The word JUWES

[Abby Normal]

I would attribute that more to street-smarts than a formal education.

Agree, he was more than likely a street smart avg local joe who knew the streets like the back of his hand.

[Abby Normal]

What would the graffiti have had to say in order to convince you that the killer had nothing to do with it?

Actually a good thought provoking question!
Probably nothing to do disparaging Jews women police or anything about violence.

Some example might be:

John smith is a pig
God save the queen
Don't eat at joes
Eds gang rules
Prince Alberts a wanker

[Harry D]

This person is a well educated and skilled individual.

Ever wonder how easily he travelled through an area chockablock full of police specifically looking for Jack the Ripper that night!

I would attribute that more to street-smarts than a formal education.

[DJA]

What would the graffiti have had to say in order to convince you that the killer had nothing to do with it?

Um.....I'm not the person wot didn't kill them womin......um,let me try that again

Ever occur to you lot that he was creating a false trail away from his bolt hole and certainly not in the direction of where he actually resided.

This person is a well educated and skilled individual.

Ever wonder how easily he travelled through an area chockablock full of police specifically looking for Jack the Ripper that night!

[Abby Normal]

YES Abby, but later Long changed his view and said he was not certain.

Steve

hey!!! what happened to my question points 1 and 2?!???

I really wanted to see your responses to those as I greatly respect your views.

[Elamarna]

I think I know why he did this. And no author writing about the GSG has solved it. It is no big thing, really. At least not for me. But for the killer it had a great significance.

Regards, Pierre

Good

publish and prove

[Pierre]

"Any rational choice theorist would agree. And why would he leave something at a spot some distance from of a murder site if he had nothing to gain? "

Pierre

you are entitled to your view

Of course it would have more substance if you actually had some background in the subject of the murders, if you had you would know the reasons for the route taken and the reason for the dumping have been covered by many without a firm conclusion, due to the lack of evidence.

However given you don't take any account of any research carried out over the years ,(other than to say well no one as found him and to suggest any such research is pointless) I doubt if you know of its existence.

I think I know why he did this. And no author writing about the GSG has solved it. It is no big thing, really. At least not for me. But for the killer it had a great significance.

Regards, Pierre

[Elamarna]

"Any rational choice theorist would agree. And why would he leave something at a spot some distance from of a murder site if he had nothing to gain? "

Pierre

you are entitled to your view


Of course it would have more substance if you actually had some background in the subject of the murders, if you had you would know the reasons for the route taken and the reason for the dumping have been covered by many without a firm conclusion, due to the lack of evidence.

However given you don't take any account of any research carried out over the years ,(other than to say well no one as found him and to suggest any such research is pointless) I doubt if you know of its existence.

[Pierre]

thanks steve
its a possibility.
1.But, as far as we know he never cut and took away any of the other victims clothing to clean himself or the knife.why only with eddowes?

2. if he wanted to clean his hands and knife he could have just done it on her apron as she lay there. why take any extra time at the scene to cut away a large portion of her apron, only to take it a short distance away, take it out, take his knife out again and clean it and or his hands. Isnt that much more riskier and time consuming?

Any rational choice theorist would agree. And why would he leave something at a spot some distance from of a murder site if he had nothing to gain?

Regards, Pierre

[Elamarna]

thanks steve
its a possibility.

also, long was pretty adamant he would have seen it-it was a large white piece of apron. He was pretty certain he said it wasn't there. Im sure he would have known better than anyone-Ill go with the PC on this one. it probably wasn't there the first time around.

YES Abby, but later Long changed his view and said he was not certain.

Steve

[Michael W Richards]

thanks steve
its a possibility.
1.But, as far as we know he never cut and took away any of the other victims clothing to clean himself or the knife.why only with eddowes?

Because it was the only murder where the victim had her colon cut off in a 2 foot section, then placed between her arm and body. It would seem logical that the feces changed the scenario. The issue is though that the apron section was only smeared slightly with both blood and feces, leading one to surmise that he may have used the section for the organs, which were virtually bloodless at that point, and he used something he had with him to clean his hands.

[Abby Normal]

To clean himself and his knife, as far as we know he had taken nothing to from Chapman, to use as a carrier, so assume he had something on him in which to secure trophies in, i assume he did same for Eddowes.

Gavin Bromley made a strong case in Ripperologist 75 for escape routes and reasons for disposal .
The reasoning seems sound, there were lights near by to check the condition of hands, and it was just outside of the City Police area.

Although at first Pc long said he was sure he would have seen the apron if it were there earlier, it later changed this and said he could not be certain.
Dc Halse suggests the Apron was inside the building by the stairs, in which case if true it would have been easy for long to have missed it.

he was on his way home, be that back to the North and East, or South having got to the site by a round about route, both actually work. you pays your money and takes your choice.

steve

thanks steve
its a possibility.
1.But, as far as we know he never cut and took away any of the other victims clothing to clean himself or the knife.why only with eddowes?

2. if he wanted to clean his hands and knife he could have just done it on her apron as she lay there. why take any extra time at the scene to cut away a large portion of her apron, only to take it a short distance away, take it out, take his knife out again and clean it and or his hands. Isnt that much more riskier and time consuming?

also, long was pretty adamant he would have seen it-it was a large white piece of apron. He was pretty certain he said it wasn't there. Im sure he would have known better than anyone-Ill go with the PC on this one. it probably wasn't there the first time around.

[Harry D]

He wouldn't know he was interrupted by Jews. And, yes, the young lad who wrote the graffito lived "close" to the Wentworth Buildings.

What's your theory, Scott?

[Errata]

What would the graffiti have had to say in order to convince you that the killer had nothing to do with it?

[Elamarna]

hi again steve
why do you think he cut the apron and dropped where he did?

To clean himself and his knife, as far as we know he had taken nothing to from Chapman, to use as a carrier, so assume he had something on him in which to secure trophies in, i assume he did same for Eddowes.

Gavin Bromley made a strong case in Ripperologist 75 for escape routes and reasons for disposal .
The reasoning seems sound, there were lights near by to check the condition of hands, and it was just outside of the City Police area.

Although at first Pc long said he was sure he would have seen the apron if it were there earlier, it later changed this and said he could not be certain.
Dc Halse suggests the Apron was inside the building by the stairs, in which case if true it would have been easy for long to have missed it.

he was on his way home, be that back to the North and East, or South having got to the site by a round about route, both actually work. you pays your money and takes your choice.

steve