'the biggest blunder in the search for Jack the Ripper'

[Cogidubnus]

Blimey Lynn...Toulouse...then you don't need me to send you any!

Dave

[lynn cates]

humour

Hello (again) Dave. I would make a quip, but I daresay Admin may fail to see the humour.

Cheers.
LC

[Monty]

Hi,

A few points.

1) The black brick ends around 4ft, which indicates to me the upper portion was written upon, ideal height all considered.

2) Lighting conditions.

3) The availability of a photographer. I suggest you read Robert McLaughlins excellent book upon the photographs and the processes during the murders. Or, if you cannot, search out Rob on the podcasts.

4) The day. Sunday, traditionally the day of the Petticoat Lane market.

There are valid reasons as to why the call was made to erase, and its easy to view from a modern perspective.

Try it from a Victorian one.

Monty

[Cogidubnus]

Fair enough Lynn...by the by just how far is it from Mitre Square to the Goulston Street Graffito site? Someone earlier posited 520 yards on foot (400 as the crow flies)...If this is accurate I can just see JtR, providing he's reasonably fit, sprinting off wiping his hands as he goes, and discarding the apron in something under two minutes...not that unreasonable I'd have thought...

Dave

[lynn cates]

exit

Hello Dave. Quite right, PROVIDED he exited through Church passage. But had he done that, he would surely have tripped over PC Harvey?

Cheers.
LC

[Bridewell]

Eddowes & Nothing

Hello Simon,

Yes sir, indeed..it wasn't public knowledge. That is what intruiges me.
If the "Nothing" referred to was Eddowes....then a policeman is involved.

Its is only speculative and tentative, but it makes me wonder.

best wishes

Phil

Hi Phil,

Apologies for dragging this forward from the beginning of the thread, but I thought it worthy of further comment. If "Nothing" was a reference to Eddowes, it might be suggestive of a policeman, but we don't know what, if anything, Kate said to the police when they found her on Aldgate. It's likely that she was asked her name on that occasion also, I would have thought.

Just going with the (interesting) supposition that "nothing" was an Eddowes reference. It would mean that the two versions would read:

"The Juwes are the men that will not be blamed for Eddowes"
&
"The Juwes are not the men that will be blamed for Eddowes".

How would that affect the meaning? Would it suggest that the writer was aware of both 'double event' murders, but thought "the Jewes" to be to blame only for the killing of Stride? How would that work? Wouldn't "nothing" have been spelt with a capital 'N' if that was the case? It's an interesting hypothesis, but it doesn't really work for me - which is not to say it's not worthy of further discussion.

Regards, Bridewell.

[Cogidubnus]

There are valid reasons as to why the call was made to erase, and its easy to view from a modern perspective.

Try it from a Victorian one.

Hi Monty

Good points...and the very factors I've long borne in mind when considering the GSG...I used to reason exactly that way...until I realised that the graffito was so small, most likely in the hallway rather than in the open, and the entrance itself was so far recessed...not really in plain sight to anyone except a resident of the building itself.

It might even be that it's out of the way position contributed towards it's not being noticed until there was a hue and cry raised over Mitre Square and the police started parying into corners. I wonder how long it could've been there...it wouldn't get weathered if it was in the hallway...

The photographic point is a good one...but they seemed to have no trouble getting hold of a photographer at other times (eg MJK)...after all they could have knocked someone up (in the British sense!)...

My belief inclines towards the GSG probably being unrelated (and therefore not necessarily a great loss), but I do think it might have been waiting half an hour or so before erasing it!

All the best

Dave

[Cogidubnus]

Hello Dave. Quite right, PROVIDED he exited through Church passage. But had he done that, he would surely have tripped over PC Harvey?

Provided of course that PC Harvey was where he should've been that night...

Dave

[Bridewell]

My belief inclines towards the GSG probably being unrelated (and therefore not necessarily a great loss), but I do think it might have been waiting half an hour or so before erasing it!

Mine too, Dave. Arnold's reasoning, as set out in a report dated 6th November:

"... knowing that in consequence of a suspicion having fallen upon a Jew named 'John Pizer' alias 'Leather Apron' having committed a murder in Hnbury Street a short time previously a strong feeling existed against the Jews generally, and as the Building upon which the writing was found was situated in the midst of a locality inhabited principally by that Sect. I was apprehensive that if the writing were left it would be the means of causing a riot and therefore considered it desirable that it should be removed..."

Full details of the wording of the GSG came out at the Eddowes inquest and were widely publicised. There was no riot.

Regards, Bridewell.

[Hunter]

There seems to be some question about official inquest testimony surviving as much of the testimony provided by the press is quoted. The written testimony has survived and is filed in the Corporation of London Records Office. A copy of the text is found in "The Ultimate JTR Companion" by Evans and Skinner. I realize most veterans already know this.

As to writing on the black part of the dado or fascia- It would make no sense - no matter who wrote it - to write in white chalk on the white bricks above.

The jamb was two bricks in width- approx. 16 inches. A dado or fascia could be on the jamb or the wall; it just delineates a difference in the vertical appearance of a lower portion of the structure and the upper portion - in this case the black water table bricks up to 4' and the white bricks above.

[Hunter]

Full details of the wording of the GSG came out at the Eddowes inquest and were widely publicised. There was no riot.

The details came out on October 11th: considerable time after the event and even then, the Met seemed to beef up security in that area just in case.

[Bridewell]

The details came out on October 11th: considerable time after the event and even then, the Met seemed to beef up security in that area just in case.

Hi Hunter,

Agreed, it came out at inquest on the 11th, and in the press the following day, but that's only 11 or 12 days after the murder. The anti-semites won't have changed their attitude in the interim though, so Arnold's fear of a riot (his word) was misplaced - although I do take your point about the beefed-up security which may have reduced the impact of publication to some degree.

Regards, Bridewell.

[Simon Wood]

Hi All,

Details of the GSG [albeit with slightly different wording] and the fact that a police officer had ordered it to be erased appeared in the Pall Mall Gazette on Monday 8th October, three days before the second sitting of the Eddowes inquest.

Regards,

Simon

[Bridewell]

Source

Hi All,

Details of the GSG [albeit with slightly different wording] and the fact that a police officer had ordered it to be erased appeared in the Pall Mall Gazette on Monday 8th October, three days before the second sitting of the Eddowes inquest.

Regards,

Simon

Hi Simon,

Thanks for that. Here's the link for anyone else who's not seen it:

http://www.casebook.org/press_reports/pall_mall_gazette/18881008.html

The PMG claim to have got their information from the Central News Agency of "Dear Boss" fame. I wonder who their source was. Common sense says it's likely to have been a police officer. My guess is the disgruntled Dc Halse, and that he tweaked his version of the wording slightly to disguise the fact.

Thinking about it, it has to be a police officer, doesn't it? Who else could it have been?

Regards, Bridewell.

[Bridewell]

Extract from the above:

"... there is now every reason to believe that the writer of the letter and postcard sent to the Central News (facsimiles of which are now to be seen outside every police-station) is the actual murderer. The police, consequently, are very anxious that any citizen who can identify the handwriting should without delay communicate with the authorities. Another communication has been received from the writer of the original 'Jack the Ripper' letter, which, acting upon official advice, it has been deemed prudent to withhold for the present. It may be stated, however, that although the miscreant avows his intention of committing further crimes shortly it is only against prostitutes that his threats are directed, his desire being to respect and protect honest women."

The article alludes to the "Dear Boss" and the "Saucy Jack", but then talks of a third communication from the same source. Does anyone have any idea which letter this would be? It can't be the Lusk letter as he didn't receive it until 16th October.

Regards, Bridewell.