The meaning of the GSG wording

[caz]

Hello Caz,

I would say that the obvious explanation is that the apron differentiated this message from all others. Pretty much anything in proximity to the apron if it could be construed as being related to the killings would draw the interest of the police. Even if the police removed the apron people would still wonder what they had been doing and would take a look. Even if they erased the J word they might have worried that somebody could fill in the blank.

c.d.

But the police didn't erase the message because there had been a bloody apron beneath it, connected with a murder. That would have been cause to preserve it, in case it was in the killer's handwriting. They erased it because they feared the words by themselves could cause public disorder. That is my point, c.d. How many passers-by do you think had seen PC Long with the apron, or were aware at the time that the killer had left it as a calling card? The police were hardly going to advertise the fact. Besides, we have been told over and over that to anyone passing it would just have appeared like a bit of dirty old rag - litter in fact.

Love,

Caz
X

[caz]

Hello Caz,

Is it really hard to imagine that graffiti existed as a regular occurrence in the LVP? Humans tend to communicate and walls and chalk were readily available. All it would take would be a few instances and then monkey see monkey do.

If I am not mistaken didn't they find some graffiti in the city of Pompei?

c.d.

Yes, but if you seek to compare the GSG with other examples of graffiti in Whitechapel in 1888 and declare it as nothing out of the ordinary (in style, size, language use and sentence construction - bugger the walls and chalk) you first have to produce some of these other comparable examples.

There is simply no point in arguing that you can't be expected to do that because nobody would have bothered photographing any, or mentioning any in the press (even after our GSG grabbed the headlines). That may or may not be true, but it's not evidence that they existed, never mind that they were all over the place.

I wonder why it is that those who argue for the apron being there at 2.20 when there is no evidence for it; and for similar graffiti being nearby when there is no evidence for it, are often the ones who argue for no connection between apron and GSG, thus lessening their options regarding the killer's behaviour and mindset.

I see the apron as a definite clue of sorts, and the message as a potential clue. That's all. I suppose I find it hard to understand why anyone would want to rub either or both of them out as if they have no possible insights worth offering in connection with this extremely clue-challenged murder case.

Love,

Caz
X

[caz]

Hello Caz,

You are connecting the killer with the message and we don't know for sure if that is the case.

Not quite, c.d. I said - and I quote:

It 'almost seems like' the killer was having a laugh - relishing the thought of how Jew and Gentile would choose to interpret the words.

Taken by itself, the message could certainly be interpreted as being pro-Jewish.

Yes, but then how ironic that the killer comes along and undermines in such a spectacularly specific way a general complaint about Jews being blamed for something (anything) they didn't do. You couldn't make it up.

Or maybe you could.

Love,

Caz
X

[Digalittledeeperwatson]

Hullo Lynn.

Hello Gareth.

"However, I'd suggest that it was only the graffito's proximity to the apron that made such a conclusion tenable. There's absolutely nothing explicitly connected to the murders in the graffito itself."

Sounds like Liz--only reason for including her in the canon is the time close to Kate.

Oops. Sorry.

Cheers.
LC

I don't agree. Any woman of potential unfortunate status found murdered in the streets with her throat slit would likely have been seen as a potential victim of 'JTR'. Is it that far of a jump as a possibility? Me thinks not. I will agree that circumstances around Stride's death are suspect though. Lipski is seeming terribly contrived to me nowadays. But all that stuff might have nothing to do with the murder/murderer. Maybe just how those around it decided to deal with the situation they found themselves in.

[Wickerman]

The police obviously thought the graffiti was connected to the case.

At the very least it is difficult to believe that the question was not asked.

I don't believe we have any real proof in the files that they did believe it was. But even if the question was asked at all, Warren may have simply said, "I'm not taking any chances, make a copy, and get rid of it".

So apparently, neither Warren nor Arnold saw any potential clue in the writing style, just the words.

[c.d.]

Hello Gareth.

"However, I'd suggest that it was only the graffito's proximity to the apron that made such a conclusion tenable. There's absolutely nothing explicitly connected to the murders in the graffito itself."

Sounds like Liz--only reason for including her in the canon is the time close to Kate.

Oops. Sorry.

Cheers.
LC

You never pass up a chance do you, Lynn?

c.d.

[c.d.]

Could be, c.d. But we'd still have to ask why the police differentiated this message from others, to the point of drawing attention to it rather than away? If the idea was to play it down and prevent trouble they went a funny way about it. With the apron gone they could simply have rubbed out the J word and left it at that. "Move along, there's nothing to see here" type of thing.

Love,

Caz
X

Hello Caz,

I would say that the obvious explanation is that the apron differentiated this message from all others. Pretty much anything in proximity to the apron if it could be construed as being related to the killings would draw the interest of the police. Even if the police removed the apron people would still wonder what they had been doing and would take a look. Even if they erased the J word they might have worried that somebody could fill in the blank.

c.d.

[lynn cates]

Liz

Hello Gareth.

"However, I'd suggest that it was only the graffito's proximity to the apron that made such a conclusion tenable. There's absolutely nothing explicitly connected to the murders in the graffito itself."

Sounds like Liz--only reason for including her in the canon is the time close to Kate.

Oops. Sorry.

Cheers.
LC

[Cogidubnus]

They found lots cd, but it was nearly all carved and not chalked, and apparently that makes the critical difference...

All the best

Dave

[Sam Flynn]

If I am not mistaken didn't they find some graffiti in the city of Pompei?

Indeed, not to mention the ancient stone quarries of Egypt. Or, even older, on cave walls.

[c.d.]

I'm not sure that's the point, is it? Even our GSG was not photographed, so it's hardly surprising if other examples were not either.

But I'd have expected far more examples to get a mention in the press - just to make something out of nothing - if similar messages were routinely found plastered over the local walls. Where were all the enterprising journalists if that really was the case?

It still appears that the GSG was viewed at the time as unusual to say the least - and they'd be the judge of that, not us.

Love,

Caz
X

Hello Caz,

Is it really hard to imagine that graffiti existed as a regular occurrence in the LVP? Humans tend to communicate and walls and chalk were readily available. All it would take would be a few instances and then monkey see monkey do.

If I am not mistaken didn't they find some graffiti in the city of Pompei?

c.d.

[c.d.]

All undone by the killer flinging the highly incriminating apron in that particular entrance, making it look like something they absolutely did do. Oops!

It almost seems like the killer was having a laugh - relishing the thought of how Jew and Gentile would choose to interpret the words.

Love,

Caz
X

Hello Caz,

You are connecting the killer with the message and we don't know for sure if that is the case. Taken by itself, the message could certainly be interpreted as being pro-Jewish.

c.d.

[Sam Flynn]

The police obviously thought the graffiti was connected to the case.

The police, variously, also thought that Tumblety, Kosminski and Druitt (inter alia) were feasible subjects.

To be fair, the graffito was at least found near an indisputable piece of tangible evidence, so it would be natural to make such a connection. However, I'd suggest that it was only the graffito's proximity to the apron that made such a conclusion tenable. There's absolutely nothing explicitly connected to the murders in the graffito itself.

[caz]

Hello Bridewell,

I think that you also have to include a pro-Jewish sentiment, i.e., the Jews are not going to accept blame for something they didn't do.

c.d.

All undone by the killer flinging the highly incriminating apron in that particular entrance, making it look like something they absolutely did do. Oops!

It almost seems like the killer was having a laugh - relishing the thought of how Jew and Gentile would choose to interpret the words.

Love,

Caz
X

[Lechmere]

The police obviously thought the graffiti was connected to the case.