Height of GSG a Clue?

[Sam Flynn]

Question for you....since in your post we have a quote that indicates the writing could be seen by passer's by, and the cloth couldnt, then how is it the writing was missed first pass after Catherine's death by Long?

Because the writing was small, and Long himself only noticed it after he'd found the apron.

(I have a fuller answer than this, Mike, but it might require some diagrams. I'm not on my usual PC at the moment, and all my drawing software's on the other one. Catch you later.)

[Wickerman]

True, Jon - but what he said was eminently refutable, and he was on oath. It would have been enough for him to have said "I didn't notice it" - he didn't have to volunteer the additional info that the apron was "in the building" at that point.

I guess the right thing to do is pull up every press report and statement attributed to Halse.
What I was looking at here was the report penciled by Insp. McWilliams, City Police. McWilliams tells us that D.C. Halse left Leman St. Police station to go to Goulston St....."where the spot at which the apron was found was pointed out to him".
By who? - Long was not present, he took the piece with him.
We can imagine a gaggle of officers assembled in Goulston st. all discussing the point at which they had been told where the apron was found. None of them knew, only Long saw it in situ and he took it with him.
Was it by the wall, against the jamb, by the corner, below the graffiti, under the graffiti. Who present would have considered the specific point was important?
Only PC Long 'knows' the true location of the apron and its relationship, if any, to the graffiti.
I'm just saying anyone else's opinion is heresay with respect to where the piece of apron was found - its secondary to anything stated by PC Long.

All the best, Jon

[perrymason]

Hi Wickerman, Sam, all.....

The problem with using Long as the de facto source on the writings location is that he didnt even notice it until looking for some blood near to the apron section, and that he said quite plainly the apron section was not there around 2:20am.

That contrasts with other opinions that state the writing was left prominently, and easily seen by those who might walk by, and of course, ...why would the apron section suddenly appear between his 2:20 pass and his 2:40 one. Where was it then immediately after Kates murder.. for some 35 to 55 minutes?

If you want to rely on Long, you have to accept his assertion the cloth was not there before 2:20am, and that the writing only drew his attention when looking more closely at the immediate area, meaning it was not obvious to anyone walking past. He then searches 6 or 7 staircases before taking it to the station.....causing Im sure some additional communication delay of this find to City Police ears.

Best regards.

[Wickerman]

Hi Wickerman, Sam, all.....
The problem with using Long as the de facto source on the writings location is that he didnt even notice it until looking for some blood near to the apron section, and that he said quite plainly the apron section was not there around 2:20am.
That contrasts with other opinions that state the writing was left prominently, and easily seen by those who might walk by,....

One solution to your dilemma may be that those other opinions were given concerning the GSG being noticed in daylight. PC Long described his discovery in darkness, the writing was not removed until after 5:00 am, it would certainly be noticable if they left it any longer.

.....and of course, ...why would the apron section suddenly appear between his 2:20 pass and his 2:40 one. Where was it then immediately after Kates murder.. for some 35 to 55 minutes?..

Of course, this apparent fact only add's to the mystery. We cannot ignore it though just because it requires some explaining. This detail doesn't sit comfortable with most theorists - tough! :-)

If you want to rely on Long, you have to accept his assertion the cloth was not there before 2:20am, and that the writing only drew his attention when looking more closely at the immediate area, meaning it was not obvious to anyone walking past....

In the dark, yes!

He then searches 6 or 7 staircases before taking it to the station.....causing Im sure some additional communication delay of this find to City Police ears.
Best regards.

PC Long was under the impression a crime had been perpetrated within the tenements, he had no idea this cloth was evidence of another murder. Perhaps not until he sought out a nearby beat constable to stand guard. This constable may have been his source another murder had occured nearby.
But still, there was no obvious connection for Long to concern himself with.

I'm comfortable with PC Long as principle witness in this GSG affair.

Regards, Jon.S.

[Sam Flynn]

Only PC Long 'knows' the true location of the apron and its relationship, if any, to the graffiti.

Unfortunately, he didn't leave that nugget of info for posterity, Jon - at least, not precisely enough.

[Wickerman]

Unfortunately, he didn't leave that nugget of info for posterity, Jon - at least, not precisely enough.

What I'm thinking Gareth is that what was said at the time was enough. It only doesn't seem to be enough for modern theorists who are imagining all kinds of hypotheses.
For all we know the apron piece may have been tossed well inside the archway. An early rising tennent may have only kicked it out into the opening against the wall just to clear out garbage "from our tennement".
Quite innocently creating an association that was never there to begin with.

I don't believe there is a connection between the GSG and the piece of apron. The GSG is merely a chastisment against Jews in general. "They take responsibility for nothing!", thats all its saying.

There's any amount of possibilities the killer could have wrote for the authorities to make a definite connection with the apron, why something so vague and debatable? It certainly does not seem to be crime related graffiti.
Neither does it compare with the tone of any of the letters mailed to the authorities. There's nothing threatening nor confrontational about the GSG, it comes across as nothing more than a complaint against Jews.

Regards, Jon

[Stewart P Evans]

Fresh

on the 12th of October The Telegraph printed this version of Longs statement regarding the writings location..."Above on the wall", just that phrasing...and Halse says regarding its condition..."[Coroner]: Did the writing have the appearance of having been recently done? - [Halse]:Yes. It was written with white chalk on a black facia."
He also said this in reply to a question by Crawford,..."Why do you say that it seemed to have been recently written? - [Halse]: It looked fresh, and if it had been done long before it would have been rubbed out by the people passing"

There has been much discussion in the past about how fresh the writing on the wall was. Surely it would have looked no different had it been written within the hour or ten hours earlier.

It was in Halse's interest, in view of his argument and the importance he attached to the writing, to say that it looked fresh. But that really means very little as it is a subjective assessment. Indeed Swanson, contrary to Halse, refers to the writing as being blurred, indicating that a shoulder or two may have rubbed against it -



But all that said, obviously the right thing to have done should have been the preservation of the writing and a photograph at the earliest opportunity. All argument as to its freshness must be speculative and based on opinion.

[Sam Flynn]

What I'm thinking Gareth is that what was said at the time was enough.

I'm with you there, Jon - and fully agree with the rest of your post, in every respect.

[DVV]

Neither does it compare with the tone of any of the letters mailed to the authorities.

Hi Jon,
the fact that it doesn't compare to letters that were not written by the murderer is hardly an argument "against" the GSG, isn't it? -though, of course, it doesn't make it a Ripper's communication.

Amitiés,
David

[Wickerman]

Hi Jon,
the fact that it doesn't compare to letters that were not written by the murderer is hardly an argument "against" the GSG, isn't it? -though, of course, it doesn't make it a Ripper's communication.

Yes, I guess that didn't come over as I meant it to.
The letters to the press were written mostly in a confrontational manner, and some were worded with the intent to connect them with the crimes.
The writers all attempted to challenge the authorities.
The GSG is neither, its not confrontational, and there is no direct attempt to connect it, or the author, with any crimes. There is no challenge to the authorities.
The writer of the GSG could have mentioned whores, Mitre Sq, knives, body parts, blood, the police being fools, a body count, - there's nothing like that!

All we have to make a strained connection between 'it' and the Whitechapel murders is the active imaginations of a few theorists. It just doesn't stand up to scrutiny!

I know, nobody likes a party-pooper...
:-)

[DVV]

All we have to make a strained connection between 'it' and the Whitechapel murders is the active imaginations of a few theorists.
:-)

I'm not sure that the Jews are the men that have not be blamed for nothing in September 1888 since the first and infamous Star's article on Leather (piece of) Apron...

[Wickerman]

I'm not sure that the Jews are the men that have not be blamed for nothing in September 1888 since the first and infamous Star's article on Leather (piece of) Apron...

Now lets see, what were Jews blamed for, taking over the east-end - a growing population?, making their fortunes in a deprived area?, looking after each other at the expence of outsiders, prefferential treatment?
There has always been contention between the 'have's' and 'have-nots', the Jews were the 'have's' the east-end poor, mostly gentiles, were the have-nots'. What else do we want to blame them for - murder?
Any other ambiguities we want to add to the list?

"The Jews are the men that will not be blamed for nothing" - evidence of murder, or just gossip?

There's plenty a disgruntled public can choose to blame the Jews for, especially in the east-end.

There needs to be something specific, the GSG isn't it!
Why isn't it?, because the wording has nothing to relate it to a murder, and everything to relate it to social grievance.

[The Good Michael]

There needs to be something specific, the GSG isn't it!
Why isn't it?, because the wording has nothing to relate it to a murder, and everything to relate it to social grievance.

Why can't social grievance be related to murder? Wasn't the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand about social grievance in a way? How about McKinley? This is the era of social grievance. Don't you think printed and written messages such as what is found in newspapers or in flyers, or on plain old t-shirts can contribute to aggressive behavior? To eliminate possible connections between text, including Der Arbeter Fraynt, newspapers, and the GSG, and the deaths of prostitutes is to unnecessarily, and perhaps, cluelessly eliminate an avenue of solution. Yet, what do I know?

Mike

[DVV]

Why can't social grievance be related to murder? Wasn't the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand about social grievance in a way? How about McKinley? This is the era of social grievance. Don't you think printed and written messages such as what is found in newspapers or in flyers, or on plain old t-shirts can contribute to aggressive behavior? To eliminate possible connections between text, including Der Arbeter Fraynt, newspapers, and the GSG, and the deaths of prostitutes is to unnecessarily, and perhaps, cluelessly eliminate an avenue of solution. Yet, what do I know?

Mike

Exactly, Mike,
and that's why, contrary to what Wickerman wrote, more than a few theorists are still giving the matter some thoughts, as did the police in 1888.
Amitiés,
David

[Johnr]

This thread is about the clue contained in the height of the GSG.....A very interesting concept.
Get your own thread you guys.
JOHN RUFFELS.