Does the Goulston Street Graffito eliminate Jewish Immigrants as suspects?

[Newbie]

Newbie- interesting piece on the double negative. Many thanks.

I wonder if the fact that the door jamb was black and
chalk was white aided the killer? It also strikes me that the lettering height was only one-half inch in height!

Would someone with time and in daylight, if they were trying to incite protests or riots against Jews write that small? In a place clearly not that visable from the street? Or would someone trying to write a message in the dark have to look closely at the black jamb and with white chalk write a message? Obviously someone who could write and with chalk at one half inch heights? This person appears to be fluid with writing in chalk.

I personally think the double event is less coincidence than calculating.

Kill Stride in Metro like all other murders to date and next to an Immigrant Jewish Socialist Club? Implication?
Head to London ( his home?) and find Eddowes and murder ( the only time in London) and head back to Metro?
Head back to Metro and dispose the Apron and leave a message implicating Jews...again on the same night? And also making police believe he lived in Metro?

The immigrant Jews were prime suspects during this time. A calculating murderer would be smart to use that as an advantage. On the night of September 30 the killer appears to possibly have done this twice. The Working Mens Club and Goulston Street. Coincidence or Calculated on the move?

We dont know of course but Mary Kellys death was in Metro not far from Chapmans so the killer returns to Metro to murder after Eddowes. Why? Because he lived in London and would not be followed out of Metro jurisdiction??

There were a lot of Jews in Whitechapel, one would have to try very hard to avoid their proximity.
Jews only come into prominence with the double event, particularly if you include the graffito as being authored by the ripper;
otherwise, that theme has no prominence elsewhere.

I'm somewhat agnostic as to the involvement of JtR in the graphito. It certainly would make things more interesting if he had done it.


What we do know is that the police were extremely sloppy in handling and providing details concerning the layout of the evidence.
Was the graffito two lines or three?
Warren said that the graffito was visible from the street, others said no.

Since the police were sloppy in these duties, I have doubts as to the meticulous nature of their questioning of the residents.
How many of the tennants spoke english, wanted to open up to the police, or could read the message?
Did the police bring a long an interpreter: someone who spoke Yiddish?

Record the position of the apron, photograph the graffito, get an interpreter and thoroughly ask the tennants, if it should take a few days, as to anyone seeing the graffito ... it being the ripper's work and then immediately washed off, the expectation would be no.
Instead, they probably got mostly quizzical looks and head shrugs, and then gave up once the graffito was gone .... hence, didn't learn anything.

Crime scene 101, but that was too much for them. What can be deduced with the evidence all tainted?

[Patrick Differ]

There were a lot of Jews in Whitechapel, one would have to try very hard to avoid their proximity.
Jews only come into prominence with the double event, particularly if you include the graffito as being authored by the ripper;
otherwise, that theme has no prominence elsewhere.

I'm somewhat agnostic as to the involvement of JtR in the graphito. It certainly would make things more interesting if he had done it.


What we do know is that the police were extremely sloppy in handling and providing details concerning the layout of the evidence.
Was the graffito two lines or three?
Warren said that the graffito was visible from the street, others said no.

Since the police were sloppy in these duties, I have doubts as to the meticulous nature of their questioning of the residents.
How many of the tennants spoke english, wanted to open up to the police, or could read the message?
Did the police bring a long an interpreter: someone who spoke Yiddish?

Record the position of the apron, photograph the graffito, get an interpreter and thoroughly ask the tennants, if it should take a few days, as to anyone seeing the graffito ... it being the ripper's work and then immediately washed off, the expectation would be no.
Instead, they probably got mostly quizzical looks and head shrugs, and then gave up once the graffito was gone .... hence, didn't learn anything.

Crime scene 101, but that was too much for them. What can be deduced with the evidence all tainted?

London was a big city of 5 million in 1888 but the major Jewish Area was in the East End and it strikes me that the killer not only murdered there, picked his victims there but was also able to escape without any detection. It is likely he was from the area because otherwise he risked getting caught and not achieving his ultimate goal of complete mutilation of a woman. As a local he had the advantage over risk. Since Police used beats it seems unlikely that the killer would have risked infiltration into the community and not be seen as an outlier by Police. Just a guess but that seems logical.

The immigrant Jews were always the primary focus of the Authorities either because of bias, witnesses like Long or the Leather Apron event initially, but collectively with the murders of Chapman, Stride and Eddowes all having a Jewish component. Long with Chapman, the Working Mens Club with Stride ( also close to the Lipski event), and the Apron ( actual physical evidence) to the predominantly Jewish Wentworth Dwellings.

Why was it that only the Eddowes murder took place in the London City police jurisdiction and all others in Metro? Did the killer, having just murdered Eddowes make a mistake in his lust to finish the job interrupted with Stride? Did the killer need to draw the attention to Metro and off of himself living in London City? That would make sense if he was a local and knew how the Police operated. Or in this case how London and Metro were disconnected in terms of coordination.

Mary Kelly was killed in Metro. The same hunting grounds and kill zone as all the victims except Eddowes.

Its not clear whether the GSG and Apron are connected. But if not it is the most bizarre coincidence in the case.

Why did the killer who was murdering women in Metro suddenly kill a woman in London after being interrupted just an hour before in Metro? The bigger question might be where did the killer go after Tabrum, Nichols, Chapman and Stride?
DId he go North, South, East or West? I think Eddowes tells us that. I think he was going West to London City where he lived.

The dropping of the Apron makes sense if this is the case. Would the killer not want to draw attention " away" from himself? Im going back to Metro. If true then the killer would meet the geographic location probability in an FBI profile.

Imagine the killer trying to draw attention away from himself after killing Eddowes and the affects of that act and the GSG.

The Apron being deposited in Metro. Therefore the killer lives in Metro. But depisits and returns to London somewhere between Goulston and Mitre Square. He isnt about to be caught on the streets.

The GSG is either an implication of Jews for something, a taunt that is possibly driven by motive for a false conviction or a red herring. Was it an accusation of immigrant Jews living in Metro? An accusation by a fellow Jew is improbable therefore the killer is a gentile living in Metro.

The killer returned to Metro to kill Mary Kelly. Again a Jew is implicated by Hutchinson.

The Police obviously have no idea who the killer is at this point. Or do they? The focus at this point in the case moves from Metro to London City and specifically to Butchers Row. According to Detective Robert Sagar they have their man. Sagar is the best in class, medically trained, an eyewitness after the fact, the case liason to Metro.

The man working on or doing business on Butchers Row and being watched. He is returning to his brother or brother in laws house which is also being watched. He eventually gets put into an asylum and not long after dies from syphilis. The books are closed.

The events of September 30th tells a story that i believe carries through up until early to 1890 when the killer is taken off the streets. Basically 18 months.

Al Capone died of syphillis and during his last year of retirement he ended up having the mind of a 12 year old. He deserved the Electric Chair.

Who was Sagars man and where did he live? Likely in London City somewhere between Mitre Square, Middlesex and Butchers Row on Aldgate at the intersection of Middlesex Street.

That the shameless Screenplay anyway..Lol

[Newbie]

London was a big city of 5 million in 1888 but the major Jewish Area was in the East End and it strikes me that the killer not only murdered there, picked his victims there but was also able to escape without any detection. It is likely he was from the area because otherwise he risked getting caught and not achieving his ultimate goal of complete mutilation of a woman. As a local he had the advantage over risk. Since Police used beats it seems unlikely that the killer would have risked infiltration into the community and not be seen as an outlier by Police. Just a guess but that seems logical.

The immigrant Jews were always the primary focus of the Authorities either because of bias, witnesses like Long or the Leather Apron event initially, but collectively with the murders of Chapman, Stride and Eddowes all having a Jewish component. Long with Chapman, the Working Mens Club with Stride ( also close to the Lipski event), and the Apron ( actual physical evidence) to the predominantly Jewish Wentworth Dwellings.

Why was it that only the Eddowes murder took place in the London City police jurisdiction and all others in Metro? Did the killer, having just murdered Eddowes make a mistake in his lust to finish the job interrupted with Stride? Did the killer need to draw the attention to Metro and off of himself living in London City? That would make sense if he was a local and knew how the Police operated. Or in this case how London and Metro were disconnected in terms of coordination.

Mary Kelly was killed in Metro. The same hunting grounds and kill zone as all the victims except Eddowes.

Its not clear whether the GSG and Apron are connected. But if not it is the most bizarre coincidence in the case.

Why did the killer who was murdering women in Metro suddenly kill a woman in London after being interrupted just an hour before in Metro? The bigger question might be where did the killer go after Tabrum, Nichols, Chapman and Stride?
DId he go North, South, East or West? I think Eddowes tells us that. I think he was going West to London City where he lived.

The dropping of the Apron makes sense if this is the case. Would the killer not want to draw attention " away" from himself? Im going back to Metro. If true then the killer would meet the geographic location probability in an FBI profile.

Imagine the killer trying to draw attention away from himself after killing Eddowes and the affects of that act and the GSG.

The Apron being deposited in Metro. Therefore the killer lives in Metro. But depisits and returns to London somewhere between Goulston and Mitre Square. He isnt about to be caught on the streets.

The GSG is either an implication of Jews for something, a taunt that is possibly driven by motive for a false conviction or a red herring. Was it an accusation of immigrant Jews living in Metro? An accusation by a fellow Jew is improbable therefore the killer is a gentile living in Metro.

The killer returned to Metro to kill Mary Kelly. Again a Jew is implicated by Hutchinson.

The Police obviously have no idea who the killer is at this point. Or do they? The focus at this point in the case moves from Metro to London City and specifically to Butchers Row. According to Detective Robert Sagar they have their man. Sagar is the best in class, medically trained, an eyewitness after the fact, the case liason to Metro.

The man working on or doing business on Butchers Row and being watched. He is returning to his brother or brother in laws house which is also being watched. He eventually gets put into an asylum and not long after dies from syphilis. The books are closed.

The events of September 30th tells a story that i believe carries through up until early to 1890 when the killer is taken off the streets. Basically 18 months.

Al Capone died of syphillis and during his last year of retirement he ended up having the mind of a 12 year old. He deserved the Electric Chair.

Who was Sagars man and where did he live? Likely in London City somewhere between Mitre Square, Middlesex and Butchers Row on Aldgate at the intersection of Middlesex Street.

That the shameless Screenplay anyway..Lol

I'm not as focused on the invisible line between jurisdictions Patrick.

As for where he went:
1. Tabrum? not sure if this was a ripper murder
2. Nichol's? to work .... assuming that he failed to achieve what he wanted and would have wanted to hunt some more if not on a schedule
3. Chapman? not perfectly clear
4. Stride? to mitre square
5. Eddowes? to a bolt hole
6. Goulston graffito? - home .... further northward (from mitre square) up goulston/bell lane or further westward (from mitre square)along Wentworth.
7. MJK? - home

My problem with Middlesex street and butcher's row, after the Eddowes murder, is why didn't he just head up middlesex once fleeing mitre square, Watkins patrolling to the east, or coming up mitre square when JtR fled the scene. Surely, if he didn't know the route, Eddowes would have tipped him off ... JtR pumping her for information before the murder. And why the long delay, given the circumstances surrounding the discovery of the bloody apron?

[Patrick Differ]

I'm not as focused on the invisible line between jurisdictions Patrick.

As for where he went:
1. Tabrum? not sure if this was a ripper murder
2. Nichol's? to work .... assuming that he failed to achieve what he wanted and would have wanted to hunt some more if not on a schedule
3. Chapman? not perfectly clear
4. Stride? to mitre square
5. Eddowes? to a bolt hole
6. Goulston graffito? - home .... further northward (from mitre square) up goulston/bell lane or further westward (from mitre square)along Wentworth.
7. MJK? - home

My problem with Middlesex street and butcher's row, after the Eddowes murder, is why didn't he just head up middlesex once fleeing mitre square, Watkins patrolling to the east, or coming up mitre square when JtR fled the scene. Surely, if he didn't know the route, Eddowes would have tipped him off ... JtR pumping her for information before the murder. And why the long delay, given the circumstances surrounding the discovery of the bloody apron?

I think you answer your own question Newbie. If the killer lived, say on the London side of Middlesex, could that explain a few things?
1. With all of the murders taking place in Metro would someone living in London be interviewed by Metro Police?
2. Did Metro and London outside of Sagar being a liason cooperate with investigation? The events of September 30 illustrate London police as far as Goulston with no knowledge of Metro police. No cooperation until the Apron and GSG were discovered. And it was Metro calling the shots in Metro eventhough Eddowes was murrdered in London City.

In my view if the killer lived in London City and murdered in Metro, then it is possible and even likely that he understood the Police dynamic. Living there his entire 30 plus years would also give him the knowledge to easily escape apprehension as he would know tactical avoidance at a high level. His turf.

In terms of Eddowes, Middlesex Street is between Mitre and Goulston so it makes sense that if the killer, having killed in Metro up until that point, would have to minimize his risk. Did he do that by going to his home on Middlesex or near Middlesex and then wait. And then after a period of not getting the knock on the door , simply walk over to Goulston just 2 blocks away, deposit the apron and possibly the message to give the indication he lived in Metro?

In the case of the killer being stopped between Middlesex and Goulston, there is no indication anyone was stopped other than 2 men right after Eddowes death and not near Goulston.

Of course the killer could have been heading North but it seems improbable after killing Stride and ending up near Butchers Row where Eddowes was earlier.

Eddowes turned tricks in the area she was found intoxicated and instead of returning to Flower & Dean she ended up around Mitre Square. Interesting that after the murder of Mary Kelly , again in Metro, the attention by Detective Sagar returns to Butchers Row and the only murder area in London City the Ripper appears.

Middlesex Street , London side, would be the perfect location for JtR. It fits Eddowes and one has to ask why the killer went West and not North? It was close to Tabrum, Chapman, Eddowes and Kelly.

[Kunochan]

This killer was shrewd and cunning and a phantom. Insane but controlled as he killed in silence.

This is the main thing for me. The Ripper was almost supernatural in his ability to hunt, kill, and mutilate without being definitely seen or heard and without leaving evidence. None of the murders or mutilations were witnessed, even when out in the open. He avoided a heavy police and vigilante presence. It almost seems impossible.

I don't think the Ripper would stop to write graffiti. I think he only dropped the apron piece because it couldn't identify him (or it was accidental). I'm assuming the police were correct in identifying the piece as coming from Eddowes' apron, although without the apron we can't know for sure. The apron piece seems to be the Ripper's only mistake, although it did not help catch him.

I don't think he wrote letters, either. (I wish we could know for sure about that kidney, but we can't.)

To clarify, I think the man seen assaulting Stride was her killer, but he wasn't the Ripper. The Ripper wouldn't operate so openly, near where people were passing by and singing. She wasn't mutilated. The actual Ripper killing Eddowes later that night was a coincidence.

[Patrick Differ]

This is the main thing for me. The Ripper was almost supernatural in his ability to hunt, kill, and mutilate without being definitely seen or heard and without leaving evidence. None of the murders or mutilations were witnessed, even when out in the open. He avoided a heavy police and vigilante presence. It almost seems impossible.

I don't think the Ripper would stop to write graffiti. I think he only dropped the apron piece because it couldn't identify him (or it was accidental). I'm assuming the police were correct in identifying the piece as coming from Eddowes' apron, although without the apron we can't know for sure. The apron piece seems to be the Ripper's only mistake, although it did not help catch him.

I don't think he wrote letters, either. (I wish we could know for sure about that kidney, but we can't.)

To clarify, I think the man seen assaulting Stride was her killer, but he wasn't the Ripper. The Ripper wouldn't operate so openly, near where people were passing by and singing. She wasn't mutilated. The actual Ripper killing Eddowes later that night was a coincidence.

Hi Kunochan - If the killer knew the behavior of the Streets including Police Beats and other repetitive times of the locals daily going about their business, his ability to kill and escape might be more believable. Add to that the locations of murders in Metro and only Eddowes in London makes me think he lived in London just inside the classic perimeter an FBI geographic profile would establish.

I think the odds of two throats being cut in the period of 1 hour is pretty low. I believe the killer chose the Metro jurisdiction because he knew, again, as a lifelong local, that his risk was very low that if he murdered outside London City, chances were he would not be exposed.

This killer had a developing goal in my mind. Total mutilation of a human. Escalation from Nichols to Chapman was the first indication. Was Stride supposed to be the next escalation? Circumstance in her case was an unforseen interruption. What did he do next?

He headed to his lair, likely his home in London City and outside of Metro. Eddowes upon leaving the Police Station, now sobered up was desperate for 1 more attempt at Doss money. She headed to St Botolphs area where as misfortune would have it she ran into JtR who was anything but finished.

St Botolphs was referred to as the Prostitutes Church as it was a frequent location for them to turn tricks. It would also be known to punchers. As long as the prostitutes kept walking they would likely not be stopped. JtR most likely also knew this fact and Mitre Square, in close proximity to St Botolphs, would also be known as a place used by these women.

The difference in Police beat timing was different between Metro and London. Metro was a 30 minute walk cycle and London a 15 minute cycle. London was a much higher risk which tells me that the killer took a much greater risk killing Eddowes. Why there and Why Then?

My guess is while heading home he ran into Eddowes and they ended up at Church Passage right after PC Harvey passed and right when Lawende, Harris and Levy came out of the Club. It had been raining so they may have been under something, even the passage itself.

Eddowes was the escalation along with face mutilation and kidney removal . In a 15 minute window. It tells a story and would make sense if, a killer having been interrupted and totally dissatisfied was willing to risk detection, his lust to kill overriding the risk.

Living in London City and killing in London City was a mistake by the killer. One he had to correct. He would not be safe in London unless he made it look like he lived in Metro. Where all other murders occured. The apron did that. The GSG did one more thing..would a gentile be more apt to write the graffito implicating Jews?

The apron deposit to indicate the killer was living in Metro and the GSG witten by a gentile to cause unrest. A bold move. One only a killer living between Mitre and Goulston could pull off with heightened Police presence in progress.

Just an overall theory.

[c.d.]

Patrick,

You seem intent on making Jack a combination of DaVinci, Einstein and Professor Moriarity constantly evaluating risks, probabilities and devising incredibly devious strategies to circumvent them all and put the odds in his favor. I just don't see him creating Excel spreadsheets as it were on which he based his actions.

c.d.

[Patrick Differ]

Patrick,

You seem intent on making Jack a combination of DaVinci, Einstein and Professor Moriarity constantly evaluating risks, probabilities and devising incredibly devious strategies to circumvent them all and put the odds in his favor. I just don't see him creating Excel spreadsheets as it were on which he based his actions.

c.d.

Thats just the way I describe things and write c.d. based on my own life experience. In an attempt to put myself in the killers shoes.

Would a local having lived in this half mile square area in Whitechapel have a likely advantage over someone who did not? Probably.

Would a local have a working knowledge of Police activity and their beats within that area? Probably.

Risk is another word for probability or chance. There was a 100% chance the killer was in Whitechapel at the time of the murders.

Time and motion analysis is just a method to describe an event of some kind. I do believe on some conscious level this killer, using his local street knowledge, was able to escape and elude the Police because of that knowledge.

I personally believe this case is likely one of a local killer and my theory ( probably theory of others as well) is plausible.

Local lunatic who knows streets finds prostitutes, goes to quiet location, cuts their throats, lays them down, mutilates and escapes. Never gets caught eventhough he hunts women who lived within a 2 or 3 block radius of each other and murders in a half square mile radius.

Moriarity, DaVinci, and Einstein and spread sheets? You left out Thomas Aquinas and Orwell. Just kidding.

[Kunochan]

Patrick,

You seem intent on making Jack a combination of DaVinci, Einstein and Professor Moriarity

c.d.

He kind of was, though? His success couldn't have just been luck. I think he must have been a local, and a genius in a very sick kind of way.

[c.d.]

He kind of was, though? His success couldn't have just been luck. I think he must have been a local, and a genius in a very sick kind of way.

Why not just a combination of street smarts and luck?

c.d.

[Patrick Differ]

He kind of was, though? His success couldn't have just been luck. I think he must have been a local, and a genius in a very sick kind of way.

Another way to look at it is no matter who the killer was they were faced with the same physical obstacles like Police on beats in various locations at various times and People on their way to work or out and about for various reasons.

When Police arrived at the scene of Victims and blew a whistle they would leave their beat and converge. This would only help a killer moving in the opposite direction.

I think the latter victims after Chapman tell a story with regard to more obstacles with a Police surge. Women also on their guard perhaps. Vigilance Committees. And yet the killer still escapes and is never caught?

I could be wrong but I think this killer was always in their midst and likely known but whatever reason never suspected.

I dont think this person was uneducated. He was smart enough not to get caught. It might have been some luck involved .

[Fiver]

I think the odds of two throats being cut in the period of 1 hour is pretty low. I believe the killer chose the Metro jurisdiction because he knew, again, as a lifelong local, that his risk was very low that if he murdered outside London City, chances were he would not be exposed.

Three throats were cut that night.

"Shortly before eleven o'clock on Saturday night a man named John Brown murdered his wife Sarah by cutting her head nearly off, at the house at which they lived, No. 11, Regent-gardens, Regency-street, Westminster." - 1 October, 1888 Star

If Brown had been the third, instead of the first, I suspect he'd be a top Ripper suspect today.

[Fiver]

I don't think the Ripper would stop to write graffiti. I think he only dropped the apron piece because it couldn't identify him (or it was accidental). I'm assuming the police were correct in identifying the piece as coming from Eddowes' apron, although without the apron we can't know for sure. The apron piece seems to be the Ripper's only mistake, although it did not help catch him.

I don't think he wrote letters, either. (I wish we could know for sure about that kidney, but we can't.)

To clarify, I think the man seen assaulting Stride was her killer, but he wasn't the Ripper. The Ripper wouldn't operate so openly, near where people were passing by and singing. She wasn't mutilated. The actual Ripper killing Eddowes later that night was a coincidence.

I agree with you on the graffito and the letters.

I go back and forth of Stride being a Ripper victim. I think Schwartz' account is accurate, since it makes him look bad. Broadshouldered man's behavior makes it unlikely that he was the Ripper and he's a great candidate for being Stride's killer. OTOH, I can't rule out the Ripper playing white knight, scaring off BS man, killing Stride, then getting spooked and fleeing. I think there's a good possibility that Stride's killer ducked into the public lavatory opposite the club when he heard Diemshutz' cart approach, the left when Diemschutz went into the club.

[Abby Normal]

Why not just a combination of street smarts and luck?

c.d.

bingo cd.

[Scott Nelson]

Why not just a combination of street smarts and luck?

I'd add the element of rage to the mix. And an additional element of a spark that set it off in most instances.