writing on the wall

[DJA]

Day 2, Thursday, October 11, 1888
(The Daily Telegraph, October 12, 1888, Page 2)

Yesterday [11 Oct], at the City Coroner's Court, Golden-lane, Mr. S. F. Langham resumed the inquest respecting the death of Catherine Eddowes, who was found murdered and mutilated in Mitre-square, Aldgate, early on the morning of Sunday, Sept. 30.

[Fleetwood Mac]

Realize that what we are seeing is the writing of a court reporter- 2nd-hand at best, and if the newspaper's reporter, more likely 3rd or 4th.

- "There she was asked her name, and she replied 'Nothing.'" (Meaning that her response was to literally say "Nothing".)
- "There she was asked her name, and she replied Nothing." (Meaning that she didn't say anything to the question.)

Two different interpretations, either of which could be correct, by Someone who probably wasn't actually there at the time- which one is true?

'Pretty obvious that the former statement is the sensible interpretation. In the event Catherine kept her mouth shut, then she didn't reply.

[DJA]

[Harry D]

Harry,

in the event the murderer was intent on leaving garbled messages on a wall for whatever reason he thought it expedient, then it would have happened at other murder sites, particularly Mark Kelly's lodging when there was ample opportunity.

The theory is the killer has a beef with Jews that night which he simply had to get off his chest. First with Schwartz/"Lipski", then secondly with Lawende & co. However, despite being spotted by Jews twice that night it didn't deter the killer from murder both times. Whatever frustration he felt should've been extinguished after he butchered Eddowes. But still, the killer felt compelled to go back on the street and risk getting caught?

[Wickerman]

Realize that what we are seeing is the writing of a court reporter- 2nd-hand at best, and if the newspaper's reporter, more likely 3rd or 4th.

- "There she was asked her name, and she replied 'Nothing.'" (Meaning that her response was to literally say "Nothing".)
- "There she was asked her name, and she replied Nothing." (Meaning that she didn't say anything to the question.)

Two different interpretations, either of which could be correct, by Someone who probably wasn't actually there at the time- which one is true?

Fair enough, except, assuming both the reporter & editor understood English, the use of "quotation marks" implies her words - verbatim. I don't know what the press were taught in the US.

[Fleetwood Mac]

The theory is the killer has a beef with Jews that night which he simply had to get off his chest. First with Schwartz/"Lipski", then secondly with Lawende & co. However, despite being spotted by Jews twice that night it didn't deter the killer from murder both times. Whatever frustration he felt should've been extinguished after he butchered Eddowes. But still, the killer felt compelled to go back on the street and risk getting caught?

Well, there are only two bits of experience we have:

1) The Whitechapel Murderer: there is no evidence of him writing on walls at any other crime scene.

2) Other serial killers: they don't tend to scrawl on walls.

I can't think of any other experience to draw upon.

Based on that, I doubt he was the author of the GSG.

[Aethelwulf]

Well, there are only two bits of experience we have:

1) The Whitechapel Murderer: there is no evidence of him writing on walls at any other crime scene.

2) Other serial killers: they don't tend to scrawl on walls.

I can't think of any other experience to draw upon.

Based on that, I doubt he was the author of the GSG.

narrow minded view of the situation. to be expected based on previous..

[Fleetwood Mac]

narrow minded view of the situation. to be expected based on previous..

The last thread was clogged up with nonsense posts, ad hominem arguments. And here you are, you want to bring this to another thread.

It's clear that a few of you are intent on having an argument, are not constructive in your posts and the posts lack any reference to the source material.

Furthermore, it's noticeable that many of the posters who used to post on here don't bother anymore. They post on JTR Forums instead. It's pretty obvious why.

At this point the mods really should be getting a grip on a few of you, but it seems they have abandoned a sinking ship and the lunatics have taken over the asylum.

The mods won't tell you so I will: stop being a child, post something constructive, in the event you're here to have a fight with someone then go back to the Richardson thread, you have willing takers on there.

[Aethelwulf]

The last thread was clogged up with nonsense posts, ad hominem arguments. And here you are, you want to bring this to another thread.

It's clear that a few of you are intent on having an argument, are not constructive in your posts and the posts lack any reference to the source material.

Furthermore, it's noticeable that many of the posters who used to post on here don't bother anymore. They post on JTR Forums instead. It's pretty obvious why.

At this point the mods really should be getting a grip on a few of you, but it seems they have abandoned a sinking ship and the lunatics have taken over the asylum.

The mods won't tell you so I will: stop being a child, post something constructive, in the event you're here to have a fight with someone then go back to the Richardson thread, you have willing takers on there.

now now, keep your dummy in old bean. all i said was that you have a narrow mind on this subject. just because there is no evidence of writing at other crime scenes (Ike?) or that such communications are uncommon, there is no way, in your opinion, that such a scenario could have played out in Whitechapel. As I said, narrow minded when the specifics of the Stride murder suggest JtR very probably wrote the GSG.

You just keep on with your mod fantasy.

[Fleetwood Mac]

just because there is no evidence of writing at other crime scenes (Ike?) or that such communications are uncommon, there is no way, in your opinion, that such a scenario could have played out in Whitechapel.

Which is not what I stated.

So, either you lack reading comprehension or you are cynically manipulating my post, neither are useful in a sensible debate.

The best that can be said in this case is what is likely. That's really what we're getting at. The fallback position of: "we don't just know" is completely meaningless when discussing the Whitechapel Murderer given there is a lot we don't know and we're discussing that which is most likely and not every possible eventuality.

I said: experience tells us that it is doubtful the Whitechapel Murderer was the author of the GSG. In the event you want to reply to what I actually said, including the experience that I've missed and tells us otherwise, then feel free; if you're planning on replying to something I didn't say, then save yourself the time and don't bother as I won't be replying.

[Harry D]

Well, there are only two bits of experience we have:

1) The Whitechapel Murderer: there is no evidence of him writing on walls at any other crime scene.

2) Other serial killers: they don't tend to scrawl on walls.

I can't think of any other experience to draw upon.

Based on that, I doubt he was the author of the GSG.

The graffito doesn't sit right with me either. Why would the killer return to the streets to write some vague message?

There's no evidence the killer left any messages after the previous murders. If he was the communicating type, wasn't Miller's Court the perfect spot (of course, some believe he did)? It's unusual to me that if the killer did have a racial or political motive, it wasn't evident elsewhere. The Zodiac Killer obviously used his murders as a pretext to wage a terror campaign on Northern California. For me, the mutilations and organ removal of the Whitechapel murders were an end unto themselves. Suddenly the killer decides he's going to use this one murder to stir up the social unrest against the Jewish population. He was willing to risk getting caught and hung for it, but never bothered again?

I also think some theorists take the police concerns at the time and reverse-engineer the author's intent. They mistakenly feared that an anti-semitic riot would break out, therefore they presume that was the killer's plan when he stopped to write it. That may well have been the case, but I find it's still problematic.

[Fleetwood Mac]

Why would the killer return to the streets to write some vague message?

The general behaviour of criminals would support that. They don't hang around after getting what they wanted.

[Abby Normal]

The graffito doesn't sit right with me either. Why would the killer return to the streets to write some vague message?

There's no evidence the killer left any messages after the previous murders. If he was the communicating type, wasn't Miller's Court the perfect spot (of course, some believe he did)? It's unusual to me that if the killer did have a racial or political motive, it wasn't evident elsewhere. The Zodiac Killer obviously used his murders as a pretext to wage a terror campaign on Northern California. For me, the mutilations and organ removal of the Whitechapel murders were an end unto themselves. Suddenly the killer decides he's going to use this one murder to stir up the social unrest against the Jewish population. He was willing to risk getting caught and hung for it, but never bothered again?

I also think some theorists take the police concerns at the time and reverse-engineer the author's intent. They mistakenly feared that an anti-semitic riot would break out, therefore they presume that was the killer's plan when he stopped to write it. That may well have been the case, but I find it's still problematic.

well if anyone fancies hutch as suspicious, he did implicate a jew, although not in writing. But im with wulf on this one-the events of the double event clearly point to the ripper writing the GSG.

[spyglass]

The general behaviour of criminals would support that. They don't hang around after getting what they wanted.

Well he didnt hang around Mitre Sq where there was plenty of wall space.
I think Goulston Street was a fair enough distance to do so.

[spyglass]

Well, there are only two bits of experience we have:

1) The Whitechapel Murderer: there is no evidence of him writing on walls at any other crime scene.

2) Other serial killers: they don't tend to scrawl on walls.

I can't think of any other experience to draw upon.

Based on that, I doubt he was the author of the GSG.

But it is possible that he did write messages, but the Police didnt pick up on them.....and so being frustrated with this, he made certain the Goulston Street message was to be found.