Goulstan Street Graffito.

[Michael W Richards]

Still sulking I see

You really need to adjust what your responses are in relation to the comments originally posted. I merely pointed out that what your argument was has essentially been addressed by citing anti-jew interpretations as being the reason for erasure.

[Michael W Richards]

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

The above is why the apron section below the writing is likely part of that same message. Its a signature.

[Herlock Sholmes]

You really need to adjust what your responses are in relation to the comments originally posted. I merely pointed out that what your argument was has essentially been addressed by citing anti-jew interpretations as being the reason for erasure.

Of course you did.

[Michael W Richards]

Of course you did.

So your reply was essentially an agreement of what etenguy agreed with in my post? It seemed worded differently than that....

"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."

Etenguy was agreeing with something I said, and you posted his agreement with the above, which essentially supports again what the motive for washing it off was. Your adding your belief about Warrens ego in the above I didnt address.

[Trevor Marriott]

The above is why the apron section below the writing is likely part of that same message. Its a signature.

Signature killers leave their signature somewhere where the item whatever that item might be is going to be found, not in an archway some distance from the crime scene where it might never have been found.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[TheCuriousCat]

I live in a small city known for its relative cleanliness, and yet there is still graffiti everywhere. If you were intending to leave your signature next to a crime scene you would need to leave it with a couple of yards if you didn't want someone else's tag to be more noticeable than yours. It's hard to believe that 1888 Whitechapel didn't have graffiti aplenty. Also, if there was a photograph...how would that help? "Good schoolboy script" is practically the definition of generic handwriting.

[Michael W Richards]

Signature killers leave their signature somewhere where the item whatever that item might be is going to be found, not in an archway some distance from the crime scene where it might never have been found.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

There is significance to that location Trevor, if one considers the text above it. That entrance way was used by the Model Homes tenants who, its my understanding, were 90%+ immigrant Jews.I also recall hearing that at least one Berner St club member or family member lived there. The message was interpreted as antisemitic, I believe correctly, and its placement could not be more dangerous for the locals. I say he should have taken a picture first, but covering it up or erasing it seems justifiable.

Its my belief that the message was suggesting Jews evading blame for events both recent and past, and the apron section is like a signature by someone who knows what a real killer looks like. Not with some clumsy single cutting left behind. Hes the guy who killed the woman in the city, Mr Apron guy, a real boogy-man...of that he leaves no doubt, but he suggests that they should blame the Jews for the International Mens Club murder. And whatever else his prejudice tells him they got away with.

If you allow for Long to be accurate in his beat recollections, then its possible the man who left Mitre Square with some of Kate in some of her own apron had approx 70 minutes to A) Hear a buzz on the street about some Jews claiming The Ripper struck in Socialists Cub just after midnight, and to B) walk away for 10-20 minutes in any direction from Mitre Square.

If he went West, then the apron was brought back out into the street to place it where it was found. That would strongly suggest that the message also not noticed until almost 2 was placed there with it. As I said, its like a signature. I wrote this. But not the guy who killed that woman in Berner Street.

Nothing to indicate that the man was referencing a double murder, or claiming responsibility for it, just a note and a signature from the man who killed in Mitre Square.

[C. F. Leon]

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

Does Anyone know WHEN the term "Goulston Street Graffito" was adopted? I very much doubt that contemporary writers used it and I'll wager that it was being used in Italian-speaking areas sometime before English-speakers used it. I don't think I've ever seen it in anything before the Centennial (1988).

[etenguy]

I live in a small city known for its relative cleanliness, and yet there is still graffiti everywhere. If you were intending to leave your signature next to a crime scene you would need to leave it with a couple of yards if you didn't want someone else's tag to be more noticeable than yours. It's hard to believe that 1888 Whitechapel didn't have graffiti aplenty. Also, if there was a photograph...how would that help? "Good schoolboy script" is practically the definition of generic handwriting.

Hi TCC

There was graffiti in the east end of London. However, JtR needed to leave the crime scene with some haste and so if he was to leave a message it is likely it would be some distance from the crime. To make his message stand out, if it was his message, he would rely on the apron piece.

In terms of the photograph, if it existed, it could help, not least in knowing exactly what the GSG said. The handwriting could also have been compared to letters received by the police - even though writing with chalk on a wall and writing on paper with a pen might look somewhat different, there could possibly have been some core similarities.

[etenguy]

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.

Possibly, Herlock - though from what we know of Warren, he wasn't given easily to panic even under pressure. It may simply be that he made an error and tried to cover that with an excuse. Or he may have had a different reason that was not voiced publicly, but if so we can only speculate what that might be.

[TheCuriousCat]

Hi TCC

There was graffiti in the east end of London. However, JtR needed to leave the crime scene with some haste and so if he was to leave a message it is likely it would be some distance from the crime. To make his message stand out, if it was his message, he would rely on the apron piece.

Hi Etenguy

He was in haste to get away, and yet decided it was worth it and stop to write a bit of graffiti that wouldn't have been noticed if it wasn't for the constable searching for blood stains? Even though he hadn't ever felt the need to leave a message before, and it was very ambiguous as to what it meant. He must really have wanted to get that message out, but simultaneously felt content leave it up to chance that it would get spotted. It's always struck me as really suspect.

In terms of the photograph, if it existed, it could help, not least in knowing exactly what the GSG said. The handwriting could also have been compared to letters received by the police - even though writing with chalk on a wall and writing on paper with a pen might look somewhat different, there could possibly have been some core similarities.

I really don't see how the photograph helps. It apparently was fairly generic handwriting. So was the handwriting on the Dear Boss letter. At best, they would know how the killer (if it was the killer) spelled Jews and if he in fact had similar handwriting to the writer of that note. Which they decided he did. Which didn't help them. Possibly because tonnes of people had very similar handwriting. Like Ulysses S Grant and George Bernard Shaw. But... yeah, it would be cool to have seen the actual picture. I don't think having the picture would have made any difference to catching the killer.

[Trevor Marriott]

There is significance to that location Trevor, if one considers the text above it. That entrance way was used by the Model Homes tenants who, its my understanding, were 90%+ immigrant Jews.I also recall hearing that at least one Berner St club member or family member lived there. The message was interpreted as antisemitic, I believe correctly, and its placement could not be more dangerous for the locals. I say he should have taken a picture first, but covering it up or erasing it seems justifiable.

Its my belief that the message was suggesting Jews evading blame for events both recent and past, and the apron section is like a signature by someone who knows what a real killer looks like. Not with some clumsy single cutting left behind. Hes the guy who killed the woman in the city, Mr Apron guy, a real boogy-man...of that he leaves no doubt, but he suggests that they should blame the Jews for the International Mens Club murder. And whatever else his prejudice tells him they got away with.

If you allow for Long to be accurate in his beat recollections, then its possible the man who left Mitre Square with some of Kate in some of her own apron had approx 70 minutes to A) Hear a buzz on the street about some Jews claiming The Ripper struck in Socialists Cub just after midnight, and to B) walk away for 10-20 minutes in any direction from Mitre Square.

If he went West, then the apron was brought back out into the street to place it where it was found. That would strongly suggest that the message also not noticed until almost 2 was placed there with it. As I said, its like a signature. I wrote this. But not the guy who killed that woman in Berner Street.

Nothing to indicate that the man was referencing a double murder, or claiming responsibility for it, just a note and a signature from the man who killed in Mitre Square.

As part of my investigation into proving or disproving the organ removals and the apron piece I worked closely with a consultant gynecologist who was able to assitand provide a valuable insight inot the removal of the organs and the apron piece being suggested as what they were carried away in.

The attcahed photo is the result of a uterus being removed from a live donor by the consulatant, and being wrapped up for a short time and then photographed. if a kidney was added to that there might be even more blood absorbed by the material

As can be seen it is heavily bloodstained not spotted/smeared with blood as the goulston apron piece was described, so based on these results I belive it is fair to say that the killer did not take away the organs in the apron piece.

Which begs the questions did the killer remove the organs? and if he did what did he take them away in, and if not the apron piece, what did he use?

And how did the apron piece end up in Goulston Street, and who deposited it, if not the killer?

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Herlock Sholmes]

Or maybe the killer just left the apron by the writing to show that he wrote it? After all, the message isn’t connected to the murder by anything obvious in the wording.

[Trevor Marriott]

Or maybe the killer just left the apron by the writing to show that he wrote it? After all, the message isn’t connected to the murder by anything obvious in the wording.

You are right there is no connection to any of the murders both past and present in the wording of the graffiti, so for anyone to suggest it was written by the killer is pure speculation.

By leaving the apron by the writing I have to ask how would anyone be able to assume that the killer wrote it, if the wording has no relevance to the murders?

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Herlock Sholmes]

You are right there is no connection to any of the murders both past and present in the wording of the graffiti, so for anyone to suggest it was written by the killer is pure speculation.

By leaving the apron by the writing I have to ask how would anyone be able to assume that the killer wrote it, if the wording has no relevance to the murders?

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

A new and enigmatic message appears at the same time as a piece of bloodied apron from the murder in a doorway? It’s almost a banker that most would at least try and connect the two.

Most things are speculation Trevor. The only time we can safely say ‘wrong’ is if someone says that it definitely ‘was’ or definitely ‘wasn't’ written by the killer.