The Indents in the GSG

[DJA]

I'm developing a new theory based on the initials of Goulston Street!

Guess who delivered the 1848 Goulstonian Lectures?

William Mickle (the double event occurred during the night of Michaelmas) gave the 1888 lectures.
Guess the topic!

GSG seems to be a clue linking the last three of the C5.

The Juwes being both the police (Old Jewry) and the club at Berner Street,"nothing" and the apron piece being Eddowes and the topic of the 1888 lectures foretelling Mary Ann Kelly's demise.

[Trapperologist]

Sam makes a good point about poetry as this is the manner in which it is written.

Guess who was known as a lover of poetry!

Guess who are known as lovers of poetry in general!

Or at least they seem to like to take a stab at it!

[Trapperologist]

Besides, all that had to be noted was the content of the message - neither the structure of the message nor the handwriting would have been of interest. It's not as if they could run it through a character-recognition engine to identify the culprit from his handwriting.

The tacking on of the end of a line to the right hand side, instead of returning back to the left margin, doesn't really exist as a "convention". I can't find anything about it. It would be more of a trait for handwriting analysis. But it doesn't apply to what's happening here since it's not the end of a real line or sentence that is being shoved quickly beneath the rest of the sentence on the line above at the right margin.

We're left with the other options you mentioned - poetry and play writing. Jack, the playwright....mmmm. I'm developing a new theory based on the initials of Goulston Street!

[Observer]

All the work of a disgruntled schoolboy. Speculate all you want on the number of lines, spacing, capitalizations, etc. It had no bearing on the crimes.

You beat me to it. I agree, it has no bearing whatsoever on the crimes.

[c.d.]

You seem to be saying that given the circumstances the decision seems unwarranted and you think the police overreacted. Maybe they did but that doesn't necessarily mean that there has to be something sinister or significant behind it.

c.d.

[DJA]

Having the police surround the message would be a reasonable inference that it came from the killer or in the least that it was somehow significant.

If you have a powder keg situation, it only takes a spark to set it off. Removing the clue was an ounce of prevention.

You are trying to put a logical spin on an illogical situation. We don't have all the information that was available to the police that led to their decision. It was a judgment call. I don't think anything more needs to be read into it.

c.d.

Probably worth reading the Inquest.

When did the police surround the message?

There was no powder keg situation.

We have the reason the police removed it at 5.30am.Not everyone was happy about it.

Incidentally Dr Sequeira and some of the police were from Old Jewry and "nothing" was possibly a reference to Eddowes.

Crawford's dismissal of the work on Eddowes by Jack is pathetic.

[Sam Flynn]

If you look at the Home Office version, there is an unnaturally large gap between "The" and "Juwes are"

Unnaturally large? Doesnt' seem so to me.



Besides, all that had to be noted was the content of the message - neither the structure of the message nor the handwriting would have been of interest. It's not as if they could run it through a character-recognition engine to identify the culprit from his handwriting.

[c.d.]

Who would know it was from the killer.

By most accounts it was a predominantly Jewish area.

Makes no sense.

Seems the police wanted the clue removed in a hurry.

Why?

Having the police surround the message would be a reasonable inference that it came from the killer or in the least that it was somehow significant.

If you have a powder keg situation, it only takes a spark to set it off. Removing the clue was an ounce of prevention.

You are trying to put a logical spin on an illogical situation. We don't have all the information that was available to the police that led to their decision. It was a judgment call. I don't think anything more needs to be read into it.

c.d.

[DJA]

Who would know it was from the killer.

By most accounts it was a predominantly Jewish area.

Makes no sense.

Seems the police wanted the clue removed in a hurry.

Why?

[c.d.]

Exactly what in the wording would incite a riot?

Not much from our modern day perspective but I can see a crowd gathering and somebody saying "hey look, here's a message from the killer and it says the Jews are to be blamed. Oh I knew it, I just knew it." Far fetched perhaps but angry crowds are not known for clear, logical thinking.

c.d.

[DJA]

Exactly what in the wording would incite a riot?

[tanta07]

How could the GSG's wording possibly incite a riot!

Because it appeared in an area where a Jewish market was going to be taking place, written on a building predominantly occupied by Jews, in a city that was at the time a hotbed of antisemitism.

Of all of the bizarre things about the GSG, I find the police's decision to erase it to be one of the more understandable parts.

[Scott Nelson]

All the work of a disgruntled schoolboy. Speculate all you want on the number of lines, spacing, capitalizations, etc. It had no bearing on the crimes.

[drstrange169]

If you look at the Home Office version, there is an unnaturally large gap between "The" and "Juwes are" which would be explained by the mortar. I'm also pre-supposing the writing was near the corner, hence the edge in my version.

[Trapperologist]

I think it's more like this with the small letters the right size, and the memo has the Will not and for nothing further over. A header has plenty of room for a 2 or 3 letter word. So I don't think the one header and one spreader and vice versa explains it. But almost.