Piece of Apron and the 'Juwes'

[Graham]

"Please don't respond with the same old recycled arguments that have appeared on this and countless similar threads, time and time again. They share a common feature indicative of the reason this debate continues: They Are Not Convincing !!!"

Frankly, I couldn't care less if you think my arguments are convincing or not. Likewise, I am not and never will be convinced that Jack the Ripper wrote the GSG, but I am not so arrogant that I would request others to stop saying so.

These are open boards, and hopefully will remain so.

Graham

[Glenn Lauritz Andersson]

Colin,

Personally, I am surprised that you of all people actually consider the possibility that the writing to have been made by the killer.
Yes, of course somebody must have written it.
But why the Ripper? Only because he was there? Or because someone had to be writing it? What kind of reasoning is that?

The only reason to ever suspect that the writing had any connection with the killings is the placing of the apron. Besides that there is not one word in its content that points in that direction!!!!! It can never be pointed out enough.

To compare the reasoning with the nicks on Eddowes face is just silly, because it is only sensible and obvious to assume that the same man who hacked and opened up her body also did the nicks in the face. You can't apply that same reasoning to the writing, based on the sole argument that 'we knew he was there' or that 'someone' wrote it. It was a building block full of occupants, the site lay in the middle of a very busy hawking industry and no doubt many people passed through and lived there on a daily basis. What does that prove? We can't even be certain of when the writing was made. It is more likely that that 'someone' was someone other than the Ripper.

Indeed, we can't KNOW if the Ripper wrote the message on Goulston Street, but I find it hardly unlikely that he did and to me it just doesn't make sense.
As for the arguments against him writing it being unconvincing, I certainly don't agree. On the contrary, they are based on pure common sense.

All the best

How can we be certain that he didn't ???

We can't: We plainly and simply cannot !!!

And either way; why didn't the 'Ripper' nick the faces of any of his earlier victims ??? Are we to conclude that Eddowes's face was nicked by someone else, either before or after her murder ???

The graffito was written by someone:

- In all its ambiguity; it was written by someone

- In all its perceived inanity; it was written by someone

- In its "schoolboy hand"; it was written by someone

- In a particular doorway, in which other graffiti may or may not have been visible; it was written by someone

- (In a particular doorway), on a particular street, in which other graffiti may or may not have been visible; it was written by someone

Someone: One of the denizens (perhaps 200-300 in number (?)), who had occasion to step into, or perhaps through the doorway, in the 24-36 hours preceding the discovery of the apron.

Given the circumstances surrounding the apron and its discovery; we can be nearly certain that our man was worthy of the distinction "someone": i.e., someone who was there; someone who could have written the graffito. So why is his candidacy for authorship any less likely than that of all of the others worthy of the distinction "someone" ???

Please don't respond with the same old recycled arguments that have appeared on this and countless similar threads, time and time again. They share a common feature indicative of the reason this debate continues: They Are Not Convincing !!!


Colin [ATTACH]2355[/ATTACH]

Hi Colin,

Its also interesting to me that the height of the message on the wall/dado/jamb...makes it unlikely to read clearly when a man of say 5'6-8' is standing erect, but when PC Lamb bent down to pick the apron up, it would have been at almost his eye level.

Im with you....we know the man who dropped the apron, and recently killed Catherine, was at that location that night. We know he left the apron near the writing. We dont know when either was at that location specifically, but both were there when the apron was spotted.

Best regards Football Dad.

... why didn't the Ripper leave similar messages at or near the scenes of his earlier murders?

How can we be certain that he didn't ???

We can't: We plainly and simply cannot !!!

And either way; why didn't the 'Ripper' nick the faces of any of his earlier victims ??? Are we to conclude that Eddowes's face was nicked by someone else, either before or after her murder ???

The graffito was written by someone:

- In all its ambiguity; it was written by someone

- In all its perceived inanity; it was written by someone

- In its "schoolboy hand"; it was written by someone

- In a particular doorway, in which other graffiti may or may not have been visible; it was written by someone

- (In a particular doorway), on a particular street, in which other graffiti may or may not have been visible; it was written by someone

Someone: One of the denizens (perhaps 200-300 in number (?)), who had occasion to step into, or perhaps through the doorway, in the 24-36 hours preceding the discovery of the apron.

Given the circumstances surrounding the apron and its discovery; we can be nearly certain that our man was worthy of the distinction "someone": i.e., someone who was there; someone who could have written the graffito. So why is his candidacy for authorship any less likely than that of all of the others worthy of the distinction "someone" ???

Please don't respond with the same old recycled arguments that have appeared on this and countless similar threads, time and time again. They share a common feature indicative of the reason this debate continues: They Are Not Convincing !!!


Colin

[Simon Wood]

Hi All,

This is from the Pall Mall Gazette, 11th October 1888—a story about Warren ordering the erasure of the GSG.

"It is now stated that the erasure was made by the express orders of Sir Charles Warren, who personally superintended the operation! The City police attached the greatest value to this clue, and decided to have the inscription photographed in order that it might be compared with 'Jack the Ripper's' letters."

If this last sentence ['letters' plural aside] is true, it means that on the morning of the double-event the City Police had knowledge of "Dear Boss", which had only been received at Scotland Yard the previous day.

The City Police didn't mention that.

Regards,

Simon

[joelhall]

Nats,

The piece of apron may have been lying in the door way of the Model Dwellings for the best part of an hour, so far as we know. It was, after all, discovered purely by accident at around 2.55 am by PC Long, about 70 minutes after Eddowes' body was found. By which time the Ripper was probably tucked up in beddie-byes.

Cheers,

Graham

this again is a two-edged sword. the item being found by accident shows that the killer did not intend to leave anything for police, else it would be in a more obvious place, somewhere he knew theyd look (such as by the synagogue if possibly trying to incite reactions against the local jewry).

on the other hand, this might be precisely why it was in this place, so there was time to write without being disturbed, whilst half the police were flocking somewhere else.

theres also the possibility this message was not intended for the police but someone else.

also does anyone here speak lithuanin? probably nothing but juwes got some hits in lithuanian but i couldnt translate it. just to be on the safe side i like to check all avenues.

oh one last thing (not sure why i feel awkward/embarrassed saying this haha) but its joel not joe

cheers

joel

[Roy Corduroy]

Hi Graham and all,

Yes my point was, picture you are Insp. McWilliam. You hear of this writing at the spot of the apron and you order it photographed. Your first instinct is this is important. No one can ever change that he had that reaction. It does not prove the killer wrote it. I agree 100%. But sometimes your first instinct is the right one. The only one that matters.

Thanks again,

Roy

[Graham]

Well Graham,
some of us go for the ripper as mentally ill and some go for the ripper as you do.I happen to think he was most likely mentally ill,like Cutbush was.
I am not saying it was Cutbush,but he did have a history of violent behaviour,whereas Kosminski,also in an asylum did not.
Incidently,there was a gap of an hour between the murder and the rag being found----so he was in a queer kind of "hurry"!
Cheers
Norma

Joe
Thanks!

Nats,

The piece of apron may have been lying in the door way of the Model Dwellings for the best part of an hour, so far as we know. It was, after all, discovered purely by accident at around 2.55 am by PC Long, about 70 minutes after Eddowes' body was found. By which time the Ripper was probably tucked up in beddie-byes.

Cheers,

Graham

[joelhall]

Definitely Joe,but in order to get David Cohen in the frame,you have to make a lot of it up as you go along-----

ooops. i actually meant to imply the personality/mental issues line not the suspect haha.

sorry for not making that clearer im with you that he was clearly disturbed. i believe he most probably wouldnt appear normal as the degree of mutilation shows a marked level of anger and violence.

joel

[Natalie Severn]

In fairness, I thought Graham was describing a mentally ill person, Nats.

Many serial killers haven't been "raving loonies" by any stretch of the imagination. "Joe Average", most of 'em.

Yes but Graham was also referring to Bundy ,like you were,Sam,and I dont see the Ripper and Bundy were after the same things at all.
I tend to think the Ripper was "hearing voices" commanding him to do what he did.
Best
Norma

[Natalie Severn]

what about kaminsky/cohen... seems more plausible to me than kosminsky?

Definitely Joe,but in order to get David Cohen in the frame,you have to make a lot of it up as you go along-----

[joelhall]

Well Graham,
some of us go for the ripper as mentally ill and some go for the ripper as you do.I happen to think he was most likely mentally ill,like Cutbush was.
I am not saying it was Cutbush,but he did have a history of violent behaviour,whereas Kosminski,also in an asylum did not.
Incidently,there was a gap of an hour between the murder and the rag being found----so he was in a queer kind of "hurry"!
Cheers
Norma

Joe
Thanks!

what about kaminsky/cohen... seems more plausible to me than kosminsky?

[Sam Flynn]

Well Graham,
some of us go for the ripper as mentally ill and some go for the ripper as you do.

In fairness, I thought Graham was describing a mentally ill person, Nats.

Many serial killers haven't been "raving loonies" by any stretch of the imagination. "Joe Average", most of 'em.

[Natalie Severn]

Hi Nats.

My own theory re: the "Double Event" (if indeed that's what it was...) is that the Ripper came very, very close to being caught in Mitre Square. So close, that he legged it, and legged it as fast as he could go. Doesn't matter if the piece of apron was taken from the scene deliberately or by accident, he was a scared man and he used it to wipe his hands, after which he discarded it in the nearest opportune spot - which just happened to be the entrance to the Model Dwellings. Given that scenario, the Ripper, abnormal or otherwise, would simply not have hung around long enough to chalk up some odd message on the wall. He'd have carried on hot-footing it. It just doesn't make sense that he'd have left a nice little message for posterity.

I also happen to think that the Ripper, whoever he might have been, was to all intents and purposes perfectly 'normal' to those whom he encountered in his everyday, humdrum life. He just had this strange urge to kill a woman every so often...

Cheers,

Graham

Well Graham,
some of us go for the ripper as mentally ill and some go for the ripper as you do.I happen to think he was most likely mentally ill,like Cutbush was.
I am not saying it was Cutbush,but he did have a history of violent behaviour,whereas Kosminski,also in an asylum did not.
Incidently,there was a gap of an hour between the murder and the rag being found----so he was in a queer kind of "hurry"!
Cheers
Norma

Joe
Thanks!

[Graham]

haha

now thats logical best post on this thread by far in my opinion

Joel,

I repeat my question from an earlier post: why didn't the Ripper leave similar messages at or near the scenes of his earlier murders?

Cheers,

Graham