The meaning of the GSG wording

[Monty]

Seeing as the items were found upon her body, clearly if the police had taken them they were given back.

Monty

[Supe]

JDow,

Marriott's "theory" doesn't work for any number of reasons and your variation of same founders on the shoals of inquest testimony. As I wrote in a recent article: The apron was also likely virgo intacta when Kate left the police station at 1 am as the jailer, PC 968 George Henry Hutt, testified “I noticed she was wearing an apron,” which he was sure was once comprised of the two pieces produced in court. And as Kate exited the station into the night — and ultimately history — we lose sight of the apron until its separate parts are observed a good quarter mile apart.

The apron was clearly in one piece when Kate left the Bishopsgate station. And it almost assuredly remained in one piece when she entered Mitre Square less than an hour later.

Don.

[JDow]

Boggled

I've always been vaguely bemused by the 'confusion' surrounding the GSG. The meaning is quite clear, having grown up in an area where that type of double negative is used everyday. It means, simply, "The Juwes(sic) won't take responsibility for anything."

Interestingly, I was listening to an old Rippercast last night (and this is off on a happy little tangent) and Trevor Marriott's theory regarding the piece of apron was mentioned, then rapidly shot down when reference was made to the small squares of cloth found on her body which had been already prepared for the alleged use the apron piece was put to.

Wouldn't it be reasonable to say that, as she would have had her possessions taken from her while she was in the cells, that she may have had to improvise something while she was in there? Just a thought.

J

[RavenDarkendale]

I think the idea of JtR getting safely home, waiting until the area was crawling with police officers, and then going out again (with the incriminating piece of apron) in order to write an ambiguous chalk message rather improbable.

To my mind it's more likely that Pc Alfred Long didn't see the apron piece and graffito on his earlier visit.

Regards, Bridewell.

You have to think about it. Here is our murderer, who has killed Eddows in an amount of time that certainly had to push the limit imposed by the return of the cop on the beat. He flees, perhaps as the footsteps approach. (And if we belive he had earlier killed Stride and nearly got caught!) This would make two close shaves in one night.

Why would he get home, or to his "bolthole" and clean up, only to come back into an area swarming with police who are probably closely questioning everyone they can find, just to drop the apron and scrawl the graffiti? Doesn't make sense.

The killer disposed of the apron and got outa there! The graffiti was probably already there.

Raven

[DVV]

To my mind it's more likely that Pc Alfred Long didn't see the apron piece and graffito on his earlier visit.
Regards, Bridewell.

Far more likely, indeed.

[Roy Corduroy]

Joe Lis (Silver) seems a likely person to do something like this. If he was the murderer. To write this provocatively where he left the apron piece. It sounds like a boast or challenge.

Like, 'you want to blame the Jews, I give you something to blame for.'

It's still the best explanation I've read, as expounded by Charles Van Onselen in his book The Fox and the Flies. Joe Lis or someone like him. The argument that this was a kind of anti-semitic message to me is strained, with too many hoops to jump through.

Roy

[Cogidubnus]

I honestly don't know Rivkah, but I wouldn't honestly worry about it, because, some occasional teasing apart, I think (hope!) we're a pretty broad church here (and can mostly understand why Webster was a misguided fool!)...

As it happens I do believe the site owners themselves are left pond anyway, so what the heck...

All the best

Dave

[RivkahChaya]

Don't worry Rivkah, you're not alone in thinking the GSG may well have had nothing whatever to do with the Ripper...but of course, sans evidence I suppose we must keep an open (even if only ajar!) mind...

All the best

Dave

I try. I'll state my view, but then still say "for the sake of discussion, etc., etc." If he did go back, he must have been a pretty highly motivated anti-Semite. I don't believe for a moment he did, but I'll tuck that away, because if somehow, someone actually does prove that he did write it, well, then we need to look at actual anti-Semitic organizations, or whatever, if they existed.

Is there a way to set the spell-check for this website on British, without having to have my whole web-browser on British? I'd like to keep my spellings consistent with the majority of posters, but I don't want to have to keep switching it.

[Bridewell]

Risky & pointless

My thought is that the ripper went to his home or workplace after the murders to stash his knife and goodies, possibly clean up a bit, grab a piece of chalk and then went to Goulston St and wrote the graffito and deposited the apron. This could explain the the lengthy time interval between the murder of Eddowes and the discovery of the writing/apron.

I think the idea of JtR getting safely home, waiting until the area was crawling with police officers, and then going out again (with the incriminating piece of apron) in order to write an ambiguous chalk message rather improbable.

To my mind it's more likely that Pc Alfred Long didn't see the apron piece and graffito on his earlier visit.

Regards, Bridewell.

[Cogidubnus]

Don't worry Rivkah, you're not alone in thinking the GSG may well have had nothing whatever to do with the Ripper...but of course, sans evidence I suppose we must keep an open (even if only ajar!) mind...

All the best

Dave

[RivkahChaya]

Hmm. I never thought about that. Premeditated graffito.

You know, back when I first read about the GSG, in a book that pretty much presented it as a given that JTR wrote it, I understood it as a paranoid "The Jews made me do it!" sort of rant.

I don't think that now, because I don't think JTR wrote it, but if you think of it as premeditated, and an attempt to blame the Jews, not for the murders directly, but for making him do it, it makes more sense. It still sounds more like something for a novel, than what really happened, but it's still more likely than stopping in the middle of a getaway to chalk something on a wall-- on the other hand, he'd have to be more than just a casual anti-Semite to take the trouble to go back.

[Abby Normal]

My thought is that the ripper went to his home or workplace after the murders to stash his knife and goodies, possibly clean up a bit, grab a piece of chalk and then went to Goulston St and wrote the graffito and deposited the apron. This could explain the the lengthy time interval between the murder of Eddowes and the discovery of the writing/apron.

[RivkahChaya]

Ah, you assume the writing was left after working hours, yes?

A fair number were transient workers, they had no workplace as such.

Monty

Good enough. The guy with blood on one hand, and chalk dust on the other, that's him.

[Monty]

Yes, I know, but did they walk around with it in their pockets after they left work? Natural chalk is messy. I'd expect them to leave it at work.

Ah, you assume the writing was left after working hours, yes?

A fair number were transient workers, they had no workplace as such.

Monty

[RivkahChaya]

Market traders, carmen, tailors, porters, children, stokers, tallymen, costermongers, foremen, seamstresses, teachers, builders, butchers, greengrocers, slaughterers....all used chalk.

I can name more if you wish.

Monty

Yes, I know, but did they walk around with it in their pockets after they left work? Natural chalk is messy. I'd expect them to leave it at work.