GSG because of Schwartz?

[Bridewell]

I don't think it likely that a man leaving a murder scene would stop to write ambiguous graffiti on a wall. The discarding of the apron piece suggests haste; the writing of the graffito suggests the opposite. I conclude that the most likely scenario is that the two are unrelated save for their proximity.

[Natasha]

In regards to the apron.

I think perhaps Eddowes left the apron there, or at least her customer did after cleaning up after 'connection'. This could explain the lost 30 minutes.

The doctors did not detect 'connection', but what are the chances that the ripper was the first 'customer' before every murder?

Also if the ripper did leave it there, then why were there only spots of feces and blood? Wouldn't there be smudges, hand prints, patches etc instead of just spots.

[Wickerman]

In regards to the apron.....
Also if the ripper did leave it there, then why were there only spots of feces and blood? Wouldn't there be smudges, hand prints, patches etc instead of just spots.

There were other stains, the Times, along with a few other publications noted:

"On the piece of apron brought on there were smears of blood on one side as if a hand or a knife had been wiped on it."

It was also wet in places, consistent with it carrying organs perhaps.
It would be rather bizarre for the killer to bring along this large piece of bloodstained cloth to wipe his hands, etc. but carry the wet organs in his pocket. Does he care more about the cleanliness of his hands than his clothes?
I think not.

[John Malcolm]

I don't think it likely that a man leaving a murder scene would stop to write ambiguous graffiti on a wall. The discarding of the apron piece suggests haste; the writing of the graffito suggests the opposite. I conclude that the most likely scenario is that the two are unrelated save for their proximity.

This is definitely not an unreasonable suggestion, but I can see a couple of things differently (actually applying this reasoning): first, would it be likely for a man whose purpose is to murder, to stop to carve designs in the victim's face and carefully "nick" her eyelids (of course after taking the time to pull out her insides and take a souvenir), in a public place, frequently patrolled? The unlikelihood of either event (mutilations/writing on the wall after a murder) taking place at all makes me think that it would take a person devoid of a fear of being caught (in either scenario), and one who is not in a rational state of mind, either; then, taking into consideration the proximity, to me it seems that it can't be a coincidence, do you follow me? And I've always felt that had the writing been there previous to the night/morning of the murder that all it would have taken to dispel the connection entirely would have been for even a single resident of the building (assuming all would have been questioned) to say so. Could all involved have been so blind? I doubt it. Another coincidence? I have a hard time wrapping my head around serial coincidence...

[The Good Michael]

I don't think it likely that a man leaving a murder scene would stop to write ambiguous graffiti on a wall. The discarding of the apron piece suggests haste; the writing of the graffito suggests the opposite. I conclude that the most likely scenario is that the two are unrelated save for their proximity.

Well, Batman says the writing was unambiguous to Warren, though he presents no evidence for this argument. I stand in the middle here. I say the apron and writing are not the work of the same person, but are related via murderer's interpretation of the writing.

Mike

[Rosella]

It's frustrating that we are never likely to know the truth about the GSG. If time travel is ever possible I will book a trip back to 1888 and be loitering nearby from about 2:20am onwards on the 30th..!

[Harry D]

It's frustrating that we are never likely to know the truth about the GSG. If time travel is ever possible I will book a trip back to 1888 and be loitering nearby from about 2:20am onwards on the 30th..!

Rather than Buck's Row on the 30th August?

[Rosella]

No, as we wouldn't be able to change history, I'd leave that pleasure to others. I would just want to know if it was Jack who wrote it.

[pinkmoon]

If our killer wrote the message why didn't he mention what he had just done in it surely he would if he had written the message.

[Scott Nelson]

Some would argue he did just that.

[pinkmoon]

I think he did not .

[Batman]

If that type of graffiti was everywhere then they would have dismissed it on the spot. Why didn't they just say 'oh look another piece of local goulston graffiti just happens to be here so let's wash it away in case it causes problems'. Don't you think at least one of them would have drawn a comparison to all the graffiti elsewhere?

Also what are the chances of randomly throwing a rag that just happens to land directly under some antisemitic graffiti? If the answer is high then why didn't the police say that by pointing to all the other graffiti of the same that make those odds high?

Why did Halse say it was fresh if the above was true?

[Natasha]

Hi Jon

There were other stains, the Times, along with a few other publications noted:

"On the piece of apron brought on there were smears of blood on one side as if a hand or a knife had been wiped on it."

The blood spots were of recent origin

Some blood and apparently faecal matter was found on the portion that was found in Goulston Street

I'm going by what the coroners say, that there was spots of blood, rather than what the majority of the papers say, because the coroner said spots.

It was also wet in places, consistent with it carrying organs perhaps.
It would be rather bizarre for the killer to bring along this large piece of bloodstained cloth to wipe his hands, etc. but carry the wet organs in his pocket. Does he care more about the cleanliness of his hands than his clothes?
I think not.

Would it not be bizarre to all of a sudden decide to dump the apron that contained the organs?
I think the apron had nothing to do with carrying away organs. I think if the ripper was going out to take organs, he would need to be organised, by bringing something that would contain the organs.

I have been thinking that perhaps someone else had planted the apron, perhaps one of the officers because perhaps they had strong convictions about who they thought the ripper was. The GSG may not have been written by an officer, but by linking it to the apron would therefore (in the mind of the person who planted it there) open a different route of inquiry. Perhaps one of the officers were in the believe that a Jew had committed the crimes and were annoyed that there wasn't further questioning of the Jewish community. It is very strange that the Jewish inhabitants of Goulston Street were not questioned about anything they may have heard/seen, or that they weren't questioned because of the GSG (as far as I know they weren't). The ripper may have lived in there for all they know.

Just an idea.

[Rosella]

How do we know that the inhabitants of Goulston St weren't asked if they had seen or heard anything unusual during the night (and let's not forget that the dumping of the apron/writing of the GSG occurred in the early hours of the morning when most people were fast asleep?) I think we sometimes forget just how much material and documentation has simply disappeared in the past century.

[Natasha]

How do we know that the inhabitants of Goulston St weren't asked if they had seen or heard anything unusual during the night (and let's not forget that the dumping of the apron/writing of the GSG occurred in the early hours of the morning when most people were fast asleep?) I think we sometimes forget just how much material and documentation has simply disappeared in the past century.

I would have though that perhaps the police would at least knock on the doors of some of the inhabitants houses in and around Goluston Street, to see if perhaps the murderer may have been living there.

It seems that perhaps the evidence was planted, but what if the apron was dropped by the killer by accident? We don't know for sure if it was dumped by someone, or if it was used to wrap organs. The logical thing to do would be to question everyone in the vicinity of where the apron was found.

Yes a great deal of info' has been lost, but there is no mention by the press that anyone around Goulston street was questioned.