The apron was dropped...

[NotBlamedForNothing]

The Jews initially tried to "blame" a killer at large for the murder on their property [...]

Why not blame the bouncer?

I suggest that punctuating a message like that with the cloth placed under it in the entraceway to model homes almost exclusively populated by Immigrant Jews suggests an Anti-Semitic tint overall.

In #446, you said...

The specific location was well known to be surrounded by 95% or more immigrant Jews.

Not much difference between 95+%, and almost 100%, is there?

[Robert St Devil]

hi bridewell
i once saw an expert on victorian language say the meaning should be interpreted-the jews wont take the blame for anything. and the open defiance interpretation from a jewish writer means you have to read the double negative as -will be blamed for something-ie the murders.

the double neg in the context it was written is almost certainly the common slang that is still common today. as in I dont know nothing. I didnt do nothing etc. of course the proper word should be "anything" (not nothing). so IMHO we should go with the common meaning and therefor the writer was probably a gentile trying to throw blame on the jews-as in they are responsible. and given the events that night with the ripper being seen by several jews I think adds greatly to this interpretation.
The police at the time certainly thought so too.

Hi Abs.

Captain Kirk split his infinitive when he shoehorned the word "boldly"; did Jack the Ripper split his idiom?

"Not for nothing" is a popular phrase which emphasizes the contrary of nothing; although the terminology is chock full of negatives, it actually is stressing or enhancing the reason for what follows in the sentence. If anything is being stated alongside "not for nothing", you can certainly bet that there's a motive or purpose behind why it's being pointed out.

I tend to believe the GSG was of the shortened elementary grade fashion: the juwes are not the men to blame for nothing. I could lean towards the idea that Jack the Ripper was actually saying that, not for nothing, the juwes are the men to blame.

[Abby Normal]

Hi Abs.

Captain Kirk split his infinitive when he shoehorned the word "boldly"; did Jack the Ripper split his idiom?

"Not for nothing" is a popular phrase which emphasizes the contrary of nothing; although the terminology is chock full of negatives, it actually is stressing or enhancing the reason for what follows in the sentence. If anything is being stated alongside "not for nothing", you can certainly bet that there's a motive or purpose behind why it's being pointed out.

I tend to believe the GSG was of the shortened elementary grade fashion: the juwes are not the men to blame for nothing. I could lean towards the idea that Jack the Ripper was actually saying that, not for nothing, the juwes are the men to blame.

hi devil
to boldly go-boldly is just an adverb not a split infinitive. the gsg was-the jews are the men that wont be blamed for nothing. Not sure where youre getting "not for nothing". so ikind of dont see youre point.

it should be read as.. the jews are the men that wont take the blame for anything. the jews dont take any blame. the jews deserve blame but dont accept any responsibility for anything. thats how i see it any way.

[c.d.]

It can also quite easily be interpreted as pro Jewish -- The Jews are tired of being blamed for things they didn't do.

c.d.

[Michael W Richards]

It can also quite easily be interpreted as pro Jewish -- The Jews are tired of being blamed for things they didn't do.

c.d.

Only in opposite land cd.

[Michael W Richards]

Why not blame the bouncer?



In #446, you said...



Not much difference between 95+%, and almost 100%, is there?

All I can say is...Huh?

[Al Bundy's Eyes]

All I can say is...Huh?

I interpreted NBFN's post as meaning, if the killer was the hired security for the night, and more so a gentile, why not shop him outright? Why come up with a convoluted cover up? Just hand him over, the club is absolved of guilt.

If that's not what he meant, I'll see your "huh" and raise you a "Whaaa?"

[NotBlamedForNothing]

I interpreted NBFN's post as meaning, if the killer was the hired security for the night, and more so a gentile, why not shop him outright? Why come up with a convoluted cover up? Just hand him over, the club is absolved of guilt.

If that's not what he meant, I'll see your "huh" and raise you a "Whaaa?"

That is exactly what I meant.

The problem for MWR is, if the club did do the obvious and blame the missing security guard and culprit, it would be cased closed for the Stride murder.

Who witnessed this security guard, I wonder?
PC Smith or Fanny Mortimer? People in the kitchen, perhaps?
The front door was locked after midnight, so through what exit did this guy go out, and for what reason?
What what Stride doing outside alone? Where had 'parcel man' gone?

[Al Bundy's Eyes]

That is exactly what I meant.

The problem for MWR is, if the club did do the obvious and blame the missing security guard and culprit, it would be cased closed for the Stride murder.

Who witnessed this security guard, I wonder?
PC Smith or Fanny Mortimer? People in the kitchen, perhaps?
The front door was locked after midnight, so through what exit did this guy go out, and for what reason?
What what Stride doing outside alone? Where had 'parcel man' gone?

Well, if Fanny in the door is accurate, she saw and heard nothing, despite 5 people and a recently deceased Liz being in the gateway for all the time she was at her door, if the pre 1am discovery is right.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

Well, if Fanny in the door is accurate, she saw and heard nothing, despite 5 people and a recently deceased Liz being in the gateway for all the time she was at her door, if the pre 1am discovery is right.

Unless her estimate of the time was incorrect, and she was actually in the yard quite a bit earlier than she realized.
Is that a reasonable supposition, when considered against these points?

• PCs Lamb and Smith are constables on their beats - they are paid to walk these beats at a fairly precise average speed, and therefore in fairly precise timespans. It is up to both to have good time awareness, and whatever clocks are visible on the these beats, aids in that awareness. If Diemschitz can notice the time at the baker's shop at the corner of Berner-street, so can Smith!
• In contrast, Fanny Mortimer does not need to know the time. She stands on her doorstep listening to the singing from inside the club. She briefly goes inside two or three times for whatever reason. However, she gives no indication that she ever looks at clock or timepiece, in the period leading up to the murder.
• Fanny's understanding of what occurs, seems to be a replica of Diemschitz on the equivalent points. Those are the time (1am), and the murderer's mode of escape - sneaking past or underneath the cart. There seems little doubt that Fanny speaks to both Mr & Mrs Diemschitz, no later than mid-morning, and is influenced by these two.
• Prior to the invention of the Schwartz story, we get a much closer approximation to the truth. Echo, Oct 1:

In the course of conversation (says the journalist) the secretary mentioned the fact that the murderer had no doubt been disturbed in his work, as about a quarter to one o'clock on Sunday morning he was seen- or, at least, a man whom the public prefer to regard as the murderer- being chased by another man along Fairclough-street, which runs across Berner-street close to the Club...

Diemschitz 'precisely 1am' claim was made to place his arrival well clear of the Schwartz incident, which itself was based on other events, at other times and locations ... except for the chase along Fairclough Street!

[caz]

As in?...

I blame the Juwes for interrupting my grand work

What would be his motivation for saying that, but in a cryptic manner?
Why not put it more clearly? Like this...

number one squealed a bit couldn't finish straight off

Two options here, I think.

Either the author of the message liked to keep people guessing, or he was so wrapped up in himself that he never gave a thought to whether anyone might find it ambiguous.

That could apply equally to a serial killer or graffiti artist.

Love,

Caz
X

[caz]

So its understood, I dont yet believe the man who killed in Mitre Square was the same man that killed Annie or Polly, so..

Forget to mention to Caz, I believe Kate agreed to meet someone outside Mitre Square that night. Might have been midnight, before she found herself in jail. So he is waiting for her...is he part of the group thats breaking into the Post Office just around the corner that weekend? Maybe. But he is there to shut her up. And mark her for her perceived betrayal.

Remind me, Michael, when did Eddowes and her partner return from the hopping in Kent; how long had they been there; and what opportunities did she have on her return to engage with these active criminals, make an enemy of them and then arrange to meet one of them, not realising he had it in for her?

This isn't a tv drama, where you write your own script. Eddowes wasn't anywhere near Whitechapel when women in very similar circumstances were being attacked and killed outdoors by an unknown knifeman who inflicted frightful wounds. She didn't have the same personal experience of going out alone at night, through most of August and September, in the wake of Tabram's murder, constantly worrying that she could be next, and assumed she was able to look after herself. That made her particularly vulnerable to a man intent on murder and mutilation, when she emerged from the police station, thinking more about the hiding she'd get from her partner for turning up hours late with no money than whether the knifeman formerly known as 'Leather Apron' would get her.

Love,

Caz
X

[caz]

It can also quite easily be interpreted as pro Jewish -- The Jews are tired of being blamed for things they didn't do.

c.d.

But if people falsely blamed me for letting my dog foul the footpath every day [I don't have a dog], or blamed me every time their cat was attacked [when my cat Monty is just as likely to be on the receiving end], I wouldn't put up a small, neatly formed message on the front wall of my own house to say I was fed up with being blamed for things I don't do or can't help.

More likely, I'd find a semi-literate rant on my wall from the idiot doing all the accusing.

Love,

Caz
X

[c.d.]

Hello Caz,

But what if the author (and I am assuming here that he was not the killer) was Jewish and wanted to inspire the troops as it were and encourage his fellow Jews to speak up and not be so docile? Wouldn't he have written the message where his fellow Jews would see it?

c.d.

[Scott Nelson]

Or a schoolkid who resided in the building chalked the message just after listening to his father complain over evening supper about being bilked in the market.