Does the Goulston Street Graffito eliminate Jewish Immigrants as suspects?

[Abby Normal]

You said, "It could have led to violence because people might have thought that the Ripper wrote it", and "the goal is to prevent rioting". That sounds like an endorsement.

The attitude behind the command to erase the text is that the plebs are so volatile, they could break out into rioting on reading an ambiguous message about Jews, possibly written by the Whitechapel Murderer. Well, the text ended up in the papers, but no rioting ensued. Nonetheless, the censorious attitude remains.

uh no. lewis post was not an endorsement. all he did was state a fact. or is tjere anything " censorious" in any of it.

all i can see in your post is fake accusations and once again just trying to wind someone up.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

uh no. lewis post was not an endorsement. all he did was state a fact. or is tjere anything " censorious" in any of it.

all i can see in your post is fake accusations and once again just trying to wind someone up.

You seem to misunderstand where I'm coming from. I know how easily certain sections of the public can be triggered by ethnically related events, and being woke as well, I have no problem with censorship designed to protect the rest of us.

[Barnaby]

For those who believe that Jack wrote the GSG, do you find it strange that he didn't write another message at Miller's Court (assuming that he killed Kelly as well)?

c.d.

I have no clue what the GSG means due to its ambiguity. But a Jewish theme runs through this night. I could imagine the killer is pissed off he was interrupted during the Stride murder outside a Jewish socialist club, and perhaps is even cognizant that he was observed by Jewish men near a synagogue on Duke Street immediately before the Eddowes murder. If so, perhaps it is no accident that he scrawled that message on a predominantly Jewish lodging house. But what he is trying to say remains a mystery.

To your question, I don't think he felt the need to vent against/defend Jews during the Kelly murder because he wasn't triggered.

[The Rookie Detective]

I have no clue what the GSG means due to its ambiguity. But a Jewish theme runs through this night. I could imagine the killer is pissed off he was interrupted during the Stride murder outside a Jewish socialist club, and perhaps is even cognizant that he was observed by Jewish men near a synagogue on Duke Street immediately before the Eddowes murder. If so, perhaps it is no accident that he scrawled that message on a predominantly Jewish lodging house. But what he is trying to say remains a mystery.

To your question, I don't think he felt the need to vent against/defend Jews during the Kelly murder because he wasn't triggered.

The fact that none of the alleged Ripper victims were Jewish, but that at least 3 of them worked for the Jews (Eddowes, Stride and McKenzie) tells us that the killer wasn't being vengeful against Jews.

If there was a Jewish angle (and i'm not convinced there was) then it's far more likely that the killer was himself a Jew (Moab and Midian springs to mind) Not necessarily of course, but statistically more likely.


We also have the fact that MJK had her thigh and arm stripped of flesh; chunks cut out to reveal her thigh bone for example.
This action is indicative of a man taking his "pound of flesh."

The Jewish villain Shylock springs to mind.

A Jewish money lender living in a Christian city, who seeks vengeance for being owed a debt and referred to as the "cut throat dog."


The killer IMO had a connection to the theatre; as did Eddowes and Kelly (allegedly)

[Abby Normal]

I have no clue what the GSG means due to its ambiguity. But a Jewish theme runs through this night. I could imagine the killer is pissed off he was interrupted during the Stride murder outside a Jewish socialist club, and perhaps is even cognizant that he was observed by Jewish men near a synagogue on Duke Street immediately before the Eddowes murder. If so, perhaps it is no accident that he scrawled that message on a predominantly Jewish lodging house. But what he is trying to say remains a mystery.

To your question, I don't think he felt the need to vent against/defend Jews during the Kelly murder because he wasn't triggered.

barnaby ive been saying this for years. He yelled lipski at schwartz who was to said to have a strong jewish appearance. add to that lawende and company watching him with eddowes. so yes he was probably pissed off at being interrupted that night by a bunch of jews so wrote the gsg for a bit of pay back.

an expert on victorian linguistics said it meant... the jews are the men that wont take the blame for anything. its a slur against jews.

[c.d.]

The killer IMO had a connection to the theatre; as did Eddowes and Kelly (allegedly)

Can you elaborate on that, R.D. especially the Eddowes and Kelly allegation?

c.d.

[Patrick Differ]

barnaby ive been saying this for years. He yelled lipski at schwartz who was to said to have a strong jewish appearance. add to that lawende and company watching him with eddowes. so yes he was probably pissed off at being interrupted that night by a bunch of jews so wrote the gsg for a bit of pay back.

an expert on victorian linguistics said it meant... the jews are the men that wont take the blame for anything. its a slur against jews.

Hi Abby - what puzzles me on GSG is why the writer would use a double negative which would have easily been translated as such at the time. The Jews are the men that will be blamed is the statement if you cancel out the negatives and make it a positive statement. It could be that by leaving the apron and message both that they would be seen by a dweller and not the Police. Was the killer in fact trying to start a riot against Jews?

it was a tinder box. Warren had good reason to erase the message.

Was the writer educated as the writing was described as with a good school boys hand?

I agree he was likely very pissed off. He goes into a Jewish neighborhood , murders a gentile but yells Lipski which indicates he himself was not a Jew?

Then he murders another gentile an hour later and he leaves a bloody apron and message implicating Jews. And leaves it at a Jewish dwelling?

There seems to be a contradiction here but yelling Lipski may be as simple as- mind your own business. The person yelling could have been a Jew. So why implicate Jews in the case of Eddowes and draw attention to yourself?

OR- the killer wanted to draw more attention to the Immigrant Jewish class that the Police were already targeting. No Englishman would commit such atrocities.

Gentile, Immigrant Jew, or Anglicized Jew. The latter didn't like the immigrants anymore than the Gentiles did. That is clearly illustrated in the Jewish Chronicle of that time. It seems ironic that Stride was murdered outside the very place producing the immigrant newspaper Arbeiter Friend. Coincidence?

He was a cunning SOB.

[c.d.]

With regard to Lawende, are we to believe that no one else on the street that night looked at the Ripper (if in fact it was him) when they saw him talking to Eddowes? I would think that at the time people were certainly taking a closer look at their fellow man especially one in the company of women. Or is it more reasonable to think that the Ripper thought yeah, just like damn Jews to be looking at people? And didn't Lawende admit that it was just a quick glance? Either way, it didn't stop the Ripper from killing and mutilating Eddowes. So how significant could this incident be?

As for this expert, did he simply give his opinion on the meaning of the GSG as written or was he knowledgeable about the whole case so that he could put it into some sort of context? And unless he himself wrote it, it is simply his opinion. And do we know if every other expert in Victorian linguistics would agree with his conclusion? He may of course be right but I think taking what he had to say with a grain of salt would be prudent..

c.d.

[The Rookie Detective]

The killer IMO had a connection to the theatre; as did Eddowes and Kelly (allegedly)

Can you elaborate on that, R.D. especially the Eddowes and Kelly allegation?

c.d.

Kelly allegedly stated she had a relative in the theatre and Eddowes allegedly had came to London with Thomas Conway to get involved in the theatre scene (as Thomas apparently wrote songs)

There's a distinct element of theatricality to the murders in terms of the way the killer chose to display them.

He took a pound of flesh from Kelly by carving out a chunk of her thigh; rather reminiscent of Shylock claiming his owed debt in the Merchant of Venice.

He also carved and slashed Eddowes face; with the nips and lines resembling a clown.


I think Kelly and Eddowes both knew the killer. If not, then he knew them to some extent.


It's just an idea, but for me the killer had theatrical experience or had frequented theatre halls to seek prostitutes.

The Coram street murder back on Christmas Day 1873 is for me the point from which the theatrical link starts.


Also, George Lusk, Charles Reeves, Le Grand, and John McCarthy, were all involved with the theatre to varying degrees.


Perhaps Kelly was singing to blotchy man to show him her hidden theatrical talent. Auditioning on the job perhaps?

We also have the torso killings; the Whitehall torso wasn't just found under the New Scotland building; it was also the same foundations as the old opera house.

There was also a piece of torso thrown over the fence into Mary Shelley's estate.


We then have Schwartz with a distinct theatrical look, and so considering he has never been definitively identified, i do wonder whether he was an actor playing a part.


The theatre link is there, but to what degree is difficult to say.

[c.d.]

Thanks for your response, R.D.

He took a pound of flesh from Kelly by carving out a chunk of her thigh; rather reminiscent of Shylock claiming his owed debt in the Merchant of Venice.

He also carved and slashed Eddowes face; with the nips and lines resembling a clown.

Those seem to be indicative of confirmation bias. They of course might be correct but it is easy to come up with countless other interpretations.

The theatre link is there, but to what degree is difficult to say.

I agree with your conclusion. The question then becomes is it significant to the case? And if we can establish other links as well the same question would apply.

c.d.

[bonestrewn]

an expert on victorian linguistics said it meant... the jews are the men that wont take the blame for anything. its a slur against jews.

Hi Abby! Do you have a source for this statement? Not asking to question your accuracy--just interested to know/read more because I've struggled to interpret the GSG.

[Abby Normal]

Hi Abby! Do you have a source for this statement? Not asking to question your accuracy--just interested to know/read more because I've struggled to interpret the GSG.

hi bone
welcome. no i dont. im going off memory but it was on this site

[bonestrewn]

Thanks anyway, Abby! Looks like I'll have to do some digging.

[Mark J D]

There was also a piece of torso thrown over the fence into Mary Shelley's estate.

I don't know whether you know this, old bean, but the Shelley House was actually equipped with its own theatre...

Bests,

Mark D.

[Newbie]

Thanks for your response, R.D.

He took a pound of flesh from Kelly by carving out a chunk of her thigh; rather reminiscent of Shylock claiming his owed debt in the Merchant of Venice.

He also carved and slashed Eddowes face; with the nips and lines resembling a clown.

Those seem to be indicative of confirmation bias. They of course might be correct but it is easy to come up with countless other interpretations.

The theatre link is there, but to what degree is difficult to say.

I agree with your conclusion. The question then becomes is it significant to the case? And if we can establish other links as well the same question would apply.

c.d.

Some say it was an upside down V, which along with mitre and square have symbolic significance in Masonic culture.
And it was Juwes in the graphito message, not Jews.

Sir Charles Warren was a high-ranking Freemason, and some believed that he had it removed because he saw that a fellow Freemason had written the message.

The clue, it is claimed, is in that odd spelling of the word Jews - Juews. It is said that that is the way the word Jews is spelt in Masonic history.

In a different direction, here is an interesting read from a Jack the ripper tour website that posits that Catherine Eddowes left the article of clothing, when cleaning up menstrual fluids, after being released from jail:

There is no solid evidence supporting the theory that the killer of Kate Eddowes was the person who dropped the cloth in the doorway or wrote the message.

If, as is claimed, the killer used the cloth to wipe the blood off his knife and hands, why did that take him from Mitre Square to Goulston Street to carry out that simple task?

And given that PC Watkins checked Mitre Square at 1:30 and discovered Kate Eddowes's body just 14 minutes later at 1:44, the killer was under a serious time constraint.

The mutilation carried out in this murder was the most extensive of all but one.

Only the fifth victim, Mary Jane Kelly, was subjected to a more horrific attack. But Mary Jane Kelly was murdered in her own home. For the first time, the killer was operating in a private room behind a locked door so he could take his time.

So we have to ask if the killer wanted to clean himself up, why did he need to spend time cutting a square of cloth from out of her apron?

Why not simply spend 10 seconds wiping his hands and knife on the intact apron?

Catherine Eddowes:
She’s been lying in a cell in a drunken stupor. The doorway in Goulston Street is about an 8-minute walk from Bishopsgate Police Station. She steps inside the doorway for privacy and, feminine hygiene being what it was in 1888, she takes her piece of cloth, lifts her skirt and cleans herself.

The police surgeons pointed out that there was no way of knowing if the blood was human or animal blood, so they certainly had no way of knowing if it was arterial or menstrual blood.

She drops the cloth and then walks for 5 minutes up to a quiet, dark corner of Mitre Square.

The cloth remains inside the passage that leads to the stairway, out of sight of the police officers who are passing along Goulston Street.

Then, sometime after PC Long passes by at 2:20 am, a resident entering or leaving sees the filthy cloth and kicks it toward the entrance to the building, ready for PC Long to see it at 2:55 am.