Sir Charles Warrens transcription.

[mariab]

Thanks Monty, I downloaded it on my comp. Basically it looks like the same hand to me, on a real hasty look.

I'm sorry...I admit freely that I have no expertise here, but to an untutored eye the capital T and it's linkage (or lack of) to the "he" in "The" seem to differ a lot...the construction and linkages of the small "p"s look to be at variance too...The Bs are more similar however...

A handwriting by the same person is NEVER completely identical, but features small variations, even inside of the same document. For instance, Warren's small “b“s vary a bit inside of the same document. Now add different time, different pens, different paper, different ink, and you get a lot of little variables.
What's very characteristic for ALL these samples is the distinctive fashion in which Warren (?) – I guess it's probably all by him – draws the capital letters in the beginning of a sentence.

[Cogidubnus]

What's very characteristic for ALL these samples is the distinctive fashion in which Warren (?) – I guess it's probably all by him – draws the capital letters in the beginning of a sentence.

Hi Maria

Like the distinctive capital "R"s which are totally different in the sample provided by Monty, to everything which has gone before?

But nonetheless if you choose to believe that the difference is purely down to the selection of one steel nib over another (I doubt Watermans 1884 invention had made it to London yet, but I may be wrong) then who am I to argue?

Respectfully

Dave

[Steven Russell]

My (strictly amateur) opinion is that "Blamed", "Berners", and "Brothels" are all in the same hand i.e. Warren's, while "...the people in the streets..." etc. is by someone else.

Best wishes,
Steve.

[Hunter]

I agree Steve.

In the end, as I stated in an earlier post, it is the signature at the bottom of this manuscript that counts... no matter who wrote (in whole or in part) the text itself. If Warren signed it, then he signed off on it.

[Cogidubnus]

In the end, as I stated in an earlier post, it is the signature at the bottom of this manuscript that counts... no matter who wrote (in whole or in part) the text itself. If Warren signed it, then he signed off on it.

Hi Hunter

That's fine...but as the entire raison d'etre for this thread was whether the trasnscription of the GSG was in Warren's own handwriting or not, then it might just be considered germane mightn't it?

All the best

Dave

[Carol]

As a one-time secretary and knowing how bosses think, it is my opinion that Sir Charles would always give any copying work to someone else. After all, he would have had much more important things to do than that sort of thing!

Carol

[Bridewell]

I'm probably just being thicker than usual today, but what is this thread seeking to prove? Whether or not Warren copied down the GSG at the scene? Whether or not Warren ever wrote out the wording of the GSG?

Apologies. I'm not trying to denigrate the topic - just don't understand it.

Regards, Bridewell.

[Steven Russell]

The GSG transcript certainly looks like Warren's writing to me although there does seem to be something unnatural about the capital Ts. I wonder if Sir Charles was trying to copy the style as well as the text and layout. Probably not though as the B of Blamed is so much like his own.

Also note that he says "having taken a copy" rather than "having ordered a copy to be taken". Could this wording swing us slightly in the direction of Sir C. having made the copy himself? I reckon it's his writing anyway.

Best wishes,
Steve.

[Phil Carter]

Hello all,

Bridewell, if so- you arent the only one as I have a question in my own thick head that lingers..

Was there a reason why Warren himself was not called to the inquest especially as

a) the writing on the wall was a central part of the inquest questioning

b) the erasure of the writing was of import enough for Warren to write an explanation to others elsewhere of his actions

c) Warren (if Steve and others are indeed correct) wrote the version seen on paper and is primary evidence

d) that Warren himself intervened and gave the order for it's erasure

Some may no doubt point out that the Coroner deemed it unnecessary to call Warren as the subject appeared sufficiently covered. Maybe that is true- but one asks the question whether there was a political sidestep in here somewhere- that Warren as the top dog couldnt be seen to be involved at this level- especially as there was an almighty craving for his head anyway.

The writing was so important they got him out of bed to intervene. But he was never PUBLICALLY questioned over this pivotal decision.

Best wishes

Phil

[Phil Carter]

As a one-time secretary and knowing how bosses think, it is my opinion that Sir Charles would always give any copying work to someone else. After all, he would have had much more important things to do than that sort of thing!

Carol

Hello Carol,

And yet not one of his minions could take the decision to erase/keep the writing WITHOUT Warren being dragged from the land of nod to decide.
If it was THAT important- the minions decided it so- then Warren could well have taken over and written it down himself, no?

Best wishes

Phil

[Jon Guy]

Hi Phil

And yet not one of his minions could take the decision to erase/keep the writing WITHOUT Warren being dragged from the land of nod to decide.
If it was THAT important- the minions decided it so- then Warren could well have taken over and written it down himself, no?

Carol may have a point, and to be fair to Warren, he was dragged from the land of nod because of the two murders and not the GSG. Arnold had already decided to have the GSG wiped away when Warren arrived at Leman St Police Station to be updated on the two murders. Arnold had already sent an Inspector with a sponge to wait for him in Goulston St.

On arrival in Goulston St, Warren had still yet to visit Berner St and with another two murder investigations under way I imagine his head was getting seriously pecked by the City and Met guys who were present.

[Stephen Thomas]

to be fair to Warren, he was dragged from the land of nod because of the two murders and not the GSG.

Nicely put, Jon.

[Errata]

"I may mention that so great was the feeling with regard to the Jews that on the 13th ulto. the Acting Chief Rabbi wrote to me on the subject of the spelling of the word "Jewes" on account of a newspaper asserting that this was Jewish spelling in the Yiddish dialect. He added "in the present state of excitement it is dangerous to the safety of the poor Jews in the East [End] to allow such an assertion to remain uncontradicted. My community keenly appreciates your humane and vigilant action during this critical time."

This is what kills me. In no way, shape or form is "Jewes" the spelling in Yiddish. The Yiddish spelling is "Yid". Thus the rather unfortunate nickname. This astonishing spelling is due to the fact that like damn near any other language, the word for "Jew" is completely different from the English word "Jew". In Vietnamese it's "Danh tu" if you were curious.

[Stephen Thomas]

This astonishing spelling is due to the fact that like damn near any other language, the word for "Jew" is completely different from the English word "Jew". In Vietnamese it's "Danh tu" if you were curious.

Ahh, so it's all danh tu a misunderstanding.

[Carol]

Hello Carol,

And yet not one of his minions could take the decision to erase/keep the writing WITHOUT Warren being dragged from the land of nod to decide.
If it was THAT important- the minions decided it so- then Warren could well have taken over and written it down himself, no?

Best wishes

Phil

Hello Phil,

I've read your post several times and looked back to the beginning of this thread and ended up confusing myself even more than usual! What I meant was that I think it possible that Warren asked someone else to make a copy of HIS (Warren's) own original copying of the GSG. Hence the wording 'enclose a duplicate'.

Carol