the Goulston St Graffiti

[sunflower]

sorry if this is in the wrong place, still navigating...

I have always doubted that this has been the work of the Ripper. If he wished to leave a message why not leave one somewhere where its authorship could not be doubted...Mary Kelly's room for example, or something right next to one of the victims. Why down a passage removed from the crime?

It's my (limited) understanding that the passage itself was home to a lot of graffiti...can anyone more knowledgeable confirm or deny this? If this is so, surely that particular phrase is meaningless, in terms of context?

thanks

[Sally]

Hi Sunflower

Good questions.

I believe there is a theory which suggest that JTR did leave graffiti in Kelly's room - the letters FM. They are supposed to represent the initials of Florence Maybrick - you really need to accept that Maybrick was the Ripper for that to work.

As to the Goulston Street Graffiti - I suppose it's the fact that a piece of Eddowe's bloody apron (presumably used by the Ripper for wiping his knife) was found in the doorway that provides the link.

It's possible of course that it's a coincidence, but I don't know - it looks a bit too neat to me to be coincidence.

Finally, supposing that the Ripper did want to leave, or send messages, he might have written some of the letters variously ascribed to him at times; the 'Dear Boss' letter, the 'From Hell' letter (not both, I shouldn't imagine).

You could be looking at a killer who enjoyed communicating his crimes to the authorities if you tied all this together. Alternatively, you could view them as separate events with a casual connection - the consequence of chance; or of 'pranksters'.

Regards

Sally

[Monty]

Sunflower,

There is no link between the writing and the Whitechapel murders as a whole. There is a link between Catherine Eddowes murder, that obviously being the location of her disgarded apron. That said, and as youve noted, there is no link within the writing itself to connect it to any crime whatsoever.

Graffiti was found near Hanbury Street and we have photographic evidence, albeit some years later, of graffiti in both Berner Street and Hanbury Street. I see no logical reason to assume Goulston street was graffiti free though some argue, validly, that the writing wouldnt have lasted that long due to its alledged imflammatory context (which is desputed).

I myself feel the writing has no relationship with the murders, Eddowes murder or the apron.

Its thw most logical and obvious explaination.

Now, you will note Mr Wescott or Mrs Morris (or any of the Pro writing brigade) enter stage left with endless, and no doubtedly valid, reasons as to why Jack musta wrote it.

My advice is to take it on board and keep an open mind, with Occams Razor obviously.

Monty

[sdreid]

My feeling is that he probably didn't write it and that the apron was there to lay a false trail.

[caz]

Leave me out of this, Monty, there's a good chap.

I have never argued that Jack must have written it, and there are certainly not endless reasons why he may have done.

But for me, keeping an open mind doesn't mean letting potential clues fall out of it, so what's left looks neat, tidy and simple - minimal in fact.

I can deal with clutter. I have to - it's hubby's middle name.

Love,

The Endless Mrs M
XX

[Abby Normal]

sorry if this is in the wrong place, still navigating...

I have always doubted that this has been the work of the Ripper. If he wished to leave a message why not leave one somewhere where its authorship could not be doubted...Mary Kelly's room for example, or something right next to one of the victims. Why down a passage removed from the crime?

It's my (limited) understanding that the passage itself was home to a lot of graffiti...can anyone more knowledgeable confirm or deny this? If this is so, surely that particular phrase is meaningless, in terms of context?

thanks

Hi Sunflower
The police officer who found it, on his previous lap noticed neither the graffiti nor the bloody apron. On his next time around he found both. That is pretty telling in my mind as is that other higher up police also made the connection. If there was a lot of other graffiti in the same passage-would not that have also been mentioned? Also, the police officer said that the graffiti in question looked fresh,and since the area was directly near where jews lived, I doubt that it could have been there very long as it is probable it would have been erased by one of the jewish occupants as sson as it was seen.

[Monty]

Apologies Caz,

I must have misread your posts over these past 10 so years.

Monty

[chrismasonic]

the policeman saying he didn't notice any writing does not mean it was not there...it just means he didn't notice it...

[Jason]

The graffiti has always been an enigma for me.If we are to believe the cannonical events then.....

Lets imagine that Jack heads out of his house. late in the evening, chalk in one hand, knife in t'other.

Lets look at the Stride killing. I dont think for one moment he did kill her but If he did and was disturbed, as is often argued, then i believe that the logical viewpoint must be that he was heading home when he stumbled across Eddowes. He must have known the streets around the first kill zone would be dangerous to hang around, he knew he wouldnt be able to go back and finish the job off, let alone graffiti the area. So he headed back home, or at least to an area he knew well and felt comfortable with. Then he comes across Eddowes, pissed as a fart and willing. Takes her to a quiet little corner of MS. Then he does one up to Goulston Street with the chalk and piece of her apron, with the intention of doing some graffiti......i'm not having it at all. If the apron piece was definitely hers, then he dropped it by mistake or intention. I think the graffiti was already there, could have been done same evening or earlier, but i dont believe it was done by his hand. I think he lived in that locality, maybe he was wiping his hands with it as he walked away from MS, and perhaps he was afraid that his hands would be seen by someone at home so he ditched the cloth when he was content that they were clean. I honestly think its coincidence. The wording of the writing is bizarre, if there is any link to the case then i honestly believe that the whole JTR case goes beyond a sole killer wandering the streets, i think he is acting for others.

[Rubyretro]

My thoughts on the GSG are the following :

It was written in a building mainly inhabited by Jews, and it's meaning isn't clear -(the Juwes are not the ones who will be blamed for nothing), which could mean
-the jews are the people that refuse to be blamed for anything (which could be bitterly ironic)
-the jews will be blamed with good reason
-nobody will blame the Jews and they did nothing wrong

It might have something to do with 'The Case' or it might not

It was written by someone who didn't have a clear command of the English Language.

It was written in very small letters, and was quite a long complicated sentence.

It was written inside a doorway which would have been in total darkness at night

The Killer was almost certainly the person who threw a piece of Catherine's apron into the doorway, and in proximity to the graffiti , immediately after her murder. He could have thrown the apron bit anywhere beforehand -but he chose to throw it there ; was it only a coincidence ?

Given the sites of the 'Double Event' murders near Jewish clubs, I'll go with it not being a total coincidence. I also think that it was on his way home. I don't think that he was a person used to writing, and would mess about with grammar, spelling, forming letters etc, in the dark, but rather chucked it in the doorway as quick as possible. He could possibly have written it beforehand, or have known it was there -but I think that the building and it's occupants were the most important thing to him.

Whatever the the 'meaning ' of the graffiti -'Jews' and 'blame' in the same phrase would have been dynamite in the furore surrounding the WM.

(Just read this back ! -in case it's not clear -I DON'T think he wrote it that night ! )

[Jason]

but do you think he did write it Ruby ? be it on that evening or another ?

[Rubyretro]

but do you think he did write it Ruby ? be it on that evening or another ?

No idea , Jason!

[Jason]

oh go on, have a guess !!

[Rubyretro]

oh go on, have a guess !!

I'll guess as far as his being good enough at READING to follow the Case in the papers..and living nearby to Goulston street. Therefore at least capable of having read the GSG before the night of the DE.

[Jason]

I'll guess as far as his being good enough at READING to follow the Case in the papers..and living nearby to Goulston street. Therefore at least capable of having read the GSG before the night of the DE.

interesting.....maybe he saw it on his way out....hadnt thought of that