writing on the wall

[Wickerman]

Hi Jon,

Then there is the man reported by Daily telegraph 6 Oct:
..... but having a small moustache and wearing a black deerstalker felt hat, instead of a soft one, has been made by the police in Whitechapel ever since Saturday, Sept. 1, the day following the Buck's-row tragedy....... and the brim of his hard felt hat struck the dairyman, who is therefore sure of the kind that he was wearing......

Here are reports of a hard felt deerstalker hat as described by PC Smith, the staring eyes and the black shiny bag. I wonder what Leon Goldstein looked like?

Best regards, George

Thankyou George.

I still look when time permits, but I have never managed to find a hard-felt deerstalker hat.
Are you subscribed to the BNA (Newspaper Archive), it may be possible to find an advertisement for one of those hats.
Even though you have what appears to be a description of one (above), I wonder if it only describes a hard brim to the soft deerstalker? I've held deerstalker hats in the past but I cannot recall if the brims were soft or hard. I know the cap was made of soft cloth so it could be folded, but what about the brim?

I'll be renewing my subscription to BNA in October, must save every penny for a 3 week trip to Egypt later this year. In the meantime I have sent an email to a distinguished Hat manufacturer in London, UK. to see if they can verify this type of hat did exist in Victorian times.

[Sunny Delight]

Just incase you are making a distinction between 'afternoon' and 'evening', in the late 19th century afternoon & evening meant the same thing.

Read the first line here:


Read the last lines here:


Read the times on the right side:


Today, we make a distinction between afternoon and evening, not so in the 19th century.
You're not the only one who has tripped up over this little known fact.

To be fair this is way off topic. Is there anywhere we can continue this where it is more appropriate?

[Wickerman]

The killer had to bring attention to the rag, hence the Graffiti.

???
Shouldn't that be the other way around?
The rag was dropped to bring attention to the graffiti, or so the conventional interpretation goes. Though, I doubt they were related.

I cant amagin a passer by or even an average policeman taking any notice of just a bit more rubbish laying around.

If you study old street photo's you may notice it was not usual to see rubbish in the streets, not like today's throw-away society.
You might like to read Mayhew's, London Labour and the London Poor. Absolutely everything had a value; paper, string, bits of wood, even horse dung. The streets were relatively clean compared with today.

[Wickerman]

Bowyer at the Inquest did not mention the Wednesday night incident but said he had last seen her on Wednesday afternoon when he had spoken to her in the Court. I think we can dismiss the press report.

Just incase you are making a distinction between 'afternoon' and 'evening', in the late 19th century afternoon & evening meant the same thing.

Read the first line here:


Read the last lines here:


Read the times on the right side:


Today, we make a distinction between afternoon and evening, not so in the 19th century.
You're not the only one who has tripped up over this little known fact.

[Wickerman]

The Star reported it differently meaning we cannot take the Evening News account at face value:

It is true that the Evening News was the paper that identified the hatless woman by name, all the rest merely described her as hatless & poorly clad, which doesn't mean it wasn't Kelly, that is how she appeared.
Kelly was certainly hatless, Cox specifically said so on the night in question. It was a prostitutes calling-card to not wear a hat in the evening hours. So all the accounts can be used to identify the same woman, and that woman was named, it was Kelly.

I think it safe to say Mrs. Kennedy was Sarah Lewis using a pseudonym. Lewis told the Inquest;

Sure, it all depends on how much stated evidence you choose to ignore.

- Lewis lived at No.24 Great Pearl Street.
- Kennedy lived at No.2 Millers Court.

- Lewis passed the Britannia, and arrived at Millers Court at, or before 2:30 am.
- Kennedy arrived at the Britannia at 3:00 am.

- Lewis saw one woman with one man outside the Britannia.
- Kennedy saw two women with one man outside the Britannia.

- Lewis saw a man in Dorset St. standing opposite Millers Court.
- Kennedy made no mention of seeing anyone in Dorset St.

Conversely, perhaps you can list at least 4 pieces of evidence which demonstrate Lewis & Kennedy were the same person?

If Lewis had seen Kelly she most certainly would have said so at the Inquest.

She did, I gave the quote above - the hatless woman entering Millers Court.
Lewis didn't live at Millers Court, in her police statement to Abberline on 9th Nov. Lewis said, "I did not know the deceased". Clearly then Lewis couldn't identify Kelly by name.

In relation to timings Hutchinson fixed his time seeing Kelly at around 2am. The whole incident involving Hutchinson, Kelly and A.K man took most likely 10-15 minutes absolute maximum. Probably slightly less. The latest Hutchinson set up vigil at Crossinghams was 2:15am. Lewis fixed the time as 2;30am on her way to Mrs. Keyler's. Again Lewis here is rather vague and frustratingly it is difficult to decipher what she meant. She told the Inquest:

"When I went into the court, opposite the lodging-house I saw a man with a wideawake. There was no one talking to him. He was a stout-looking man, and not very tall. The hat was black. I did not take any notice of his clothes. The man was looking up the court; he seemed to be waiting or looking for some one. (This has to be Hutchinson). Further on there was a man and woman - the later being in drink. There was nobody in the court. I dozed in a chair at Mrs. Keyler's, and woke at about half- past three. I heard the clock strike."

I think though she just muddled the events. She sees Hutchinson standing as if waiting for someone. Further on from him she sees a man and a woman the latter in drink. Then entering the court no one was there.

Lewis did not say when she arrived at Millers Court, she said she was there at 2:30 am, that is when the church chimes the half-hour. We know this because she also said she heard the same clock chime 3:30, so we know it chimed at 2:30, and in her testimony she told the court she was AT Millers Court at 2:30, not that she ARRIVED at 2:30.
She also says she knew the time because she looked up at the clock as she passed, but she doesn't say what that time was. It could have been 2:05, 2:10, or 2:15, but she just doesn't say.
Yet you are trying to insist it must have been 2:30, when by your own estimation it couldn't have been 2:30 because Hutchinson had to be watching the Court by 2:15, which was when Lewis arrived, give or take a minute or two.

Bowyer was asked when he last saw Kelly alive at the Inquest:

By the Jury: When did you see her last alive ? - On Wednesday afternoon, in the court, when I spoke to her. McCarthy's shop is at the corner of Miller's-court.

Yes, and he told the truth, but the coroner did not pursue the questioning, that is the issue.


What your reply shows is that you are confused over the sequence of events because of your choice to ignore meaningful evidence (re Kennedy & Lewis), in preference to guesswork. And for some reason a refusal to accept Hutchinson was telling the truth.
If you just accept what is written it all falls into place much easier.

[Trevor Marriott]

The killer had to bring attention to the rag, hence the Graffiti.
I cant amagin a passer by or even an average policeman taking any notice of just a bit more rubbish laying around.
and although my memory escapes me at this moment, I think I'm right in saying Halse hadn't been alerted about the Mitre Sq murder at this point ( I stand to be corrected on that )

And I'm pretty certain that dark red/blood wouldnt be that noticeable in the dark.....I tried that experiment years back.

If he had wanted to bring attention to the apron piece he could have just sent it to the police with a note attached, Disposing of it where it was found might have resulted in it not being found, and simply treated as an old screwed up piece of rag thereby attracting no attention. The writing cannot be connected to any of the murders and has no significance to any of the murders. So on that basis I conclude that the killer did not write it.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[spyglass]

The killer had to bring attention to the rag, hence the Graffiti.
I cant amagin a passer by or even an average policeman taking any notice of just a bit more rubbish laying around.
and although my memory escapes me at this moment, I think I'm right in saying Halse hadn't been alerted about the Mitre Sq murder at this point ( I stand to be corrected on that )

And I'm pretty certain that dark red/blood wouldnt be that noticeable in the dark.....I tried that experiment years back.

[milchmanuk]

sorry couldn't resist

[milchmanuk]

I believe the portion of apron was found inside the stairwell passage, not right underneath the writing.

theres a chance he through it in there walking past ,
so he put organs into something else ?
you think he would went equipped to carry away organs seeing he new he,s quarry .

[Scott Nelson]

nice graphic. if anything like accurate with the position of the writing and apron below, the scenario that the two are unconnected seems even more ridiculous.

I believe the portion of apron was found inside the stairwell passage, not right underneath the writing.

[erobitha]

i mean i dont think he cares about racism or anything !

He cares about credit. Like every narcissistic serial killer does.

[milchmanuk]

i mean i dont think he cares about racism or anything !

[milchmanuk]

if JtR did write the words, why would if be write about jews,
what is he giving away as such. ?

[Sunny Delight]

Halse tells us it was written on the black Dado, and that the black Dado came up the wall about 4 feet (48 inch), the wall being white above that.

Some years back we managed to get the dimensions of those 19th century house bricks, and the cement line between the bricks.
This photo shows the cement line at 49.5 inch from the ground, the line at 72 inch (6 ft) is just for reference. The apron (red) must have been somewhere below the graffiti, as long says.



We don't really know which side of the entrance the graffiti was written, but there was a lamp towards the left side, which should mean the right side of the archway would be lit, the left side would be in shadow, so it's just more likely to have been on the right side.

That's a really interesting photo. I concur with Walter Dew though. It would have been suicidal to stop and pen a message with the apron so close and the knife still upon his person. Even if the graffitti was written by the killer what does it really tell us that we don't already know?

[Sunny Delight]

On Thursday night Gallagher and his wife retired to rest at a fairly early hour. Their married daughter, a woman named Mrs. Kennedy, came home, however, at a late hour. Passing the Britannia, commonly known as Ringer's, at the top of Dorset street, at three o'clock on the Friday morning, she saw the deceased talking to a respectably dressed man, whom she identified as having accosted her a night or two before.
......Mrs. Kennedy is confident that the man whom she noticed speaking to the woman Kelly at three o'clock on Friday morning is identical with the person who accosted her on the previous Wednesday.
Evening News, 10 Nov.




(Sarah Lewis)
In the doorway of the deceased's house I saw a man in a wideawake hat standing. He was not tall, but a stout-looking man. He was looking up the court as if he was waiting for some one. I also saw a man and a woman who had no hat on and were the worse for drink pass up the court.
Daily News, 13 Nov.

A woman with no hat on - that is hatless. Nothing to do with Walter Dew, though his observation is consistent with other evidence.

Everyone is welcome to invent their own drama, I go by what is stated in writing by witnesses.




Bowyer was never asked.
When you are in court you only answer the questions given to you.

The Star reported it differently meaning we cannot take the Evening News account at face value:

"....She states that about three o'clock on Friday morning she entered Dorset-street on her way to her parent's house, which is situate immediately opposite that in which the murder was committed. She noticed three persons at the corner of the street near the Britannia public house. There was a man - a young man, respectably dressed, and with a dark moustache - talking to a woman whom she did not know, and also a female poorly clad, and without any headgear. The man and woman appeared to be the worse for liquor, and she heard the man ask, "Are you coming." Whereupon the woman, who appeared to be obstinate, turned in an opposite direction to which the man apparently wished her to go. Mrs. Kennedy went on her way and nothing unusual occurred until about half an hour later. She states that she did not retire to rest immediately she reached her parents' abode, but sat up, and between half-past three and a quarter to four she
HEARD A CRY OF "MURDER."

I think it safe to say Mrs. Kennedy was Sarah Lewis using a pseudonym. Lewis told the Inquest;

"On Friday morning, about half-past two a.m., when I was going to Miller's-court, I met the same man with a woman in Commercial-street, near Mr. Ringer's public-house (the Britannia). He had no overcoat on.
[Coroner] Had he the black bag ? - Yes.
[Coroner] Were the man and woman quarrelling ? - No; they were talking. As I passed he looked at me. I don't know whether he recognised me. There was no policeman about."

If Lewis had seen Kelly she most certainly would have said so at the Inquest. She did see the man who accosted her. Mrs. Kennedy in one report says she saw Kelly and in another that there were two women. The press statements are difficult to reconcile even if Mrs. Kennedy was not Sarah Lewis.

In relation to timings Hutchinson fixed his time seeing Kelly at around 2am. The whole incident involving Hutchinson, Kelly and A.K man took most likely 10-15 minutes absolute maximum. Probably slightly less. The latest Hutchinson set up vigil at Crossinghams was 2:15am. Lewis fixed the time as 2;30am on her way to Mrs. Keyler's. Again Lewis here is rather vague and frustratingly it is difficult to decipher what she meant. She told the Inquest:

"When I went into the court, opposite the lodging-house I saw a man with a wideawake. There was no one talking to him. He was a stout-looking man, and not very tall. The hat was black. I did not take any notice of his clothes. The man was looking up the court; he seemed to be waiting or looking for some one. (This has to be Hutchinson). Further on there was a man and woman - the later being in drink. There was nobody in the court. I dozed in a chair at Mrs. Keyler's, and woke at about half- past three. I heard the clock strike."

I think though she just muddled the events. She sees Hutchinson standing as if waiting for someone. Further on from him she sees a man and a woman the latter in drink. Then entering the court no one was there.

Bowyer was asked when he last saw Kelly alive at the Inquest:

By the Jury: When did you see her last alive ? - On Wednesday afternoon, in the court, when I spoke to her. McCarthy's shop is at the corner of Miller's-court.