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

[spyglass]

HI Vingle,
I suggest you read Trevor Marriots book "21st century Investigation "if you want to go down that route.

[spyglass]

Not that he suggests police involement, but Eddowes left it there earlier for reasons I would rather not describe here.

[FrankO]

Is there any mileage in thinking about a scenario where the piece of apron is left by someone other than the ripper.

Hi Vingle,

Even though it’s an interesting idea, personally, I don’t see any mileage in the scenario you put forward. Obviously, it ‘s possible, but there are simply no clues that point in that direction. If constables were trying to put the blame on a Jewish immigrant, they might have done better to leave the apron piece at the door of the Great Synagogue or the Bevis Marks Synagogue. But, that’s just my take on it.

All the best,
Frank

[Beowulf]

Constable Alfred Long, 254 A, Metropolitan police: I was on duty in Goulston-street, Whitechapel, on Sunday morning, Sept. 30, and about five minutes to three o'clock I found a portion of a white apron (produced). There were recent stains of blood on it. The apron was lying in the passage leading to the staircase of Nos. 106 to 119, a model dwelling-house. Above on the wall was written in chalk, "The Jews are the men that will not be blamed for nothing." I at once searched the staircase and areas of the building, but did not find anything else. I took the apron to Commercial-road Police-station and reported to the inspector on duty.

I believe above would mean just that.

I have not read anywhere that the police searched this 'dwelling-house'? What if the murderer simply was going home and this dwelling-house was it. He could've both written the message and dropped the apron and went upstairs to bed. Careless, but seems you wouldn't want to rule it out.

Was at least a list of who lived there ever made? Was anyone considered at all who lived there? Seems logical to investigate it, at least.

[Bridewell]

I don't think that it was the biggest blunder at all.

I don't actually think the police blundered a great deal. This type of murder was unprecedented in their experience and they were simply not equipped to deal with it. To argue that they were, by the standards of the day, incompetent, it would be necessary to show that, had the murders been committed elsewhere, another police force would have performed more effectively. For me this was the biggest of the few blunders made, because the argument for erasure doesn't stand up. We know (from Dew) that anti-semitic graffiti (and views) were widespread, so why the need to immediately erase this example? Warren could have used as many officers as necessary to screen the area for the hour or so it would have taken to photograph it. "The cover would have been torn down" is nonsense.
The killer may well not have written the graffito, but there was no way that Warren could have known as much.


It is perfectly understandable given the inflamatory nature of the graffiti and the potentially extremely explosive situation regarding racial hatred/suspicion of the Jewish community at that time.

Did the police go round carrying buckets erasing all such graffiti? I suspect not. The graffito became public knowledge and no disorder resulted when that occurred.

The detail of the word 'nobody' and Eddowes comes down to whether you think that is just a coincidence or not -and I do personally.

I confess to not having previously made this connection (if, indeed, there is one). No need for police involvement though. The officer who arrested her probably asked her name at that time and got the same response - which could have been overheard by any member of the small crowd of onlookers. Like you, though, I think it's probably just coincidence.

As to Jack being potentially caught near the graffiti and his risk of being a suspect -I think that a) he was someone who appeared perfectly anodyne and looked totally different from the suspect descriptions being circulated so he felt 'safe' and b) he was a 'narcissist' who thought he was much smarter than the police and would easily be able to convince them that he was innocent.

Completely agree.

Regards, Bridewell.

[Wickerman]

I have not read anywhere that the police searched this 'dwelling-house'?

I don't have a reference at my fingertips but I think it was the City police who searched this Goulston St. address.

Regards, Jon S.

[Beowulf]

I don't have a reference at my fingertips but I think it was the City police who searched this Goulston St. address.

Regards, Jon S.

Well, that kind of soothes my mind. Thanks. I didn't genuinely think it had been done, have not run across it but I'm sure you know what you are speaking of.

[Hunter]

"When Hunt returned an enquiry was made at every tenement of the building but we could gain no witness of any one going in likely to be the murderer."

- From written statement of DC Daniel Halse, Eddowes inquest; No.135, Corporation of London Records Office.

[PhiltheBear]

In my usual manner I'm probably being a bit thick here but...

PC Long's written report testified to the effect that the piece of apron had appeared between 2.20 a.m. and 2.55 a.m. and it was "lying in the passage of the door-way leading to 109-118... Above it on the wall was written...."

There's an obvious problem - if it's in the door-way the only thing above it is the top of the door.

Supt Arnold's report testified that "my attention was called to some writing on the wall of the entrance to some dwellings..." and "it was in such a position that it would be rubbed by the shoulders of persons passing in and out of the building"

Therefore, it's fairly obvious that the writing was on a wall inside the doorway - although Warren claimed it was visible to the street - but not until 5 a.m.

The problem that now occurs is that between 2.20 and 2.55 it would have been dark - too dark to have written without a light in a passageway and it is therefore extremely unlikely that Jack could have written it. Why would he light a lamp or candle which would illuminate himself as much as the wall? Much more plausible is the case that the writing was already there (and because it was in the passageway, in the dark, not noticeable by PC Long on his usual patrol) and that Jack simply dropped/threw the piece of apron into the passageway to dispose of/hide it. Long's light would be directed down, rather than up, so that he could see where he was going, which is why he spotted the piece of apron when he did.

[Tom_Wescott]

Hi Phil. By 'doorway' he simply meant the entranceway. Of course there was no door there. It was written on the door jamb, not the wall.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[The Good Michael]

Hi Phil. By 'doorway' he simply meant the entranceway. Of course there was no door there. It was written on the door jamb, not the wall.

Jamb, jelly, you gotta admit Phil's conclusions are sound.

Mike

[Tom_Wescott]

Phil's conclusions aren't unsound, but they're not entirely accurate. Jack had moonlight to work by and was using white chalk against black dado. The writing was certainly not done during the daylight, unless Phil is suggesting no one in the building saw it.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[PhiltheBear]

Hi Phil. By 'doorway' he simply meant the entranceway. Of course there was no door there. It was written on the door jamb, not the wall.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

Define 'jamb'. I know that the graffito was described as being written on black - which doesn't jell with the idea that the words were less than a brick high - indicating that they were written on brick.

Moonlight giving enough light? Just checked an astronomy programme - no Moon that night - but I will recheck.

[Simon Wood]

Hi All,

Biggest blunder?

The combined intellect of the Metropolitan and City police forces, from lowly PC to Commissioner, could not agree upon the position, wording, grammar or lineage of the GSG.

Discuss.

Regards,

Simon

[Tom_Wescott]

Hi Phil. I don't know what you mean. But imagine you were standing in the entry of Goulston Street and an earthquake started happening, you would stand in the entrance way, which was like a doorway but with no door. On what you might call a door jamb, at approximately shoulder height to an average man, was the writing. White chalk on black dado.

Hi Simon,

Believe me, I've put a lot of thought into that myself and have my ideas. Literally no two people saw the same thing. DC Halse spent the most time in the presence of the graffiti, and much of that time alone, so I tend to favor his version, although I think "Juwes' might actually have been 'IWMES', which appears virtually the same in cursif. And since everyone was expecting it to be a word and not an anagram, their minds told them it was some mutated form of 'Jews'.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott