The Goulston Street Apron

[The Good Michael]

it could have been anti Jewish sentiment directed at no one in particular, but the guy knew it was a predominantly Jewish building.

Anti-Jewish? Nah... Think "Pro-Jew" and "solidarity". Those are the reasons the police were afraid of it.

Mike

[Errata]

Anti-Jewish? Nah... Think "Pro-Jew" and "solidarity". Those are the reasons the police were afraid of it.

Mike

So they were afraid that all the Jews would rise up and riot over... what exactly? That doesn't sound right.

[The Good Michael]

So they were afraid that all the Jews would rise up and riot over... what exactly? That doesn't sound right.

And it sounds right that they would erase graffiti because of yet another (yawn) bit of antisemitism? No way. The police were concerned of people thinking of a Jewish act of murder, and that it might act as a catalyst for some sort of lynching by the gentile populace. They were concerned already about anarchists which were predominately educated, foreign Jews. What they didn't need was some sort belief in solidarity that would provoke others. It was all part of the class struggle.

Mike

[caz]

I disagree Caz,

A new build in an estate in Leicester was daubed with graffiti in less than 12 hours of opening.

I think its a bit a lame reason personally, and certainly not true on the whole.

Monty

Was it daubed with easily removed chalk, Monty? And would it have been noticed the moment it was done?

Of course any new build could be covered in graffiti in the time it takes to daub it, but if the 'Juwes' message was written in chalk right by the entrance, where occupants had to enter and leave, I just can't imagine that it could have been there for long without anyone seeing it or at least trying to rub it out.

Nobody even said they had noticed any writing there before PC Long passed by and saw both the message and the apron piece.

There is no evidence to suggest that one had been there significantly longer than the other. None at all. That's pure speculation.

Love,

Caz
X

[RivkahChaya]

It was the middle of the night on Shabbes. No one would have been up and about in that building. Non-observant Jews who lived there would have accepted the fact that a certain amount of quiet on Shabbes went with living there, or, they would have gone somewhere else for the night. The graffito would have stayed there until sundown on Saturday if the police had not wiped it away. The residents were probably never even aware of it, though, as it was, going up late at night, and being wiped out shortly thereafter.

[The Good Michael]

It was the middle of the night on Shabbes. No one would have been up and about in that building. Non-observant Jews who lived there would have accepted the fact that a certain amount of quiet on Shabbes went with living there, or, they would have gone somewhere else for the night. The graffito would have stayed there until sundown on Saturday if the police had not wiped it away. The residents were probably never even aware of it, though, as it was, going up late at night, and being wiped out shortly thereafter.

And there were a lot of atheist Jews in the area, but that and the idea that it may or may not have stayed on the wall for a time is relevant in what way? Serious question.

Mike

[Abby Normal]

I dont think its unreasonable to think that older buildings would collect graffiti more than newer ones. Certainly not lame anyway. Though it is a minor point-The main point being that it was mainly inhabited by jews who would surely would have erased the possibly negative jewish graffiti the moment they saw it. more than likely the GSG was written that night and never saw the light of day.

[Michael W Richards]

Anti-Jewish? Nah... Think "Pro-Jew" and "solidarity". Those are the reasons the police were afraid of it.

Mike

? You are talking about the same grafitto arent you Mike?

Regards

[RivkahChaya]

And there were a lot of atheist Jews in the area, but that and the idea that it may or may not have stayed on the wall for a time is relevant in what way? Serious question.

Mike

I dont think its unreasonable to think that older buildings would collect graffiti more than newer ones. Certainly not lame anyway. Though it is a minor point-The main point being that it was mainly inhabited by jews who would surely would have erased the possibly negative jewish graffiti the moment they saw it. more than likely the GSG was written that night and never saw the light of day.

Not on Shabbes. Anyone observant, who lived in the area, and anyone who lived in the area who was not trying to be provocative, would not erase it on Shabbes.

As far as why it's relevant, I'm not the one who brought it up.

Personally, I believe that the association with the apron was accidental, and I also believe that were the apron not left near the graffito, no one would have thought it was an accusation that had anything to do with the Ripper.

[Wickerman]

I dont think its unreasonable to think that older buildings would collect graffiti more than newer ones. Certainly not lame anyway. Though it is a minor point-The main point being that it was mainly inhabited by jews who would surely would have erased the possibly negative jewish graffiti the moment they saw it. more than likely the GSG was written that night and never saw the light of day.

On the contrary, Jews have tolerated considerably worse treatment than some ridiculous schoolboy scribbling. Why would they even pay attention to it, they were likely above all that. Sticks and stones, etc...

[Errata]

On the contrary, Jews have tolerated considerably worse treatment than some ridiculous schoolboy scribbling. Why would they even pay attention to it, they were likely above all that. Sticks and stones, etc...

But people take pride in their home. I'm sure it would have been washed off as soon as someone was available to do so. But it's not like someone would have broken the sabbath or gotten off work early just to make it happen.

[Monty]

The writing can be seen as a defiant statement, so GM is quite correct.

Monty

[caz]

It was the middle of the night on Shabbes. No one would have been up and about in that building. Non-observant Jews who lived there would have accepted the fact that a certain amount of quiet on Shabbes went with living there, or, they would have gone somewhere else for the night. The graffito would have stayed there until sundown on Saturday if the police had not wiped it away. The residents were probably never even aware of it, though, as it was, going up late at night, and being wiped out shortly thereafter.

I agree with your final sentence, Rivkah.

The point is, all the arguments in the world for the writing being there earlier and simply not being noticed, or nobody being able or willing to remove it before the police did so, do not amount to evidence that it was there before the early hours of Sunday morning; only that it is possible in theory.

Love,

Caz
X

[caz]

Personally, I believe that the association with the apron was accidental, and I also believe that were the apron not left near the graffito, no one would have thought it was an accusation that had anything to do with the Ripper.

Ah but there's the rub, because we can't simply remove the apron piece like the police did, or pretend it was not left near the graffito, arguably close in time to when the latter was left.

Love,

Caz
X

[caz]

On the contrary, Jews have tolerated considerably worse treatment than some ridiculous schoolboy scribbling. Why would they even pay attention to it, they were likely above all that. Sticks and stones, etc...

Hi Jon,

Put it this way. If you came home or went out and there was some ridiculous schoolboy scribbling in chalk on the black bricks at the entrance to your home, would you:

a) not even see it there?
b) pay no attention?
c) make a mental note to remove it if your religion didn't allow you to do so immediately?

All I'm saying is that as nobody ever said afterwards that they had seen the writing there, before PC Long's first recorded sighting at 2.55am, I find it unlikely that it could have been there since before sundown on the Saturday. Possible, but unlikely. And of course there is no evidence that it was.

Love,

Caz
X