Blurred

[Pierre]

Hi,

In a police report dated 6 November 1888, chief inspector Donald Swanson wrote about

"Facts known to Met:Police. respecting the Murder in Mitresquare & writing on wall." (Evans & Skinner, p. 207-208).

About the writing on the wall, he wrote:

"Upon the discovery of the blurred chalk writing on the wall,...".

What could Donald Swanson have known about this?

Regards, Pierre

[David Orsam]

Hi,

In a police report dated 6 November 1888, chief inspector Donald Swanson wrote about

"Facts known to Met:Police. respecting the Murder in Mitresquare & writing on wall." (Evans & Skinner, p. 207-208).

About the writing on the wall, he wrote:

"Upon the discovery of the blurred chalk writing on the wall,...".

What could Donald Swanson have known about this?

Do you think the blurred nature of the writing might explain why everyone who read the writing believed the word "Judges" was a reference to Jews?

[GUT]

You don't think Swanson had access to all th reports?

[Geddy2112]

About the writing on the wall, he wrote:

"Upon the discovery of the blurred chalk writing on the wall,...".

What could Donald Swanson have known about this?

Regards, Pierre

That the writing was blurry?

Not sure what the OP is driving at here.

[GUT]

That the writing was blurry?

Not sure what the OP is driving at here.

I seldom know what he's talking about.

[David Orsam]

That the writing was blurry?

Not sure what the OP is driving at here.

Check out post #2. Might contain a clue.

[Abby Normal]

Check out post #2. Might contain a clue.

don't you mean to say the word judges was mistakenly read as juwes?

[David Orsam]

don't you mean to say the word judges was mistakenly read as juwes?

No, I deliberately said "a reference to Jews" because not everyone read it as "Juwes".

[Abby Normal]

No, I deliberately said "a reference to Jews" because not everyone read it as "Juwes".

got it-sorry

[Elamarna]

Check out post #2. Might contain a clue.

David,

If Pierre is about to suggest that being blurred the writing could be misunderstood by the witness's. the following must be answered first:

If it was blurred, does that not suggest that it was not fresh?

If it was blurred one reason would be it had been rubbed against by passers by.

If it had been rubbed by passers by this surely must have happened when the street was busy, then the writing almost certainly has no bearing at all on the murders as many have long argued.


However being blurred seems to go against the evidence of those who reported seeing it.
Pierre appears to be taking a second hand source, over that of the eyewitnesses, Swanson does not claimed to have seen the writing at anytime does he?


Steve

[David Orsam]

David,

If Pierre is about to suggest that being blurred the writing could be misunderstood by the witness's. the following must be answered first:

If it was blurred, does that not suggest that it was not fresh?

If it was blurred one reason would be it had been rubbed against by passers by.

If it had been rubbed by passers by this surely must have happened when the street was busy, then the writing almost certainly has no bearing at all on the murders as many have long argued.


However being blurred seems to go against the evidence of those who reported seeing it.
Pierre appears to be taking a second hand source, over that of the eyewitnesses, Swanson does not claimed to have seen the writing at anytime does he?

Once Pierre has performed some internal and external source criticism, analysed all the sources systematically and explained what perspectives, classifications and operationalisations of concepts from the sources he is using for his analysis then we may start to see things very differently Steve.

[Elamarna]

Once Pierre has performed some internal and external source criticism, analysed all the sources systematically and explained what perspectives, classifications and operationalisations of concepts from the sources he is using for his analysis then we may start to see things very differently Steve.

He may try.
However its written in chalk, the witness's said in good schoolboy, so the style was clear.
If it is blurred, it is because it has been rubbed against or smudged. then it is not fresh, but old writing.

[Geddy2112]

Check out post #2. Might contain a clue.

Welllll I did not really want to elaborate on the hunch that one person thought it said 'judges.' Might have been so blurry it said 'jumble.'

[Errata]

Well it was also raining a bit. That blurs things.

[Elamarna]

Well it was also raining a bit. That blurs things.

Hi Errata,

that could be but i was under the impression that the writing would have been mainly protected from the rain.
however again it does suggest that the writing was not fresh.

Steve