Originally posted by Pierre
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Pc Long and the piece of rag.
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by Pierre View Post"All" walls, for which you have no data. And note that I am talking about surfaces. The Artisan dwellings writing was not blurred at all.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Pierre View PostIt can´t be just an opinion. I wish it was.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post[B]So the apron piece has now evolved from a portion/piece to half an apron ...
I wrote about this back in 1998, and used that same quote - everyone who read my dissertation learned the size of the piece of apron about 18 years ago.
If you have believed otherwise, then I guess you can say you've finally learned something.
The reference, by the way was, - Jones & Lloyd, The Ripper File - pg 126.
Also, Sir Henry Smith, though heavily critisized for being inaccurate in some statements, was at least known to be present for this report:
'By this time the stretcher had arrived, and when we got the body to the mortuary, the first discovery we made was that about one-half of the apron was missing. It had been severed by a clean cut'.
- (Sir Henry Smith, From Constable to Commissioner - pg 152)Last edited by Wickerman; 10-07-2016, 03:28 PM.Regards, Jon S.
Comment
-
Originally posted by David Orsam View PostTo which I reply, so what? If he had to physically go inside to see the apron then we know he physically went inside at 2.55am. If he physically went inside at 2.55am why could he also not physically have gone inside at 2.20am?
Comment
-
Originally posted by David Orsam View PostIf the graffiti was "at the entrance", as you say, then might I suggest that the supposed "ambiguity" is easily resolved if the piece of white material was found at the start of the passage leading to the staircases, i.e. at the entrance?
Does that not mean all the evidence is consistent?
Comment
-
Hi Jon,
I'm not sure if we can take Jones & Lloyd's book as gospel.
I cannot find a primary source for the statement attributed to DC Halse on page 126; nor the newspaper article attributed to the Daily Telegraph, 2nd October 1888, but I am happy to be corrected.
Sir Charles Warren to Sir James Fraser, 3rd October 1888—
“I have seen Mr. Matthews today and he is anxious to know whether it can be known that the torn bib of the woman murdered in Mitre Square cannot have been taken to Goulston Street by any person except the murderer."
The bib is the part above the waist of the front of an apron. A corner of it had been cut away.
As to the chalked message—
"The writing was in a good round hand, upon the black dado of the passage wall." DC Halse, Morning Post 12th October.
"The writing was on the jamb of the open archway or doorway visible to anybody in the street." Sir Charles Warren, 6th November report.
Two very different places.
Regards,
SimonNever believe anything until it has been officially denied.
Comment
-
So now we are expected to ignore Walter Dew.Strange.That it was a white apron at one time is not contested,but white at the time it was found in Goulston St?It w as stained,it was discoloured,it had the appearance of blackness.That much is stated.Not by me,but sources from that time.So w ho is falslyfying accounts?Not me.
Easily seen? Well it might have been in daylight,or by the light of several policemen's lanterns,but did W arren and associates view the scene in the same conditions as Long? It is down to Long and no one else.Except Halse,who is not confident the apron could be seen,wherever it lay.Both passed by at about 2.20.That is their evidence.They passed by.No evidence they did anything else.
What is the significance of the apron.None. The writing ,in my opinion,is more important.
Comment
-
Hi
Just been catching up on the additions to the thread today by our very own historian.
Once again we have claims which are said not to be personal opinion but backed by data sources. And yet again we are told we may not know the sources yet.
I repeat for the untold time.
IF A DATA SOURCE CANNOT BE REVEALED IT MUST BE DEEMED NOT TO EXIST UNTIL SUCH TIME IT IS REVEALED.
steve
Comment
-
Hey Simon.
Originally posted by Simon Wood View PostHi Jon,
I'm not sure if we can take Jones & Lloyd's book as gospel.
I cannot find a primary source for the statement attributed to DC Halse on page 126; nor the newspaper article attributed to the Daily Telegraph, 2nd October 1888, but I am happy to be corrected.
We do have some portions from the Telegraph of Oct. 2nd here on Casebook but we maybe shouldn't assume what we have to be complete.
The caveat I have tried to keep in mind is that papers from this period were published in several editions, in some cases only a few hours apart.
That quote said to be from Oct. 2nd does not say which edition.
The online B.N.A. does not yet carry the Daily Telegraph so this makes it difficult to criticize the account with any certainty.
Sir Charles Warren to Sir James Fraser, 3rd October 1888—
“I have seen Mr. Matthews today and he is anxious to know whether it can be known that the torn bib of the woman murdered in Mitre Square cannot have been taken to Goulston Street by any person except the murderer."
The bib is the part above the waist of the front of an apron. A corner of it had been cut away.
As to the chalked message—
"The writing was in a good round hand, upon the black dado of the passage wall." DC Halse, Morning Post 12th October.
"The writing was on the jamb of the open archway or doorway visible to anybody in the street." Sir Charles Warren, 6th November report.
Two very different places.
Regards,
Simon
If you look at this more recent picture, the "black dado" runs all the way up the left & right door jambs. In 1888 it may have only been black up to about 4 feet, inside as well as on the jamb?
So, we can't argue definitively that those two statements are in conflict.Regards, Jon S.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Elamarna View PostHi
Just been catching up on the additions to the thread today by our very own historian.
Once again we have claims which are said not to be personal opinion but backed by data sources. And yet again we are told we may not know the sources yet.
I repeat for the untold time.
IF A DATA SOURCE CANNOT BE REVEALED IT MUST BE DEEMED NOT TO EXIST UNTIL SUCH TIME IT IS REVEALED.
steveG U T
There are two ways to be fooled, one is to believe what isn't true, the other is to refuse to believe that which is true.
Comment
-
[QUOTE=Pierre;394866]Originally posted by John G View Post
How is Juwes/Juews/Jews "clearly read"?
And that is the only key word.
Comment
-
My name is Dave. You cannot reach me through Debs email account
Comment
Comment