What if Goulston St Graffito was photographed?

[John Wheat]

I'm sorry John, but doesn't that cover the entire set of human beings? Or was that your point?

It's too bad it wasn't written in Hebrew or Yiddish or Ladino. But then the constables would have totally ignored it.

Jeff

Hi Jeff

Yes that was my point.

[Phil Carter]

Hi Phil, I wouldn't share that optimism. Depending on the type of handwriting it's likely we'd end up with three or four versions of words like Juwes. What would the size of the writing tell us? What would the blurring tell us? Chalk can blur easily, in an instant. It would tell us nothing, nothing that we would all agree on anyway.

And h honestly, when I read threads in which people claim to see signed sketches by Walter Sickert on Mary Kelly's partition wall I'm kind of glad that we don't have more photographic evidence.

Hello Henry

in most cases. .I would totally agree with you. Especially people playing around with original photos in photoshop.

the blurring was mentioned by only one policeman. . Who wasn't even there. If he is correct.. then it asks the question why it wasnt noted by every pc attending. There is nothing in any official report. That in itself asks the question of the veracity of the reports. .together with exact placement.

A photo would also disprove much.

That said..yes..I agree. But irregularities could have been seen.


Merry Christmas to you and yours. 😊



Phil

[dantheman]

Strongly suspect Jack was born left handed and switched.
Given that a Lecturer might well have chalk in his pocket the weekend before term's start,a match could have been made.
Especially a lecturer who had been treating Eddowes and Nichols for over twenty years.
Incidentally,have a good look at Stride's bottom lip. That is another piece of Jack's expertise. It is a genetic condition.
Chapman had cancer. Ditto.
Mary Ann Kelly was a member of his church as a child.
Incidentally Jack was partially deaf. If you have a good look at one of his photos,the left ear seems to be cauliflowered.

Hi DJA,

What Jack are you referring to?

Thanks

Dan

[Henry Flower]

And to you, and yours, Phil - thank you sir.

[DJA]

Hi DJA,

What Jack are you referring to?

Thanks

Dan

Jack the Ripper.
AKA Henry Gawen Sutton.
AKA Edward Hyde.

https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/43

Worth a read. Gull was Jekyll.....Henry G Kill.....get it?
Inspector Newcomen was Major Henry Smith,RL Stevenson's cousin,once removed.A newcomer to the job in 1885.
Sir Danvers Carew is three clues.Have fun with that.Hint he died in 1885 from an overdose of chloral hydrate prescribed by Gull.
Same stuff D'Onston became addicted to.Also a Sutton inpatient.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Hyde,_3rd_Earl_of_Clarendon

One of the many clues in the 1885 novella that returned to London in 1888 as a stage play. Just before Eddowes went hopping and Nichols was murdered after moving next door to her old friend.
Nichols and Eddowes were his inpatients together from December 1867.
Both had the same strep infection which makes it's home in the intestines.
All CV5 are linked to one person.
Oh yeah. "That square in Soho". Have a look at a map of Soho Square.
Sutton Row and Soho Square corner is where the old Magical Brothel used to be.
Shades of the Cleveland Street Scandal.

[jerryd]

The Astrakhan was a coat, not a beard.

[dantheman]

Jack the Ripper.
AKA Henry Gawen Sutton.
AKA Edward Hyde.

https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/43

Worth a read. Gull was Jekyll.....Henry G Kill.....get it?
Inspector Newcomen was Major Henry Smith,RL Stevenson's cousin,once removed.A newcomer to the job in 1885.
Sir Danvers Carew is three clues.Have fun with that.Hint he died in 1885 from an overdose of chloral hydrate prescribed by Gull.
Same stuff D'Onston became addicted to.Also a Sutton inpatient.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Hyde,_3rd_Earl_of_Clarendon

One of the many clues in the 1885 novella that returned to London in 1888 as a stage play. Just before Eddowes went hopping and Nichols was murdered after moving next door to her old friend.
Nichols and Eddowes were his inpatients together from December 1867.
Both had the same strep infection which makes it's home in the intestines.
All CV5 are linked to one person.
Oh yeah. "That square in Soho". Have a look at a map of Soho Square.
Sutton Row and Soho Square corner is where the old Magical Brothel used to be.
Shades of the Cleveland Street Scandal.

Thanks for the info and I'll definitely read up on it. First need to finish M. J. Trows' Torso book.

[Penhalion]

"Nichols and Eddowes were his inpatients together from December 1867."

In 1867, Mary Ann Nichols was still living in whatever wedded bliss she had with her husband and was busy having children with him. She wasn't an in patient anywhere at that time.

During 1867, Eddowes was traveling around the country selling pamphlets and broadsides with her not-husband and having children with him. Again, not an inpatient anywhere at that time.

Where do you have documentation of either of them being inpatient anywhere much less at the same place and time being treated by the same doctor?

[DJA]

Both had Rheumatic Fever.
It is a strep pyogenes infection that resides in the intestines.
Similar to D'Onston's Neurasthenia. Today we call that Chronic Fatigue Syndrome.
Ain't hard to find the documentation. Try Googling Sutton,Gull,Rheumatic fever.
Kate was still Conway in 1867.

[Penhalion]

That's cool. If it is easy to find, please provide it.

[Penhalion]

Right. So I found the source you are using and while it is interesting, there are some problems with using it for your purposes.

First off- the women are identified by their First names and last initial only. How many women who answered to Catherine C. could there have been in London at that time? Hundreds? Thousands? The age is interesting but wrong for our Kate. By December of 1867, Catherine Conway was already 25 by a wide margin not 24 as reported (birthday in April). Also, we don't know if Catherine was even IN London at this point as she and her not-husband traveled extensively selling their wares.

Mary Ann N. is likewise interesting but, again, without a specific last name we cannot be sure especially as her age is also close but incorrect as she would have been 22 by December of 1867 not 21 as reported. Also, records seem to indicate that in 1867 she and her husband were living with her father at 131 Trafalgar Street which is rather far south of the river. If she were ill while living at that location she would more likely have gone to Guy's than all the way north to London Hospital.

There is no other descriptive information given, both of 'our' women had children at this point but no reference is made to recently giving birth for either of them. No mention is made of them being married or not. We simply don't have enough identifying information to use to say for sure if these women are the Catherine and Mary Ann we are looking for.

[DJA]

Just compiled a lengthy reply.
Timed out and lost.
I'll get back to you when I have the time.
The ages were approximates. Sutton had a problem with maths,hence everyone has his birth year wrong.

[Harry D]

Another fantasist...

[Penhalion]

"Sutton had a problem with maths,hence everyone has his birth year wrong."

How do you know that he had a problem with math? How do you know that everyone's birth year was wrong if we don't actually know who any of these people are? Physicians are generally pretty good at math because if they aren't, it makes their jobs a lot harder.

Hang on, if you read the introduction to the article you will see that those who were admitted to the London Hospital (as both Catherine C. and Mary Ann N. were) actually came under the care of Drs. Davies, Clarke, and Ramskill and were afterwards transferred to the care of Dr. Sutton. Not Gull. (See page 44 of the article for confirmation of these details).

Even IF these women were our Kate and Polly, they never met Dr. Gull and were never cared for by him (in any capacity because you know he had nurses who were doing the actual hands on part of the job, right?).

While finding those names in a paper co-written by Gull is interesting, there's still no proof Gull ever had any contact with them much less that they are in fact the women we are interested in.

[Pcdunn]

I think you will find DJA is not interested in Dr. Gull as a Ripper suspect, Penhalion.