Height of GSG a Clue?

[Scott Nelson]

(1) The intended audience was only the one who wrote it (an exercise in self expression).
(2) He was a resident of the building
(3) The short time period between cutting the piece of apron and depositing it in the entrance to the building indicates that the apron piece did not change many hands. There also wasn't enough time for a dog to get involved.
(not numbered) There probably was other graffitti around as well.

[diana]

Attempted Reproduction

I am not good at posting graphics here. Nevertheless, I downloaded the picture of the Goulston Street doorway, put it in Paintbrush, clicked on the text function (an icon that looks like the letter A), placed a transparent text box on what I thought would be the appropriate location, changed the text color to white and typed the GSG.

I have said all that because I doubt my ability to upload the result and if I can't do it maybe somebody more tech savvy than me will be able to do it.

. . . about 17 minutes later no go. Maybe somebody else would like to try it?

I clicked on the picture icon and when it asked for the URL the only thing I could do was give the C:\ etc. etc. address on my computer. I checked the preview but all there was was the address, no pic. I also tried copy/paste but that didn't work either.

[Sam Flynn]

I clicked on the picture icon and when it asked for the URL ...

The "picture" icon is when you want to link to an image held on a web server. You want the "paper-clip" icon, Di - as indicated by the blue arrow below:



...clicking on that will pop up the "upload" dialogue box, from where you can browse to your image file and upload it.

[Blues]

With the influx of Jewish immigrants into the area and the presence of "Jewish radicals" - anyone could have written the graffiti. All letters ,including the Lusk, letter seem to be in a sloppy hand (imo). I've always taken the text of the graffito to mean that the "Jews" won't be blamed for the ills of the world. With the "tension" in the area, this seems to be appropro of many Jewish men's feeling. Without the photograph, nothing can be compared...unfortunately. But I am also of the thought that if we are getting into "spelling errors" - e.g. "Juwes" - Jack the Ripper should be thought of as Jack the Reaper. Again, someone with language/dialect experience may be able to hunt down the land of origination clues imbedded in "Juwes", "Ripper" and the many Irish (?) sounding clues in the letters. One thing I have a question about - was there actually other chalk writing by the body of C.E. and/or other victims? I have read that there was but in other seemingly well researched dissertations, there's no mention of it. I'm referring to the possible chalk writing with the gist of "I'll stop when I've killed 10 more..." I don't have the time at the moment to look back...Little help on its existence? (First post here...always been fascinated by the case but never delved into the details. It all breaks my heart. Especially M.K. I think we've all known a M.K.)

[diana]

Thanks

Thanks Sam I'll try again.



Yaay! I really think a picture will enable us to be sure we're all talking about the same thing.

I'll bet I got it wrong in some respects. Anxious to see other versions and critiques.

[Wickerman]

.....
I'll bet I got it wrong in some respects. Anxious to see other versions and critiques.

Here's where I visualize the GSG being, from official statements.

Forget the 72" dimension, this pic was used for something else.
(P.S. how do we get text under a picture?)

[diana]

Hi Wickerman,

To type under the pic I just clicked to place my cursor down there and let rip.

I was guessing with my placement and didn't consult source material so its very likely your version is better.

Do you have documentation for using the other side of the doorjamb and the side facing rather than the outer facing?

Sam, without your help and advice we wouldn't even be trying this, thanks again.

[perrymason]

Hello all,

Quick note...it was mentioned, my apologies for forgetting by whom, that there wasnt much time between the apron being taken and then dropped....just wanted to remind our viewers that on record, it is not seen until almost 3am. Whether it was there all that time is about as clear as whether Jack also wrote the graffiti.

On the images posted by Diana and Wickerman, ....if we really want to know what side it was on, we need to know which side Long approached from. If he was going North on Goulston, on the east side of it, then Wickerman is probably right on the location...and I believe he was. Is anyone sure of where he was when he would have seen this.....for example, if he was heading South on Goulston, on the East Side again, Wickermans suggested location would be hard to miss. His POV might also explain why the writing might not have grabbed his attention had it not been for the apron section. On the proximity to the apron, in the inquest he says the writing was "above" the section, leading one to surmise that he saw some association by that juxtapositioning.

Cheers all.

[Wickerman]

Thankyou Diana.
Yes, I tried placing my cursor between a line prior to uploading a picture thinking it would drop in at the point of the cursor - nope!

When I preview the post to see if the pic has uploaded there is no 'attachment' text to show where the pic is to insert itself.

Another puzzle is, why is my pic enveloped in a frame when yours is not?


Anyway, back to the thread..., Yes Diana, there is a reference that the GSG was "on the right-side of the door jam", but I cannot find it!
Sugden also states it was on the right side, but he doesn't give a reference either.
A reference does exist, it's not our imagination, and it wasn't from PC Long, it was by either Arnold, Warren, or some other official, I don't think it was Halse either.
I'll find it someday, - Stewart will know, he probably like's to see us stew a little :-)

[diana]

I claim no expertise relating to uploading graphics. Can't help there.

I got to thinking that the placement of the graffito on the inside facing rather than the front facing would be more consistent with the statement that the residents shoulders could have rubbed it off.

[Sam Flynn]

On the proximity to the apron, in the inquest he says the writing was "above" the section

..."above it on the wall", actually, which isn't quite the same - certainly not as explicit - as "above the section". It might just have indicated that the writing wasn't on the opposite wall.

It's important to recall that there's more than just Long's testimony to bear in mind. Firstly, there's Warren's statement that "the writing was on the jamb... visible to anybody in the street", and secondly Halse's "I would not necessarily have seen [the apron], for it was in the building".

The only way these three witness accounts can be reconciled is if the writing were close to the very front of the entranceway, with the apron recessed a little way inside the passage. Something like the "Scenario B" I posted earlier.

[Wickerman]

..."
It's important to recall that there's more than just Long's testimony to bear in mind. Firstly, there's Warren's statement that "the writing was on the jamb... visible to anybody in the street", and secondly Halse's "I would not necessarily have seen [the apron], for it was in the building".

But just as a cautionary caveat, Halse is only offering an appologetic to explain why he never saw the apron in-situ. He is telling what he believes to be true. He can only tell what he didn't see, not what he saw.

regards, Jon.S.

[perrymason]

Hi Sam,

I agree with you that the explanations of the locations you mentioned, the writing wasnt cited as being at the foot of the jamb, so it must have been slightly further into shadows of the entrance. In the inquest coverage under our Official Documents, 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"

So it sounds like the writing is really on the entranceway jamb, or dado, to which fascia would be attached, and the cloth slightly back from that into the entranceway more.

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? Factoring in Halse's remarks. Yet Long claims to have seen the apron piece first, answering a question regarding that very matter, he said....."The piece of apron, one corner of which was wet with blood." He says he only saw the writing when looking for more blood near the apron section. He was also sure that it had not been there when he passed earlier. When asked directly, he said "It was not".

This leaves some problems, and when you add that Long says when recalled to the stand that before he left to go to the station with the news of the apron, he knew of the city murder that night already...and only heard rumours about another,...you have some more.

Why would'nt Long see the writing first, as it was so visible as to be possibly brushed by people as they passed it?
Why is Long so sure that it wasnt there at approx 2:20, if its the least visible of the two items?
If Halse was correct and the was writing fresh and noticeable to passers by, how would Long not see that until looking for blood spots connected with the apron section?

I think in part what may have happened is that Long knew of the Mitre Square killing before 2:20am, but not of the apron piece specifically, he was just told of a murder in the city while he is performing his route duties before 2:20am, so he would probably be looking for blood spot clues, bloody footprints, splotches...or people skulking about. As he is doing when he says he found the writing.

I think he does find out about the apron piece before his pass around 10 to 3, and so he says the cloth was "not there" at 2:20am because he didnt want to appear inept not seeing it or the writing the first pass by,.... he knows if it was there and he didnt see it, he delayed the investigation of it by almost 1/2 hour.

I think Long and Harvey share that little experience that night...both should have seen something but didnt.

Still doesnt explain why the writing, cited as the most visible or prominent of the two items, didnt catch his eye first.

All the best Sam

[FrankO]

It's important to recall that there's more than just Long's testimony to bear in mind. Firstly, there's Warren's statement that "the writing was on the jamb... visible to anybody in the street", and secondly Halse's "I would not necessarily have seen [the apron], for it was in the building".

Hi Gareth,

What one might also want to bear in mind is that, in contrast to Halse's and Long's, Warren's wasn't a public statement. It was part of a confidential report to the Home Office in which Warren explained his questioned decision to rub out the writing.

The only way these three witness accounts can be reconciled is if the writing were close to the very front of the entranceway, with the apron recessed a little way inside the passage.

I agree with you here, and with your general view that the piece of apron wasn't necessarily lying directly under the writing.

All the best,
Frank

[Sam Flynn]

But just as a cautionary caveat, Halse is only offering an appologetic to explain why he never saw the apron in-situ.

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.