Kate's "Nothing"

[RivkahChaya]

I don't drink much but I have been out of it with hypoglycemia and sometimes you know what's going on and sometimes not. I do know with regular, heavy drinkers that they can drink a lot and be well drunk and appear and act quite sober.

Not be blamed for nothing is the way cockney's speak and it means 'not be blamed for anything'. It's probably pronounced 'not be blamed for nuffink' if you get the idea.

Double negatives are also typical of first-language Yiddish speakers of English, although, a Yiddish speaker would probably say something like "Don't get blamed for nothing"-- although, the ones I know learned American English, so maybe not in London. I still think the graffito sounds like a feeble attempt to make fun of a Yiddish accent.

Anyway, if the writer wants to make a reference to Eddowes, why be cryptic? why not use her real name, or say "Number 4," or something clearer? If the whole point is to draw attention to her, then why draw attention away by being cryptic? Is it a secret, or isn't it?

[moonbegger]

Fixation by a few I might add. I have no doubt that the word "nothing" refers only to it's original meaning i.e. "nothing".

I am pleased that you have reached your final conclusion Observer and that you have no doubts to ponder regarding something that you cannot be certain of either way , All we have here are theory's and conjecture , this is the nature of the beast . And yes indeed , this is a puzzle , a puzzle that no one really knows how to piece together .

For me personally, I find every piece of the puzzle is worth a good look .. now some may find that puzzling itself ..

This fixation on the world "nothing" puzzles me. She was blind drunk,

Kate referred to herself as "nothing" on the night .. Her bloodstained apron was discovered beneath some graffiti that included "will be blamed for nothing" . We could , as you and Observer suggest , file it away in the over stuffed coincidence tin .. but where would be the fun in that

I still find the In house Police jibe , to be the best explanation for all of the unanswered questions regarding the GSG and its subsequent removal , but I will be the first to admit, we just don't know , maybe we'll never know , but lets not stop asking questions or running probable scenarios up the preverbal flagpole .. And if a couple of pieces do fit snugly together , lets look at them a little closer .. Lets face it , we're all pissing in the wind here .


cheers , moonbegger .

[GUT]

G'day Moonbegger

Lets face it , we're all pissing in the wind here .

Truest words on these boards.

[Observer]

I am pleased that you have reached your final conclusion Observer and that you have no doubts to ponder regarding something that you cannot be certain of either way , All we have here are theory's and conjecture , this is the nature of the beast . And yes indeed , this is a puzzle , a puzzle that no one really knows how to piece together .

For me personally, I find every piece of the puzzle is worth a good look .. now some may find that puzzling itself ..

Firstly Moonbegger you missed my point. You asserted that it was highly improbable that Kate Eddowes met her end purely by chance, that is, it's highly improbable tht she was in the wrong place at the wrong time. However, all the evidence points to the fact that Kate Eddowes was murdered by a random killer. She was indeed in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Regarding the word "nothing" in the GSG, yes, I am one hundred per cent certain that it does not refer to Kate Eddowes in person. You like putting together puzzles.

And so, here's a little analogy regarding your "nothing" theory.

Picture this. A puzzle, a jigsaw puzzle, when completed it shows lets say a view of Piccadilly Circus. It's nearly complete, only Eros head needs putting into place. There's one piece left in the box, Elvis Presley's left eye, from a different jigsaw, but what the hell you proceed to pummel it into place with a sledge hammer. And that's putting it mildly.

Kate referred to herself as "nothing" on the night .. Her bloodstained apron was discovered beneath some graffiti that included "will be blamed for nothing" . We could , as you and Observer suggest , file it away in the over stuffed coincidence tin .. but where would be the fun in that .

Yes, she did indeed refer to herself as "nothing". Inside Bishopgate Police Station that is. How would her murderer know this fact? The notion does indeed belong inside the coincidence tin.

I still find the In house Police jibe , to be the best explanation for all of the unanswered questions regarding the GSG and its subsequent removal , but I will be the first to admit, we just don't know , maybe we'll never know , but lets not stop asking questions or running probable scenarios up the preverbal flagpole .. And if a couple of pieces do fit snugly together , lets look at them a little closer .. Lets face it , we're all pissing in the wind here .

The "in house police jibe," has me beat. Can you explain? Probable scenarios? You jest. You know Moonbegger, it's all very well running "probable" scenarios up the flagpole. But please, if you do, make sure it's our glorious Union Flag, not a pair of Aunties old bloomers.

Regards

Observer

[Observer]

Lets face it , we're all pissing in the wind here .

G'day Moonbegger

Truest words on these boards.

Believe me, some of us are pissing against a hurricane.

[moonbegger]

[QUOTE]

Firstly Moonbegger you missed my point. You asserted that it was highly improbable that Kate Eddowes met her end purely by chance, that is, it's highly improbable tht she was in the wrong place at the wrong time. However, all the evidence points to the fact that Kate Eddowes was murdered by a random killer. She was indeed in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Of course she was in the wrong place at the wrong time !!! But that is only from Kate's perspective .. From the killers perspective she was in the right place at the right time .. But back to my post .. Of course I reversed the hypothetical probability .. it was a bit of tongue in cheek , that I assumed most would get Especially as this hypostasis , is based on the likelihood of Kate muttering out the same response whilst the PC was trying to communicate with her in the street , and possibly overheard by her would be killer .

Yes, she did indeed refer to herself as "nothing". Inside Bishopgate Police Station that is. How would her murderer know this fact?

I suggest you read the lead post in future Observer , before jumping in throwing accepted facts about , maybe you would understand a little bit more about the suggested hypothesis you are questioning .

And so, here's a little analogy regarding your "nothing" theory.
Picture this. A puzzle, a jigsaw puzzle, when completed it shows lets say a view of Piccadilly Circus. It's nearly complete, only Eros head needs putting into place. There's one piece left in the box, Elvis Presley's left eye, from a different jigsaw, but what the hell you proceed to pummel it into place with a sledge hammer. And that's putting it mildly.

Really Observer I think speaks more of your ability to create a realistic analogy than is does of my ability to speak hypothetically ..

The "in house police jibe," has me beat. Can you explain? Probable scenarios?

"The Jewries" was allegedly the nickname of the City police given to them by the Met , In short It was the City Police themselves who had had Eddowes in custody earlier in the evening. I think the theory, as originally advanced, was that the 'Met' were having a go at the City Police .. the whole kit and caboodle was a hoax .. written in the proverbial good schoolboy hand. It might also explain a desire by Warren not to have the GSG photographed - and the GSG's own reference only to "the men" as opposed to "the ones".

it's all very well running "probable" scenarios up the flagpole. But please, if you do, make sure it's our glorious Union Flag, not a pair of Aunties old bloomers.

"The truth is incontrovertible, malice may attack it, ignorance may deride it, but in the end; there it is" [Sir Winston Churchill]

cheers , moonbegger .

[Michael W Richards]

Firstly Moonbegger you missed my point. You asserted that it was highly improbable that Kate Eddowes met her end purely by chance, that is, it's highly improbable tht she was in the wrong place at the wrong time. However, all the evidence points to the fact that Kate Eddowes was murdered by a random killer. She was indeed in the wrong place at the wrong time.

The evidence such as it is doesnt suggest someone unknown to Kate at all, although it does suggest the same killer as Polly and Annie, who we assume were selected randomly. She may well have made plans to meet her eventual killer sometime earlier that day, or to meet someone who then leaves her in the company of her killer. The police openly speculated about a possible pre-arranged meeting themselves.

Just because we cannot state why they were murdered doesnt mean their killing was automatically then a random act of violence. The little we know about these women and their associations at the time of their murders may be the reason we cant see why they were murdered.

Cheers

[Michael W Richards]

One thing is clear by the "nothing" remark though, coupled with her other fake name.....she did not intend for the police to have her real name that night....even for a D & D...something relatively common around those parts at the time.

Cheers

[GUT]

G'day Michael

It also seems to have been relatively common to use different names, even with the police.

[Observer]

Of course she was in the wrong place at the wrong time !!! But that is only from Kate's perspective .. From the killers perspective she was in the right place at the right time .. But back to my post .. Of course I reversed the hypothetical probability .. it was a bit of tongue in cheek , that I assumed most would get Especially as this hypostasis , is based on the likelihood of Kate muttering out the same response whilst the PC was trying to communicate with her in the street , and possibly overheard by her would be killer .

You reversed the hypothetical probability and thought everybody would get it? I got it, we all got it. This is what transpired

G'day Moonbegger

Or the poor thing was just plain good old fashioned unlucky, and in yhe wrong place at the wrong time.

Yes Gut , even the highly improbable , is also possible ..

moonbegger

How the hell are we to suppose the above was tongue in cheek? There aren't even any of the silly little smilies you seem fond of to give us a clue.

I suggest you read the lead post in future Observer , before jumping in throwing accepted facts about , maybe you would understand a little bit more about the suggested hypothesis you are questioning .

I understand the hypothesis perfectly, and am telling you that it has no foundation in truth. In fact, The opposite is the truth, it seems Kate Eddowes was incapable of speech when arrested, indeed she could not even stand unaided. There is no evidence her killer was there at the time, nor is there any evidence that she uttered the word "nothing". There are hypotheses, and there are hypotheses, the hypotheses in question is just plain silly, utterly worthless.

Really Observer I think speaks more of your ability to create a realistic analogy than is does of my ability to speak hypothetically ..

?????

"The Jewries" was allegedly the nickname of the City police given to them by the Met , In short It was the City Police themselves who had had Eddowes in custody earlier in the evening. I think the theory, as originally advanced, was that the 'Met' were having a go at the City Police .. the whole kit and caboodle was a hoax .. written in the proverbial good schoolboy hand. It might also explain a desire by Warren not to have the GSG photographed - and the GSG's own reference only to "the men" as opposed to "the ones"..

I am aware of this notion. However, how the hell I'm supposed to deduce the above from the scanty information you gave me, i.e. "the in house police jibe" is beyond me. I can't read your mind.

"The truth is incontrovertible, malice may attack it, ignorance may deride it, but in the end; there it is" [Sir Winston Churchill]

I tell you my friend, the above quote does no justice to the notion that Kate Eddowes killer overheard her mutter the word "nothing" to the arresting officer, and then incorporated it into the GSG. It bears no resemblance to your scenario. Churchill will be turning in his grave.

Regards

Observer

[Observer]

The evidence such as it is doesnt suggest someone unknown to Kate at all, although it does suggest the same killer as Polly and Annie, who we assume were selected randomly. She may well have made plans to meet her eventual killer sometime earlier that day, or to meet someone who then leaves her in the company of her killer. The police openly speculated about a possible pre-arranged meeting themselves.

Just because we cannot state why they were murdered doesnt mean their killing was automatically then a random act of violence. The little we know about these women and their associations at the time of their murders may be the reason we cant see why they were murdered.

Cheers

I thought you might be lurking in the background. There is no evidence whatsoever which suggests Kate Eddowes had arranged a meeting with anyone on the day prior to her murder.

[Roy Corduroy]

Believe me, some of us are pissing against a hurricane.

Yes

Roy

[moonbegger]

Hello Observer ,

I understand the hypothesis perfectly, and am telling you that it has no foundation in truth.

Then riddle me this Observer. If you understood my "hypothesis perfectly" , Why then would you ask me a question that I had already explained in my opening post ? one that was fundamental to my whole hypotheses

is there a remote possibility that her Killer was part of the crowd around her, and heard her reply to PC Robinson ?

Yet , still you ask me

Yes, she did indeed refer to herself as "nothing". Inside Bishopgate Police Station that is. How would her murderer know this fact?

If your not really paying attention my friend , then no matter how simply I explain things , they will escape you, regardless of "mind reading" or "silly little smileys" you may need to clue you in

Ok , lets look closely at these stone wall facts you swear by ..

In fact, The opposite is the truth, it seems Kate Eddowes was incapable of speech when arrested,

what is your source for Kate being incapable of speech ? And Where does it tell us "she never muttered a drunken word" ? It does Not !

indeed she could not even stand unaided.

I am pretty sure , many of us on these boards have at one time had the same disadvantage , but does a inability to stand unaided automatically disengage our vocal chords ?

There is no evidence her killer was there at the time,

There is also No evidence to prove he was not ..

nor is there any evidence that she uttered the word "nothing".

Well there is , as we know , documented evidence that she uttered "Nothing" at the station, but there is absolutely No evidence to contradict the possibility of her muttering something whilst slumped against the shutters .. or whilst being marched off .

These are the hard facts you stand by .. and that's fine with me Observer ,
but to snarl out that my hypotheses has no foundation in truth .. to use your own constructive ( I couldn't find a tongue in cheek smiley ) words , its
"just plain silly, utterly worthless."

And regarding the Churchill quote , pertaining to the incontrovertible truth..

It was in fact the perfect rebuttal to your "Aunties bloomers up the flagpole"
In short ; Be it a posh flag , be it a pair of bloomers , be it a tea towel , if it be true .. it be true . I tried , but I really cant break it down any further than that .. and in all probability , you gave up paying attention a few paragraphs ago ..

cheers all the same

moonbegger

[Michael W Richards]

I thought you might be lurking in the background. There is no evidence whatsoever which suggests Kate Eddowes had arranged a meeting with anyone on the day prior to her murder.

Yeah, no matter what you try to espouse, someone will point out the truth. If thats 'lurking", then yes, truth will follow you, despite your attempts to obfuscate it.

If you read my quote you'll see I never stated what you rebutted above, I stated "earlier that day", meaning in context, prior to her incarceration and to address her choice of turn when out of Bishopsgate. According to the calendar she was killed on the 30th, but I was speaking about the 29th as a day in the life of Kate Eddowes, from waking to sleeping,...which continues upon her release.

Cheers

[moonbegger]

And there is only one thing worst that pissing against the wind ... and that my dear , is not pissing against the wind

moonbegger ..