The GSG - Did Jack write it? POLL

[etenguy]

That reminds me - I found this podcast a remarkable experience, with participants in four (or five) countries spanning three continents... and about as wide a range of time-zones as one could imagine

And I look forward to listening to it, once I can find a couple of hours. Hopefully there are some roughly half hour natural breaks which will make it easier to fit in round the other commitments of the day.

[Varqm]

I didn't think this was an example of the police generally theorising about who wrote the GSG. I took this simply as Halse trying to answer the question he was asked and explaining why he had concluded that the GSG had been freshly written. It gives us an opportunity now to decide whether his explanation is compelling.

It's clear.He was reasoning/theorising that it written by the ripper because it must have been written recently,if earlier it would have been rubbed out.And how do you resolve the problem of Long not being in the position to see if the graffito was there at 2:20 AM and that it could have been there.There was no way out of this,the rest is theory.Senior officials could have tried to verifiy by having Long demonstrate what he did at 2:20 AM,where did he shone the light, or search the houses/dwelling for the writer.


-

[etenguy]

It's clear.He was reasoning/theorising that it written by the ripper because it must have been written recently,if earlier it would have been rubbed out.

You and I read Halse's response to this question differently. I do not find any indication in his answer about who wrote the GSG. Halse is simply stating his opinion that the GSG was freshly written and then states why he believes that. Even if Halse is correct, and it was freshly written, it does not necessarily follow that the killer wrote the GSG.

And how do you resolve the problem of Long not being in the position to see if the graffito was there at 2:20 AM and that it could have been there.There was no way out of this,the rest is theory.Senior officials could have tried to verifiy by having Long demonstrate what he did at 2:20 AM,where did he shone the light, or search the houses/dwelling for the writer.
-

I'm not entirely sure where this line of reasoning is leading. It would be very easy for Long not to have noticed graffiti on a normal beat. Graffiti was common in the area and it would not stand out. It was the apron which drew attention to the graffiti. Of course it may have been there and then again possibly not. We have no way of knowing for sure.

We now, with the knowledge we have from reported actions and testimony, have to decide whether we can come to a conclusion about the author of the GSG. I personally believe it is highly likely it was written by the murderer, for all the reasons I mentioned in my earlier posts.

[Kattrup]

. I personally believe it is highly likely it was written by the murderer, for all the reasons I mentioned in my earlier posts.

I agree. Freshly written, and consisting of tiny letters written at an uncomfortable height, and right above the apron.

I believe Jack wrote it.

[Sam Flynn]

I agree. Freshly written, and consisting of tiny letters written at an uncomfortable height, and right above the apron.

Unfortunately, there is nothing that says the writing was right above the apron, and all the evidence says is that one witness believed it looked fresh... even though there apparently wasn't any chalk-dust found on the floor of the passage.

The fact that it was written in small letters at an uncomfortable height, yet still appeared neat, suggests to me that it was written in a leisurely manner under favourable seeing conditions - as opposed to in the middle of the night, by a man on the run from the scene of a major crime.

[etenguy]

Unfortunately, there is nothing that says the writing was right above the apron, and all the evidence says is that one witness believed it looked fresh... even though there apparently wasn't any chalk-dust found on the floor of the passage.

I believe PC Long did state the writing was above (the apron) on the wall. Though he did not say 'right above', most people would have answered as he did if they meant the apron was below the writing. In any case, it was close enough that senior Police Officers consider the two might be connected.

Halse gave a reason for why he thought the writing looked fresh to him, and we have to judge whether we find that convincing. Long was not sure. Of the two, Halse seems the more reliable witness to me. Long had to stop his testimony to retrieve his notebook before continuing and was sacked the following year for being drunk on duty.

The fact that it was written in small letters at an uncomfortable height, yet still appeared neat, suggests to me that it was written in a leisurely manner under favourable seeing conditions - as opposed to in the middle of the night, by a man on the run from the scene of a major crime.

Possibly. It wasn't a long message, so probably less than a minute or two to write. Not too much effort to write neatly.

Or perhaps, written by someone used to writing with chalk who had neat handwriting even when writing quickly.

We could counter each reason to think the GSG was written by the murderer, as we could for each reason to think the apron and writing were not connected. I think all we can do is consider the whole body of the argument for and against and decide which we consider most likely.

[Sam Flynn]

I believe PC Long did state the writing was above (the apron) on the wall.

The sources vary in their wording, unfortunately, from "on the wall above" to "above it on the wall". Even the latter doesn't mean diametrically above.

In any case, it was close enough that senior Police Officers consider the two might be connected.

I'd suggest that the connection could still have been made, even if the writing had been on the opposite wall. We tend to like seeing connections at the best of times, and a beleaguered police-force is perhaps more susceptible still.

Halse gave a reason for why he thought the writing looked fresh to him, and we have to judge whether we find that convincing. Long was not sure. Of the two, Halse seems the more reliable witness to me. Long had to stop his testimony to retrieve his notebook before continuing and was sacked the following year for being drunk on duty.

I can't see how the ability to judge the freshness of chalk should correlate with one's police service record.

I think all we can do is consider the whole body of the argument for and against and decide which we consider most likely.

For me, the only real clue is the apron, because that unequivocally shows that the killer passed that way after murdering Eddowes. The graffito adds nothing, whether it was written by the killer or not.

[Joshua Rogan]

The sources vary in their wording, unfortunately, from "on the wall above" to "above it on the wall". Even the latter doesn't mean diametrically above

In the same way that Mrs Prater said she lived "above" Mary Kelly, perhaps?

I'm sure I've read one report that said the writing was found a few or a couple of yards from the apron, but I can't find it now so may have dreamed it.

[Scott Nelson]

In color or black and white?

[etenguy]

I can't see how the ability to judge the freshness of chalk should correlate with one's police service record.

I think PC Long comes over as a bit apathetic - eg he didn't bring his notebook and clearly the coroner was not content with what he was hearing without it. And then a few months later being sacked. Not painting a picture of a sharp, motivated employee. I think this might lead us to question him.

My great grandfather was a policeman in the 1880s and was fired for being drunk on duty. It was about the fourth time he was caught before he lost his job. I suspect it was the same for PC Long.

For me, the only real clue is the apron, because that unequivocally shows that the killer passed that way after murdering Eddowes. The graffito adds nothing, whether it was written by the killer or not.

Actually, it doesn't even prove that the killer passed that way, though it is highly probable. There are other ways the apron could have got there (though this is just playing devil's advocate). Nevertheless, your conclusion (which I share) is based on probability. Though I doubt we could reach as a high a level of probabilty when considering the GSG, we could take the same approach and come to some conclusion.

As for whether the GSG adds anything - well it's certainly not a smoking gun, but I am interested to learn more about cnr's political motivation theory, of which the GSG may provide supporting evidence if it was found to be written by the ripper.

[Sam Flynn]

In the same way that Mrs Prater said she lived "above" Mary Kelly, perhaps.

Indeed, and that misled us for over a century.

[Fisherman]

Above all, be careful...?

[Busy Beaver]

It depends on when it was written. But I doubt very much Jack would have had the time to write on walls whilst beating a hasty retreat. As this was the only such type of graffiti written, he obviously didn't go about writing stuff on walls & thorough fares on his murdering days off (or on).

[Joshua Rogan]

It depends on when it was written. But I doubt very much Jack would have had the time to write on walls whilst beating a hasty retreat. As this was the only such type of graffiti written, he obviously didn't go about writing stuff on walls & thorough fares on his murdering days off (or on).

Not *that* hasty a retreat, if the killer was indeed responsible for the GSG - PC Long positively stated that the apron was not there when he passed at 02:20, and if he was correct then whoever deposited it took well over half an hour to travel the six minute walk from Mitre Square. So more of a leisurely, or roundabout, retreat.

[Harry D]

The GSG will remain one of the many great unknowns of the case. Convincing arguments can be made for both sides. Some believe the discarded apron was used to authenticate the graffito, while others think it was left by happenstance. As the graffito offers no insight into the murders, and the killer never communicated at the other crime-scenes, I choose to believe the latter.