The GSG - Did Jack write it? POLL

[etenguy]

Disagree. People are prone to all kinds of odd misspellings. I've no doubt it's referring to the Jewish people, and the writer may have been using a dialect. Phillip Sugden's book says that Jewry Street, Aldgate was once known as ‘Pouere Juwery’ (Poor Jewry).

I'm still not convinced that the 'u' wasn't just a partially looped 'e'.

It is true that people make odd misspellings (a few years back I hit a wall with deny and came up with denigh) but I think that is less likely if you a member of, or hater of, a specific group like Jews.

I find Sam's suggestion below more likely if Jews was meant

Juwes definitely meant Jews. It might even have been spelled "Jews", but something may have caused a glitch in the writing - like the chalk hitting a bump in the brickwork - that made the word look ambiguous. This ambiguity might explain why one officer thought it said "Juwes" and the other "Jewes".

As for:

Not necessarily; I remember chalked graffiti on the wall of my school bus shelter that stayed looking fresh for weeks, if not months. I'm not saying the GSG was that ancient, of course, but it doesn't follow that its apparent freshness meant it was less than a day old.

It is possible it was longer than a day, I guess the important point from this is that it could have been written early in the morning or at some time the previous day (or earlier still if the freshness of the writing was preserved). The state of the writing does not appear to preclude the ripper having written it.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Hi Eten,

4. We don't know precisely what it said or the spelling used but most believe it to be 'The Juwes are not the men that will be blamed for nothing'

I just wondered at everyone’s opinion on this point? I’d have thought that most people felt that the message said - The Juwes are the men that will not be blamed for nothing?

Thoughts?

[etenguy]

Hi Eten,



I just wondered at everyone’s opinion on this point? I’d have thought that most people felt that the message said - The Juwes are the men that will not be blamed for nothing?

Thoughts?

I think you are probably correct.

[Herlock Sholmes]

I think you are probably correct.

I just wondered Eten. I’m miles behind on current research I jus thought that I’d missed something else.

[Trevor Marriott]

It is true that people make odd misspellings (a few years back I hit a wall with deny and came up with denigh) but I think that is less likely if you a member of, or hater of, a specific group like Jews.

I find Sam's suggestion below more likely if Jews was meant



As for:

It is possible it was longer than a day, I guess the important point from this is that it could have been written early in the morning or at some time the previous day (or earlier still if the freshness of the writing was preserved). The state of the writing does not appear to preclude the ripper having written it.

It seem common sense and the application of logic has gone out of the window with some posters

Why would the killer bother to walk that distance bwteen Mitre Sq and Goulstons street to :

1. To write graffiti to which he the writer only knew what it meant
2. Why the need to walk that distance before writing the graffiti, when there were many other likely scribing points on route?
3. Why write anything connected to the murder at a location some distance from the crime scene, when the likelihood was that it may never be discovered, and if it were
who would relate it to the the killer. In fact the killer could have written it on the wooden fence/gate in Mitre Square.
4. And the same points apply to the sugestion that the killer dumped the apron piece.

And no one has come up with any plausib/e explantion as to why the killer out of all the places en route from Mitre Sq he chose Goulston St archway

Oh, and of course we have to also consider these points along with how they both just happened to be discovered by the police

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[etenguy]

It seem common sense and the application of logic has gone out of the window with some posters

Why would the killer bother to walk that distance bwteen Mitre Sq and Goulstons street to :

1. To write graffiti to which he the writer only knew what it meant
2. Why the need to walk that distance before writing the graffiti, when there were many other likely scribing points on route?
3. Why write anything connected to the murder at a location some distance from the crime scene, when the likelihood was that it may never be discovered, and if it were
who would relate it to the the killer. In fact the killer could have written it on the wooden fence/gate in Mitre Square.
4. And the same points apply to the sugestion that the killer dumped the apron piece.

And no one has come up with any plausib/e explantion as to why the killer out of all the places en route from Mitre Sq he chose Goulston St archway

It is true that we can only speculate as to the murderer's motive for choosing that spot to discard the apron fragment, but the fact it was found there, overwhelmingly suggests he did. Though of course, this does not mean he also wrote the message. The location may have no particular significance to him whatsoever, it may just have been convenient.

Oh, and of course we have to also consider these points along with how they both just happened to be discovered by the police

I find it strange you question good police work. It was their job and they appear to have done a good job. Are you suggesting that either the apron segment or graffitti or both were planted by the police?

[APerno]

"The Juwes are not the men who will be blamed for nothing."

"The Juwes are the men who will not be blamed for nothing."

It is not as though you can conclude one sounds better than the other, i.e. you can't really argue that one makes more sense than the other.

Does anyone know which came from the City of London officer, and which from the Met PC?

Does anyone know if the newspapers carried one over the other, or printed both?

[Wickerman]

"The Juwes are not the men who will be blamed for nothing."

"The Juwes are the men who will not be blamed for nothing."

It is not as though you can conclude one sounds better than the other, i.e. you can't really argue that one makes more sense than the other.

Does anyone know which came from the City of London officer, and which from the Met PC?

Does anyone know if the newspapers carried one over the other, or printed both?

You can read up for yourself, here is the inquest record.
https://www.casebook.org/official_do...t_eddowes.html
PC Long (Met) - "The Jews are the men that will not be blamed for nothing."
Det. Halse (City) - "The Juwes are not the men who will be blamed for nothing."

The press who covered the inquest published both.

[APerno]

You can read up for yourself, here is the inquest record.
https://www.casebook.org/official_do...t_eddowes.html
PC Long (Met) - "The Jews are the men that will not be blamed for nothing."
Det. Halse (City) - "The Juwes are not the men who will be blamed for nothing."

The press who covered the inquest published both.

Interesting read. Thank you!

It is interesting that the City Solicitor, Mr. Crawford challenged PC Long about the wording, but seems to have accepted Det. Halses version without question. I wonder if it was because it was a PC vs. a Detective?

Mr. Crawford: As to the writing on the wall, have you not put a "not" in the wrong place? Were not the words, "The Jews are not the men that will be blamed for nothing"? - [PC Long] I believe the words were as I have stated.

The ordering of the testimony suggests that PC Long testified before Halse, yet even before Halse offers a different opinion Mr. Crawford is already challenging Long's wording (assuming that the testimony order as suggested is correct.)

Do you know which version Knight used in his Freemason fantasy? I am going to GUESS it was Halse's version only because his placement of 'not' makes the wording sound a touch more cryptic, maybe even poetic.

I have wondered whether the erasing of the graffito wasn't used by Warren's distractors as a coup to get rid of the Commissioner? Did particular individuals or groups e.g. The City of London Police leak that morning's events to the press with malice intent?.

The graffito was the beginning of the end for Warren.

[Trevor Marriott]

I find it strange you question good police work. It was their job and they appear to have done a good job. Are you suggesting that either the apron segment or graffitti or both were planted by the police?

Was it good police work? out of all the rubbish littering the streets and surrounding areas a police officer, who at the time is not aware of the Eddowes murder or any other crime that it could be connected to, just happens to take notice of a screwed up piece of rag, and having noticed it then takes it to the police station. I find that strange.

The graffiti was not written by the killer, neither was the apron piece dropped there by the killer.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[FISHY1118]

So Trevor was the cut piece of apron Eddows ? yes /no ... a no would require some sort of explanation as to why it wasn't, and a yes answer would require some sort of explanation as to why you think the killer didn't drop it there.

[Trevor Marriott]

So Trevor was the cut piece of apron Eddows ? yes /no ... a no would require some sort of explanation as to why it wasn't, and a yes answer would require some sort of explanation as to why you think the killer didn't drop it there.

You clearly have not read the chapter on Eddowes murder in my book "Jack the Ripper-The real truth" The answer to your questions can be found there.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Jack-Ripper-Truth-Trevor-Marriott/dp/1728912997/ref=tmm_pap_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=1535752176&sr=8-2

[Jon Guy]

Hello Jon,

Which begs the question why not leave a message at Miller's Court?

c.d.

Hi CD

Why a message at Millers Court ?
Nothing was left at any other crime scene.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Do you know which version Knight used in his Freemason fantasy? I am going to GUESS it was Halse's version only because his placement of 'not' makes the wording sound a touch more cryptic, maybe even poetic.

Hi APerno,

He actually used PC Long’s version.

[Harry D]

Hello Jon,

Which begs the question why not leave a message at Miller's Court?

c.d.

Indeed, CD. He had all the time in the world to leave a message there. Could've even scrawled it in blood for added effect. It is strange that a killer who decided to communicate under those circumstances would not leave another message. And the one message he leave did had no apparent bearing on the murders. As Abby Normal has said, I wouldn't be surprised if it had something to do with his encounters with Jews that night that brought his antisemitism to the fore, and he needed to get it out his system.