the Goulston St Graffiti

[Wickerman]

Really?, so what does the length of time have to do with it, if we are supposed to believe people would have intentionally rubbed it out had they seen it?

[Batman]

Brushed off isn't rubbed off.

[Wickerman]

Halse meant deliberately rubbed out, not brushed off.

Did He?

"It looked fresh, and if it had been done long before it would have been rubbed out by the people passing."
Daily Telegraph.

"He assumed that the writing was recent, because from the number of persons living in the tenement he believed it would have been rubbed out had it been there for any time."
Times.

"Because it seemed fresh, and if it had been long written it would have been rubbed by people passing"
Daily News.

You may notice the original inquest record makes no mention of this.

[Batman]

Halse meant deliberately rubbed out, not brushed off.

[Wickerman]

Det. Halse is reported to have said that the black section of wall which the graffiti was written on came up to about four feet off the ground.

"...The bricks are painted black up to about four feet high, like a dado, and above that are white."
Daily News, 12th Oct. 1888.

Roughly speaking then, it must have been lower than that.
So if people could have brushed against it, likely not with their shoulders, elbows maybe?

[GUT]

How far up from the ground was the graffiti written? Was the person kneeling when he wrote (or was it a kid) or was written in the middle or at chest level?

G'day Gman 992

From memory it was said that it must have been fresh because otherwise shoulders would have brushed against it, or words to that effect.

[Gman992]

How far up from the ground was the graffiti written? Was the person kneeling when he wrote (or was it a kid) or was written in the middle or at chest level?

[Hatchett]

Hi,

I meant cryptic in the sense that it allowed diference of opinion as to what it means, and a debate that lasts until today.

Best wishes.

[Wickerman]

It looks like the end block of the dwellings, near to the baths.

Monty

That's what caught my eye too Neil.

[Wickerman]

It was after 1901 the lampost in the foreground has the date 1901 on it

Thats why I asked about the newspaper Trevor

I know, you were only trying to help...

[MrBarnett]

Seems to be taken from the northside corner of New Goulston Street.

Monty

Spot on, I would say.

[Monty]

It does.

Seems to be taken from the northside corner of New Goulston Street.

Monty

[MrBarnett]

Monty,

That was a typo on my part. Pinterest was where I sourced it.

All looks rather neat and tidy don't you think?

MrB

[Monty]

Pintrest has the date as 1935.

It looks like the end block of the dwellings, near to the baths.

Monty

[MrBarnett]

Hi Jon,

It was captioned Wentworth Street, 1925. They got the street wrong , but judging by the clothes the date is not too far out.

Can't read a date on the newspaper but the front page headline seems to be , 'The King At Unknown Warriors Tomb'. So post WW1 certainly.

BTW, the image had already been posted on here , so no scoop after all .

MrB