The apron was dropped...

[caz]

Hi c.d, Scotty,

How would that work in either case, given that the message was both small and ambiguous? How many passers-by would have read it and 'got' the message, before the police found it and erased it for fear that it would cause a public disturbance, despite the fact that the apron piece was removed before that could have happened?

Love,

Caz
X

[Michael W Richards]

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?"

I appreciate your translation Al. The fact is whether its Louis himself or a gentile hired as security that night, the CLUB would be involved. The CLUB would be closed, as its reputation before that time was unsavory. And Morris would have no speaking fees, Louis wouldnt have a job nor would Mrs D, Lave might get booted out of the cottage, Wess would have to find another location for the Arbeter Fraint office, no more revenue from large meetings, ...etc.

The economics were not lost on those primarily responsible for the club, as you can see in their "blameless" statements... that are directly refuted in multiple statements, which also corroborate each other. Based on 4 witnesses they were by Liz dying at around 12:40. Now look at the statements by those with economics, not some dead whore, on their minds.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

The economics were not lost on those primarily responsible for the club, as you can see in their "blameless" statements... that are directly refuted in multiple statements, which also corroborate each other. Based on 4 witnesses they were by Liz dying at around 12:40. Now look at the statements by those with economics, not some dead whore, on their minds.

You haven't given evidence for Gillen yet - so 3 witnesses - and one of your remaining 3 is Spooner, who is at best, muddle-headed.
Actually, until you can shed some light on Spooner, every time I see your '4 witnesses' claim, I'm going to mentally translate to '2 witnesses' - one of which was a club member.

[Observer]

I appreciate your translation Al. The fact is whether its Louis himself or a gentile hired as security that night, the CLUB would be involved. The CLUB would be closed, as its reputation before that time was unsavory. And Morris would have no speaking fees, Louis wouldnt have a job nor would Mrs D, Lave might get booted out of the cottage, Wess would have to find another location for the Arbeter Fraint office, no more revenue from large meetings, ...etc.

The economics were not lost on those primarily responsible for the club, as you can see in their "blameless" statements... that are directly refuted in multiple statements, which also corroborate each other. Based on 4 witnesses they were by Liz dying at around 12:40. Now look at the statements by those with economics, not some dead whore, on their minds.

Why would the club be closed as a result of an individuals rash lapse of control? Why would Deimshutz lose his job? Why would Arbeter Fraynd have to find another location for their offices?

[Observer]

You haven't given evidence for Gillen yet - so 3 witnesses - and one of your remaining 3 is Spooner, who is at best, muddle-headed.
Actually, until you can shed some light on Spooner, every time I see your '4 witnesses' claim, I'm going to mentally translate to '2 witnesses' - one of which was a club member.

Save your breath, Michaels been ignoring the above since time immemorial.

[Michael W Richards]

Save your breath, Michaels been ignoring the above since time immemorial.

Ive been ignoring what can be obviously addressed, Im not selling anything therefore I dont need to pander. A comment like Spooner being "muddle headed" is an example. There is no evidence that is the case at all. As for Gillen, I believe he used the quote himself when Gillen is mentioned...you want me to do what with that question? Hosch(esch)berg, Spooner, Kozebrodksi and a member named Gillen makes 4 doesnt it?

As for arguing why a Socialist Club, which neighbors felt had "low people" hanging round and with a reputation among local Police as an "anarchist" club...a fact which is substantiated in a letter William Morris sends to Woolf Wess declining an invitation to speak there due to their reputation...why a discovery of murder on their property with only the men still in attendance on the property, would result in the clubs closure.....im sorry but the bleeding obvious is the bleeding obvious.

The same men attacked Police with clubs in 6 months.

[NotBlamedForNothing]

Ive been ignoring what can be obviously addressed, Im not selling anything therefore I dont need to pander. A comment like Spooner being "muddle headed" is an example. There is no evidence that is the case at all.

The 'Spooner Paradox' is described here...

https://forum.casebook.org/forum/ripper-discussions/motive-method-and-madness/743271-does-the-killer-scope-out-locations-before-he-kills?p=743587#post743587

and here...

https://forum.casebook.org/forum/ripper-discussions/motive-method-and-madness/743271-does-the-killer-scope-out-locations-before-he-kills?p=743807#post743807

Would you mind explaining away that apparent paradox, or explain to me where I've gone wrong?

As for Gillen, I believe he used the quote himself when Gillen is mentioned...you want me to do what with that question? Hosch(esch)berg, Spooner, Kozebrodksi and a member named Gillen makes 4 doesnt it?

You sound a little muddle-headed, Michael. Would you mind rephrasing that?

As for arguing why a Socialist Club, which neighbors felt had "low people" hanging round and with a reputation among local Police as an "anarchist" club...a fact which is substantiated in a letter William Morris sends to Woolf Wess declining an invitation to speak there due to their reputation...why a discovery of murder on their property with only the men still in attendance on the property, would result in the clubs closure.....im sorry but the bleeding obvious is the bleeding obvious.

The Bleeding Obvious: Sir, we believe it may have been our security guard, who now seems to have gone AWOL...

[DJA]

As for arguing why a Socialist Club, which neighbors felt had "low people" hanging round and with a reputation among local Police as an "anarchist" club...a fact which is substantiated in a letter William Morris sends to Woolf Wess declining an invitation to speak there due to their reputation...why a discovery of murder on their property with only the men still in attendance on the property, would result in the clubs closure.....im sorry but the bleeding obvious is the bleeding obvious.

The same men attacked Police with clubs in 6 months.

22 September 1888 : Morris was scheduled to give a poetry reading at an entertainment sponsored by the SL at the International Club, 40 Berner Street, Commercial Road, for the benefit of the Yarmouth Free-Speech Fund. However, it is unlikely that he attended this event as he was still at Kelmscott Manor. He also published `Notes on News' and `A Modern Midas' in Commonweal.


8 June 1890 : Morris acted as chairman at the fifth anniversary celebration of the International Working Men's Club at 40 Berner Street, London.


You continually misrepresent the facts about 16th March,1889.
The police were the aggressors. Mrs Diemshitz hit one with a hair broom.

[c.d.]

Hi c.d, Scotty,

How would that work in either case, given that the message was both small and ambiguous? How many passers-by would have read it and 'got' the message, before the police found it and erased it for fear that it would cause a public disturbance, despite the fact that the apron piece was removed before that could have happened?

Love,

Caz
X

Hello Caz,

I think you hit the nail on the head. But wouldn't that apply regardless of whether the message was pro Jewish or anti-Semitic? Hence the problem.

c.d.

[c.d.]

Only in opposite land cd.

How so exactly, Michael? The message (if removed from proximity to the apron) can be interpreted as pro-Jewish in my opinion. I am not saying that it is but it certainly seems a reasonable interpretation. Or are you using the apron to influence your interpretation of the message?

c.d.

[Michael W Richards]

22 September 1888 : Morris was scheduled to give a poetry reading at an entertainment sponsored by the SL at the International Club, 40 Berner Street, Commercial Road, for the benefit of the Yarmouth Free-Speech Fund. However, it is unlikely that he attended this event as he was still at Kelmscott Manor. He also published `Notes on News' and `A Modern Midas' in Commonweal.


8 June 1890 : Morris acted as chairman at the fifth anniversary celebration of the International Working Men's Club at 40 Berner Street, London.


You continually misrepresent the facts about 16th March,1889.
The police were the aggressors. Mrs Diemshitz hit one with a hair broom.

I can only assume you are unaware of the letter that William Wess received from Mr Morris, (revealed by the Wess descendants on a British Antique Roadshow a few years ago), which used the specific terms and language I stated.

[Michael W Richards]

How so exactly, Michael? The message (if removed from proximity to the apron) can be interpreted as pro-Jewish in my opinion. I am not saying that it is but it certainly seems a reasonable interpretation. Or are you using the apron to influence your interpretation of the message?

c.d.

Its the fact that the message reads "The Jews are not the men that will be blamed for nothing" cd. Not Jews shouldnt be blamed, not Jews are wrongly blamed, but the Jews are NOT the men that will be blamed for nothing". Substitute "nothing" for without cause or reason.

[c.d.]

Its the fact that the message reads "The Jews are not the men that will be blamed for nothing" cd. Not Jews shouldnt be blamed, not Jews are wrongly blamed, but the Jews are NOT the men that will be blamed for nothing". Substitute "nothing" for without cause or reason.

It's ambiguous meaning that it is open to interpretation.

c.d.

[Michael W Richards]

It's ambiguous meaning that it is open to interpretation.

c.d.

Actually within a proper construct, meaning within the parameters of that specific nights activities and actions, its anything but ambiguous. But Im really not against anyone believing anything they want about the writing, or any of these crimes, its when we discuss the probabilities and actual facts that I get antsy.

[IchabodCrane]

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 it was old graffiti and as anti-semitic as Charles Warren believed, why did no locals clean it? It was just chalk after all. Charlie understood the message. He also oversaw the official report that was submitted by PC Long. There is a chance Long's transcription may not be 100% accurate and potentially for a reason that only old Charlie would know at that time.

Bravo! I fully support these conclusions. As was pointed out in many previous threads, the double event simply contains too many references to Jewish locations to be coincidental.
1) Dutfields Yard and the international working mens eductional club
2) The great synagogue at Mitre square (most obvious spontaneous choice after plan A failed)
3) Goulston Street (already planned to drop hint there on way back home)
The logical conclusion is that the Ripper, influenced by the newspaper reports about Leather Apron, set out to put a clear spotlight on the Jewish community that night.
The inference is, that the Ripper himself was not a Jew. Moreover the grammar of the GSG suggests that his native language was French (Les juifs ne sont pas des gens qui seront blames pour rien - makes perfect sense in French)