house in 14 Dorset Street when he was going to kill Mary and Elizabeth just on the other side of the street.

That letter was written the same day as the GOGMAGOG-letter, on November 5th. He wanted the police to go searching for him in the area around Miller´s Court. It was his first murder indoors in Whitechapel, so he knew the adress and was planning the murder. Having the police looking for him outside is part of his high risk MO.

The letter is also using the same kind of metaphorical language. "Either of the Piers" is meant to be "Either of the Pubs". He would be sitting in Britannia and see the police coming in looking for him. And "before closing time" means before closing the streets for Lord Mayor´s Show.

Thanks for reminding me of this letter.

Regards Pierre

And be there the slightest proof behind this hypothesis?

I suspect not.