Goulstan Street Graffito.

[DJA]

Those in power often protect their peers or those they value (Dominic Cummings is a case in point).

The question which taxes me more is why did Warren do it. Was it incompetence, real concern about violent riots or something else?

We have Jack's approximate height,or lack thereof, from the graffito (confirmed by Mrs Long at Hanbury Steet).
We did have his handwriting,before it was wiped.
We know of his expertise with a knife.
Does anyone who fits the bill have an alibi for that night's time frame and the previous two murders?

[NotBlamedForNothing]

Those in power often protect their peers or those they value (Dominic Cummings is a case in point).

The question which taxes me more is why did Warren do it. Was it incompetence, real concern about violent riots or something else?

The Foreman: Why was the writing really rubbed out?

[Michael W Richards]

We only know that they said that it was erased because it posed a potential threat to local jews. Ergo, they felt it was a negative commentary about Jews/Juwes/Jewes...whathaveyou. Coupled with a message just above it, and the fact that Long stated empirically that "it was not there" around 2:20, both could easily have been put there at the same time. The proximity and timing in fact suggest just that.

[etenguy]

We only know that they said that it was erased because it posed a potential threat to local jews. Ergo, they felt it was a negative commentary about Jews/Juwes/Jewes...whathaveyou. Coupled with a message just above it, and the fact that Long stated empirically that "it was not there" around 2:20, both could easily have been put there at the same time. The proximity and timing in fact suggest just that.

I agree with you, Michael. Alas, the reason provided by Warren does not have credibility, particularly that the area could not be secured for an hour. And given the very high profile of the case, the pressure on the police to find the murderer and the lack of any evidence obtained by the police, to destroy potential evidence on such a flimsy excuse was either the height of incompetence or there is another reason that has not been shared.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

Evening News, Oct 8:

SPONGED OUT.

Most unfortunately one of the police officers gave orders for this writing to be immediately sponged out, probably with a view of stifling the morbid curiosity which it would certainly have aroused. But in so doing a very important link was destroyed, for, had the writing been photographed, a certain clue would have been in the hands of the authorities. The witnesses who saw the writing, however, state that it is similar in character to the letters sent to the Central News and signed "Jack the Ripper," and though it would have been far better to have clearly demonstrated this by photography, there is now every reason to believe that the writer of the letter and postcard sent to the Central News (facsimiles of which are now to be seen outside every police station) is the actual murderer.

The police, consequently, are very anxious that any citizen who can identify the handwriting should without delay communicate with the authorities.

The Central News, since the original letter and postcard of "Jack the Ripper" was published, has received from 30 to 40 communications daily, signed "Jack the Ripper," evidently the concoction of silly notoriety hunters.

ANOTHER COMMUNICATION KEPT SECRET.

A third communication, however, has been received from the writer of the original "Jack the Ripper" letter and postcard, which acting upon official advice, it has been deemed prudent to withhold for the present. It may be stated, however, that although the miscreant avows his intention of committing further crimes shortly, it is only against prostitutes that his threats are directed, his desire being to respect and protect honest women.

In view of the interest and importance of the above news, we think it well to state that back numbers of our issue of Thursday, October 4, containing complete facsimiles of the letter and postcard may be obtained at our office.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

London Evening Post, Oct 2:

A BATCH OF RUMOURS

Members of the International Club in Berner-street, including the steward, are all agreed that it was quite possible for the murderer to escape in the confused scene that followed the discovery of the body of “Long Liz” in the yard. None, however, seem to recollect having seen any stranger amongst those who were then present. The rumour that during the night cries of “Murder!” and “Police!” were heard by the inmates of the club-house proves to be without foundation, and this justifies the emphatic contradiction given to the report by the police from the first. Another rather widespread rumour proves to be equally inaccurate. It was to the effect that Sir Charles Warren, on visiting the yard on Sunday morning last, discovered some writing on the wall in chalk, which gave expression to some very objectionable sentiments of a religious character, and which was supposed to have been the handiwork of the murderer. This was alleged to have given such great offence that Sir Charles, fearing a disturbance in the neighbourhood, directed the writing to be washed out – an order said to have been promptly complied with by the police. Investigation, however, has proved the absolute fallacy of the story.

This is an interesting rumour, given the date and text of the Moab and Midian letter...

Dear Mr Williamson

At 5 minutes to 9 oclock tonight we received the following letter the envelope of which I enclose by which you will see it is in the same hadwriting as the previous communications

"5 Oct 1888

Dear Friend

In the name of God hear me I swear I did not kill the female whose body was found at Whitehall. If she was an honest woman I will hunt down and destroy her murderer. If she ['was an honest woman' deleted] was a whore God will bless the hand that slew her, for the women of of [sic] Moab and Midian shall die and their blood shall mingle with the dust. I never harm any others or the Divine power that protects and helps me in my grand work would quit for ever. Do as I do and the light of glory shall shine upon you. I must get to work tomorrow treble event this time yes yes three must be ripped. will send you a bit of face by post I promise this dear old Boss. The police now reckon my work a practical joke well well Jacky's a very practical joker ha ha ha Keep this back till three are wiped out and you can show the cold meat

Yours truly
Jack the Ripper"

Yours truly
T.J. Bulling

[NotBlamedForNothing]

Reference to the same rumor in the Morning Advertiser, Oct 3, but this time with the reason for dismissing the rumor...

Another rumour alleged that the murderer at the same time that he took the life of "Long Liz" also availed himself of the opportunity to write with chalk on the brick wall some words calculated to provoke no small amount of exasperation in a certain quarter. Further, it was stated that Sir Charles Warren, when he saw the writing on the wall early on the Sunday morning after the murder, ordered it to be washed out; and that that direction was implicitly carried out by the police. A careful examination of the wall, however, has revealed the fact that the whole story is a fabrication, for the brickwork does not show any of those marks which would result from such an operation.

Can you believe it? It is not because the writing on the wall is strongly denied to have been there that the rumor is dismissed, but rather because the wall does not look like a wall with washed-out writing supposedly should!

And what do 'those marks' look like? Would not the wall have been sponged like the wall at Goulston street was, thus leaving very little if any visible trace?

And what's this about the direction from Warren being implicitly carried out by the police?
What's an implicit direction? Had he already ordered that any potentially provocative remarks at any murder scene, be immediately removed?
If not, then why would the rumor include this notion of implicit direction, if Warren is onsite to supposedly see it, and therefore be in a position to give explicit direction for it's immediate removal?

[caz]

Do you not think it likely, NBFN, that this early rumour was based on the very real GSG, but the reporter concerned got the wrong end of the stick and thought it related to the Stride murder scene and Dutfield's Yard, where no evidence was found of any chalk writing, leading the reporter to the erroneous conclusion that the whole story was false?

[Michael W Richards]

in 1896 a new furor about the Ripper started when a letter was received by the Police, it referenced the GSG, so it was taken seriously.

[Azarna]

Regarding how the GSG became known as a 'graffito' - isn't it merely the singular form of 'graffiti' in Latin? Is too much being read into what is simply a matter of grammar?

I am pretty sure "graffito" is something of a recent label for it. At the time the writing on the wall was referred to as ... "the writing on the wall".

[Aelric]

I am pretty sure "graffito" is something of a recent label for it. At the time the writing on the wall was referred to as ... "the writing on the wall".

Indeed, but it is known as the GSG today so I thought it worth pointing out.

[Herlock Sholmes]

I agree with you, Michael. Alas, the reason provided by Warren does not have credibility, particularly that the area could not be secured for an hour. And given the very high profile of the case, the pressure on the police to find the murderer and the lack of any evidence obtained by the police, to destroy potential evidence on such a flimsy excuse was either the height of incompetence or there is another reason that has not been shared.

We know that Warren was a military man and certainly not the kind of man that would accept or enjoy having his orders questioned. I can imagine an under-pressure Warren ordering a writing, containing the word Jews (however it was actually spelled) to be erased in a kind of panic perhaps picturing in his mind Jewish shops and homes being attacked and mobs on the street. He knew of the Vigilance Committee and so might have suspected that some might have sought to take justice into their own hands? And then when someone suggested preserving it he might have taken the “are you questioning my authority?” attitude. Later he might have regretted acting so precipitately but obviously he wouldn’t have wanted to admit to an error.

[Michael W Richards]

We know that Warren was a military man and certainly not the kind of man that would accept or enjoy having his orders questioned. I can imagine an under-pressure Warren ordering a writing, containing the word Jews (however it was actually spelled) to be erased in a kind of panic perhaps picturing in his mind Jewish shops and homes being attacked and mobs on the street. He knew of the Vigilance Committee and so might have suspected that some might have sought to take justice into their own hands? And then when someone suggested preserving it he might have taken the “are you questioning my authority?” attitude. Later he might have regretted acting so precipitately but obviously he wouldn’t have wanted to admit to an error.

All of which suggest he thought the message might incite anti-Jew factions...like we already stated.

[Herlock Sholmes]

All of which suggest he thought the message might incite anti-Jew factions...like we already stated.

Still sulking I see

[spyglass]

I've often wondered why the size of the actual graffiti is an argument for it not being by the killer, but by someone who had a grudge with Jews, possible someone ripped off in the market.
The point is, clearly the graffiti was written by someone who wanted it to be seen, and so the size argument goes both ways.

Regards