Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The apron was dropped...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by erobitha View Post

    For someone who was disturbed by police he got quite a bit done to Eddowes. I don’t think cutting a piece of her apron was anymore time consuming than carving Vs in her face or the top of her nose off.
    One of the few things I think Patrick Cornwell got right was with Eddowes he seemed to rip through the many layers of clothing with his knife much quicker by slashing away through them to get to as much of her abdomen and genitalia exposed and as quickly as possible. On Chapman and Nichols he lifted up their skirts which he probably learned took too much time.
    I find it difficult to believe he wouldn’t have had time to have taken a piece of her apron there and then as a means to identify himself as the killer so the police will believe the graffiti was his. He most likely changed clothes and washed in a safe house nearby and waited for the opportune moment to place the evidence at Goulston Street.
    A safe house? How opulent is our killer? Does he have a top hat, and is he clad in astrakhan?

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by The Baron View Post


      Actually it has everything to do with the murders.


      The Baron
      Ahh, so if I want to know anything about the GSG, I know who to come to.....
      Regards, Jon S.

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by erobitha View Post
        The GSG is not coincidental. Jack never left a clue of a bloodied apron or such like before, why wait until the 4th victim? He left the clue because he knew it would be picked up and connected to the writing on the wall. It could nbot be any more deliberate. He wanted that message to be read.
        If he wanted it to be read, he would do what every other graffiti artist does, make it BIG and LARGE!

        If it was old graffiti and as anti-semitic as Charles Warren believed, why did no locals clean it? It was just chalk after all.
        Why should they?, it's just the ramblings of another Anti-Semitic fool.
        The Jewish people have tolerated much worse than that.
        Besides, you're assuming the Jewish residents could read English.
        Speaking it is one thing, reading English is another matter.

        Last edited by Wickerman; 08-16-2020, 01:43 AM.
        Regards, Jon S.

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by erobitha View Post

          For someone who was disturbed by police he got quite a bit done to Eddowes. I don’t think cutting a piece of her apron was anymore time consuming than carving Vs in her face or the top of her nose off.

          That would depend on two factors, the first in which order he carried out those acts, and secondly her clothes were found drawn up above the waist making the apron difficult to access. There was no evidence of slashing to access the abdomen via these actions, there was evidence that she had been stabbed through her outer clothing.

          I find it difficult to believe he wouldn’t have had time to have taken a piece of her apron there and then as a means to identify himself as the killer so the police will believe the graffiti was his. He most likely changed clothes and washed in a safe house nearby and waited for the opportune moment to place the evidence at Goulston Street.
          You are suggesting that the killer who us suspected of all the other murders and in this instance suddenly became a signature killer, something not seen with the other victims, and signature killers will leave clues at or near to the crime scene for the police to find. The distance between the crime scene and GS is far to great to corroborate this.

          Other times killers will send letters containing facts about the murder to which only the police might know. In this case if the killer had taken away a piece of her apron, why did he not simply post it to them with a note, that way they would have known it was form the actual killer and you would now be a happy poster.


          www.trevormarriott.co.uk

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post

            You are suggesting that the killer who us suspected of all the other murders and in this instance suddenly became a signature killer, something not seen with the other victims, and signature killers will leave clues at or near to the crime scene for the police to find. The distance between the crime scene and GS is far to great to corroborate this.

            Other times killers will send letters containing facts about the murder to which only the police might know. In this case if the killer had taken away a piece of her apron, why did he not simply post it to them with a note, that way they would have known it was form the actual killer and you would now be a happy poster.


            www.trevormarriott.co.uk
            The common misconception by police is that serial killers do not have nuance or evolve. Jack was disturbed on Berner Street and was furious that he couldnt get to finish the job off and went on to release all that pent up frustration on Eddowes. He was interrupted with Stride because of the Jews next door. There is no way he would have been made aware if Stride was not by his hand that a similar mode of killing happened an hour previously, how?

            He left the clue as a claim to Stride and felt his message about the Jews would be cryptic but clear enough that if it wasnt for them she would have easily been identified as one of his. He was worried Stride would not be marked as one of his because he didnt get to do his work. He still wanted the credit. Sending the apron in the post merely identifies Eddowes was his, but the police would know that when they saw her. Sending it in the post does nothing for the Stride murder, so he thought it would be the quicklest way to leave a funny message and for the police to know Stride was his too.
            "When the legend becomes fact... print the legend"
            - The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance (1962)

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by erobitha View Post

              The common misconception by police is that serial killers do not have nuance or evolve. Jack was disturbed on Berner Street and was furious that he couldnt get to finish the job off and went on to release all that pent up frustration on Eddowes. He was interrupted with Stride because of the Jews next door. There is no way he would have been made aware if Stride was not by his hand that a similar mode of killing happened an hour previously, how?

              He left the clue as a claim to Stride and felt his message about the Jews would be cryptic but clear enough that if it wasnt for them she would have easily been identified as one of his. He was worried Stride would not be marked as one of his because he didnt get to do his work. He still wanted the credit. Sending the apron in the post merely identifies Eddowes was his, but the police would know that when they saw her. Sending it in the post does nothing for the Stride murder, so he thought it would be the quicklest way to leave a funny message and for the police to know Stride was his too.
              so how do you interpret the graffiti in relation to the murders? there is nothing in that graffiti which would suggest it was written by the killer, or that it related to any of the murders.

              www.trevormarriott.co.uk

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by Wickerman View Post

                If he wanted it to be read, he would do what every other graffiti artist does, make it BIG and LARGE!



                Why should they?, it's just the ramblings of another Anti-Semitic fool.
                The Jewish people have tolerated much worse than that.
                Besides, you're assuming the Jewish residents could read English.
                Speaking it is one thing, reading English is another matter.
                1) Your point applies in reverse also. If the aim was anti-Semitic why not make it bigger and more impactful
                2) This point merely endorses my own. It’s unlikely to have been written for an audience who barely could speak any English let alone read it and not in such a subtle way either

                It was a message for the police. Simple as that.
                Last edited by erobitha; 08-16-2020, 08:17 AM.
                "When the legend becomes fact... print the legend"
                - The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance (1962)

                Comment


                • #53
                  [Wrong reply]

                  Reply was meant to Takod

                  I know people like to take things literally. I meant safe house as in somewhere safe he could clean and change. If he lived local this makes sense as much as if he had private lodgings.
                  Last edited by erobitha; 08-16-2020, 08:25 AM.
                  "When the legend becomes fact... print the legend"
                  - The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance (1962)

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post

                    so how do you interpret the graffiti in relation to the murders? there is nothing in that graffiti which would suggest it was written by the killer, or that it related to any of the murders.

                    www.trevormarriott.co.uk
                    I don’t believe what PC Long transcribed and was approved by Warren is 100% accurate. I’m certain there is quite a significant enough change to the transcription Warren approved, to the one that was actually written. Warren couldn’t care less for anti-semitism and his track record shows he was not afraid of police confrontations either. He wanted to control the narrative of what that evidence looked like. He knew what part of it meant and that was enough to spook him, to as I now understand, wipe the graffiti off the wall himself. Very strange behaviour by the highest ranking officer in the met.
                    My Jack enjoyed double meanings and word play. He knew the right people would know Stride was him.
                    "When the legend becomes fact... print the legend"
                    - The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance (1962)

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by erobitha View Post

                      1) Your point applies in reverse also. If the aim was anti-Semitic why not make it bigger and more impactful
                      Well, I think it's clear the author was blaming Jews for something, it's borderline whether it's anti-semitic or not. But, there is nothing in the wording to directly connect it to any murder. A disgruntled customer of any one of their businesses could just as easily have scribbled it.
                      There's a Jewish school just around the corner, "a good schoolboy's round hand" we are told.
                      A message to police is intended to get their attention, it needs to be several inches tall, not less than an inch.

                      2) This point merely endorses my own. It’s unlikely to have been written for an audience who barely could speak any English let alone read it and not in such a subtle way either
                      All it may suggest is, the author couldn't write Hebrew, if, it was intended for the tenants.
                      It wasn't intended for the police, it told them nothing.



                      Regards, Jon S.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by erobitha View Post

                        I don’t believe what PC Long transcribed and was approved by Warren is 100% accurate. I’m certain there is quite a significant enough change to the transcription Warren approved, to the one that was actually written. Warren couldn’t care less for anti-semitism and his track record shows he was not afraid of police confrontations either. He wanted to control the narrative of what that evidence looked like. He knew what part of it meant and that was enough to spook him, to as I now understand, wipe the graffiti off the wall himself. Very strange behaviour by the highest ranking officer in the met.
                        My Jack enjoyed double meanings and word play. He knew the right people would know Stride was him.
                        That's just changing the evidence to suit the theory.
                        The evidence, as it came down to us, is telling us the story. Once you start changing the evidence, you're delving into fiction.

                        Regards, Jon S.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by Wickerman View Post

                          That's just changing the evidence to suit the theory.
                          The evidence, as it came down to us, is telling us the story. Once you start changing the evidence, you're delving into fiction.
                          Thanks for that. Except City of London police had a different transcription.
                          "When the legend becomes fact... print the legend"
                          - The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance (1962)

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by Wickerman View Post

                            Well, I think it's clear the author was blaming Jews for something, it's borderline whether it's anti-semitic or not. But, there is nothing in the wording to directly connect it to any murder. A disgruntled customer of any one of their businesses could just as easily have scribbled it.
                            There's a Jewish school just around the corner, "a good schoolboy's round hand" we are told.
                            A message to police is intended to get their attention, it needs to be several inches tall, not less than an inch.



                            All it may suggest is, the author couldn't write Hebrew, if, it was intended for the tenants.
                            It wasn't intended for the police, it told them nothing.


                            - Evidence to link Eddowes murder found by police. Jack never left any such "careless" clues before
                            - It is left under a legible but not overtly large chalk message on a wall. On the face of it not making much sense
                            - Chalk can be removed extremely easily from a wall as Warren demonstrated
                            - Nothing clearly anti-semtic in the known message? But clear enough apparently to Warren
                            - Stride was murdered next door to a Jewish working mens club but there is a chance due to lack of mutilation he wont get the credit. Some even now refusing him that trophy
                            - It is his way of letting the police know he committed the Stride murder and don't be blaming the jews. Something the police were intent on doing with the debacle of Leather Apron
                            - Within that message he spells jews Juwes. A word well known to Warren

                            I simply do not buy Warren's argument one bit and anyone with a rational brain cannot either. I stand by the fact there was likely more to the graffiti than we will even know for certain. I can speculate, but the fact is there are at least three differing accounts of the transcription. How do we know that there may not of been a symbol or other markings either? A photograph would have caught anything like that you would hope.

                            Warren saw to it that history gets to analyse his version of events of the GSG more so than anyone else's.
                            Last edited by erobitha; 08-16-2020, 06:55 PM.
                            "When the legend becomes fact... print the legend"
                            - The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance (1962)

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by erobitha View Post

                              Thanks for that. Except City of London police had a different transcription.
                              That's true, yet the Halse version was not verified. Long's was, in so far as he had his inspector read his note and correct the spelling.
                              So, two officers read Long's version, which is why it tends to be the version most repeated.
                              Regards, Jon S.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Just to throw a spanner...

                                There was other graffiti which was photographed. It has no cryptic meaning and was roundly dismissed as being not more than an interesting side note. It's on here somewhere.

                                I can't recall who found it, along with a variant Eddowes photo.
                                Thems the Vagaries.....

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X