The meaning of the GSG wording

[Abby Normal]

Hi
This thread is for what you think the wording of the GSG means, if it was written by the killer (I think it probably was). Please no debates on whether it was written by the killer or not-Lets assume it was.

So what does it mean?

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

My possible explanations:


1.The killer was Jewish- And it means, basically-The jews(and me) have been blamed for nothing for too long. Kind of a reaction against the opression the Jews have felt.
I think this perhaps Rob House's view in his new book on AK.


2. The killer was Jewish-means-With the double negative switched-The Jews will be blamed for something. as in- I am Jewish and I did it and I should be blamed! I am glad I did it. A boast. I beleive some of the senior police official at the time held this view.

3. The killer was not Jewish-means-The Jews will not take the blame for anything. I read somwhere(can't remember where) that a language expert on the times says that this is probably the most accurate way to interpret it.
So I see this reading as a non Jewish killer trying to blame them perhaps in a more subltle or indirect way. as in-they have never and also in these murders accept blame for their evils, but they are responsible (either directly or non-directly) for these murders.


4. The killer was not jewish-means-The Jews will be blamed for something. Again turning the double negative to the positive and directly meaning-The Jews did it!

5. The killer was not Jewish-means-the jews will not be blamed for something. As in The jews are being unfairly accused and are not responsible for this.


My personal view is that number three is the most likely.
Please let me know if you think any above is most likely or your own interpretation of what the GSG meant.

[Ben]

I think #3 is the most likely too, Abby.

It was apparently the explanation favoured by several senior police officials.

[lynn cates]

the implication

Hello Abby. Although I don't think the perpetrators of the "Double Event" wrote this, an ally perhaps did.

And I think you are correct that it was a Gentile trying (rather ineptly, I might add) to implicate a Jew. So #3 looks most likely.

Cheers.
LC

[Colin Roberts]

Please no debates on whether it was written by the killer or not-Lets assume it was.

You should periodically 'bump' this portion of the original post, Abby, in hopes of keeping the thread on track.

~~~

I have been seduced by the 'gut feeling' that 'Jack the Ripper' was somehow 'spooked', in Dutfield's Yard; that he was then obsessively compelled to do something, which he considered - psychotically - to be immoral - i.e. kill twice, during the same excursion; that he, therefore, blamed the "Juwes" that had disturbed him, for Eddowes's death; and, that he 'voiced' his feelings accordingly.

[Phil H]

Personally, I doubt whether "Jack" spent time writing messages - if indeed he was literate in English or at all.

I believe that the graffito is a piece of anti-semitic drivel, chalked sometime before 30 Sep 88. It just happened to be close to the spot where JtR discarded his bloody scrap of apron.

Juwes is almoost certainly a mispelling of Juwes and is probably aimed at one of the inhabitants of that staircase.

The message IMHO has nothing whatsoever to do with the Whitechapel murders.

All just my reading of the evidence.

Phil

[Abby Normal]

You should periodically 'bump' this portion of the original post, Abby, in hopes of keeping the thread on track.

~~~

I have been seduced by the 'gut feeling' that 'Jack the Ripper' was somehow 'spooked', in Dutfield's Yard; that he was then obsessively compelled to do something, which he considered - psychotically - to be immoral - i.e. kill twice, during the same excursion; that he, therefore, blamed the "Juwes" that had disturbed him, for Eddowes's death; and, that he 'voiced' his feelings accordingly.

Hi Colin
Thanks for the response. I too beleive that the (Jewish)witness sightings the night of the double event is what IMHO prompted him to write the GSG.
But I have never heard of your view before he would find it immoral to kill twice in one night. Care to expand/explain?

[Stephen Thomas]

The message IMHO has nothing whatsoever to do with the Whitechapel murders.

Agreed, Phil. If one accepts the probable double negative (which was regularly used then and in more historical times and even now for emphasis) and the mis-spelling of 'Jews' the message is simply saying 'Stop blaming Jews for stuff'. The idea that JTR would take time out in that situation to write that message in chalk in one inch high letters in a 'schoolboy hand' strikes me as rather silly.

[Colin Roberts]

Personally, I doubt whether "Jack" spent time writing messages - if indeed he was literate in English or at all.

I believe that the graffito is a piece of anti-semitic drivel, chalked sometime before 30 Sep 88. It just happened to be close to the spot where JtR discarded his bloody scrap of apron.

Juwes is almoost certainly a mispelling of Juwes and is probably aimed at one of the inhabitants of that staircase.

The message IMHO has nothing whatsoever to do with the Whitechapel murders.

All just my reading of the evidence.

The message IMHO has nothing whatsoever to do with the Whitechapel murders.

Agreed, Phil. If one accepts the probable double negative (which was regularly used then and in more historical times and even now for emphasis) and the mis-spelling of 'Jews' the message is simply saying 'Stop blaming Jews for stuff'. The idea that JTR would take time out in that situation to write that message in chalk in one inch high letters in a 'schoolboy hand' strikes me as rather silly.

Neither of your posts bears any relevance, whatsoever, to the topic of this thread!

This thread is for what you think the wording of the GSG means, if it was written by the killer (I think it probably was). Please no debates on whether it was written by the killer or not-Lets assume it was.

"Please no debates on whether it was written by the killer or not-Lets assume it was."

[Sally]

Interesting thread

I think the killer wrote the message, so no need for any debate from me. I think most likely a Gentile killer trying to blame the Jews, so 3 or 4 would do. I think it means - 'if you blame the Jews for these murders you'll be right to do so.'.

[Stephen Thomas]

Neither of your posts bears any relevance, whatsoever, to the topic of this thread!

Are you losing it or what, mate?

Check the title of this particular thread.

[Colin Roberts]

Neither of your posts bears any relevance, whatsoever, to the topic of this thread!

Are you losing it or what, mate?

Check the title of this particular thread.

I'll let the readership of this thread decide which one of us has his head up his ass!

Either way, no one's interested in whether Stephen Thomas would "take time out in that situation to write that message in chalk in one inch high letters in a 'schoolboy hand'".

The field of 'Ripperology' is interested in whether 'Jack the Ripper' would have done so!

And, there has been but one human being, throughout the course of human history that would have known: 'Jack the Ripper', himself.

I have never heard of your view before he would find it immoral to kill twice in one night. Care to expand/explain?

It's simply a 'gut feeling', Abby.

Of course, it requires a lone serial-killer that is prone to an extremely obsessive-compulsive sense of 'lust', as well as a psychotic quirk, regarding a sort of murder 'etiquette'.

In light of the infinitude of possible scenarios, the balance of probabilities would suggest that mine is rather unlikely, ... as are each of the others.

But, I believe that my 'gut feeling' scenario fits rather well, in the overall sequence of events.

I think most likely a Gentile killer trying to blame the Jews, so 3 or 4 would do. I think it means - 'if you blame the Jews for these murders you'll be right to do so.'.

You are suggesting a killer that attempted to deflect attention, as well as outright responsibility for each of the so-called 'Whitechapel Murders' that had been committed, to date (i.e. 30 September, 1888).

"They did it!"

I, on the other hand, am suggesting a killer that simply attempted to deflect a sense of 'moral blame' for the murder of Catherine Eddowes.

"I did it; but, it's their fault!"

[Sally]

Yes..

You are suggesting a killer that attempted to deflect attention, as well as outright responsibility for each of the so-called 'Whitechapel Murders' that had been committed, to date (i.e. 30 September, 1888).

"They did it!"

I am.

I, on the other hand, am suggesting a killer that simply attempted to deflect a sense of 'moral blame' for the murder of Catherine Eddowes.

"I did it; but, it's their fault!"

But I don't see why that couldn't work, on the other hand. Yes, perhaps.

[SarahLee]

Abby,

Interpreting your question as being about the literal translation of the words themselves and taking JTR out of the equation, then I have to agree that no.3 seems the most likely :

"The Jews will not take the blame for anything"
or in my mind
"The Jews won't be blamed for anything"

That's the translation that came into my mind the very first time I saw those words, without having read any other theories about it.

If you want to expand your question to encompass theories about whether the killer was Jewish or not (which you imply by the options you've given) then I'm afraid I can't play under your rules about not debating who wrote it
You see I don't believe that the killer wrote it, or that it pertains to anything to do with the Whitechapel murders . . . but I'd better shut about that before I get told off for going off topic

[FrankO]

Hi Abby & all,

What I make of the GSG (in case it was written by the Ripper) is that, according to the Gentile writer, the Jews will be blamed for the murders, and not without good reason. So this would put my interpretation close to explanation number 4.

All the best,
Frank

[Raoul's Obsession]

I like the suggestion a few posts above..

I don't think the killer is saying that a jewish person did it, nor do I think he is trying to put the 'blame' on them for the actual murder - but I've always taken it as something that you might do in anger, kind of a petty act, in which you are saying 'I did it, but what about these people, they're evil too, and yet you don't go after them!'. I can see it linking to Dutfields Yard.

As for the issue that I'm not allowed to talk about: the purpose of graffiti is for it to be seen and to say something to as many people as possible, so if it wasn't written by the killer, then why would you write it in such small print. I've certainly never seen graffiti on a train station that size. Fine on a toilet cubicle where it might be seen- but not here. end rant.