Did BS-man murder Liz Stride?

[Batman]

It can't be just Warrrens subjectivity because there are several others there in agreement over its implications.

And again a bloody apron caused an antisemitic riot let alone graffiti.

Even though the apron wasn't leather surely some of you anti stride/gsg crowd can see the irony in what he did and the antisemitic hate he was now fostering.

[c.d.]

I get it, but I don't buy it. And I didn't mean the handwriting, per se, just that the Ripper had written it. Which, of course, he did.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

Hello Tom,

"Of course?" Did you mean to preface that with in my opinion? Our good friend Michael Richards is beginning to rub off on you.

c.d.

[Tom_Wescott]

Smith is hardly going to let it pass as of no consequence when his own Chief Inspector had suggested it be photographed first.
Naturally this is nothing more than a "we had a better idea" ie; City vs the Met.

I don't recall reading any recriminations leveled against Warren for this action, official or unofficial. I tend to think there wasn't any due to the fact a man of lesser rank, Supt. Arnold, voiced the same opinion as Warren.
That would be a risky move if Arnold was aware of any condemnation towards Warren from the Home Office.

The fact Arnold was comfortable putting his reasoning in writing, in support of Warren, indicates there were no retributions against Warren for what he did.
So once again, not a consideration in his eventual resignation.

That's pretty selective reasoning, though, isn't it? One is dismissed on the notion that it was 'Met vs City' bravado while the other is accepted prima facie and could not have been Arnold trying to defend his 'boss' by saying what he WOULD have done?

As for the graffiti, if it was old the residents would have seen it and already known what it said.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Wickerman]

.... I believe there's little doubt that many in power shared Henry Smith's consternation over this action and due to the pressure to solve this case it reflected poorly on Warren and did indeed play a part in his eventual firing/resignation.

Smith is hardly going to let it pass as of no consequence when his own Chief Inspector had suggested it be photographed first.
Naturally this is nothing more than a "we had a better idea" ie; City vs the Met.

I don't recall reading any recriminations leveled against Warren for this action, official or unofficial. I tend to think there wasn't any due to the fact a man of lesser rank, Supt. Arnold, voiced the same opinion as Warren.
That would be a risky move if Arnold was aware of any condemnation towards Warren from the Home Office.

The fact Arnold was comfortable putting his reasoning in writing, in support of Warren, indicates there were no retributions against Warren for what he did.
So once again, not a consideration in his eventual resignation.

I get it, but I don't buy it.

You think the police will have told the residents what was written?

Take a read of this..

"Among the many discredited rumours current in the neighbourhood is the assertion that Sir Charles Warren on visiting the yard on Sunday morning last discovered some writing on the wall in chalk, which gave expression to very objectionable sentiments of a religious character, and which was supposed to have been the handiwork of the murderer. This was alleged to have given such great offence that Sir Charles, fearing a disturbance in the neighbourhood, directed the writing to be washed out. Investigation, however, has proved, so far as can be judged, the absolute fallacy of the story. A careful examination of the brickwork in the yard this morning has revealed beyond dispute the fact that there has been no effacement of chalk marks on the walls, certainly within recent date."
Echo, 2nd Oct. 1888.

We have already discussed another instance where the police denied the existence of any graffiti in the days immediately following the incident.

Therefore, if any residents had been told what was written the press would have sourced it out and been all over it.
They were investigation the rumors, but without success, in fact the rumors were apparently confused with the Stride murder.

[Tom_Wescott]

I explained that in the post you didn't get
In other words....the police cannot ask a resident if they had seen it, unless they tell the resident what was written. Clearly, the police did not tell any resident what was written.
Now do you get it?



You cannot determine hand writing characteristics from graffiti on a wall, due to the nature of how it is done.

I get it, but I don't buy it. And I didn't mean the handwriting, per se, just that the Ripper had written it. Which, of course, he did.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Wickerman]

.... I'm not suggested they read the graffiti to the residents, but like you said, would have asked if they'd seen that graffiti.

I explained that in the post you didn't get
In other words....the police cannot ask a resident if they had seen it, unless they tell the resident what was written. Clearly, the police did not tell any resident what was written.
Now do you get it?

It was certainly in the interests of the police to confirm that was not the Ripper's handwriting...

You cannot determine hand writing characteristics from graffiti on a wall, due to the nature of how it is done.

[The Good Michael]

I think the key point to take away from this besides your admiration and respect for me is that regardless of how Warren himself interpreted the message his concern was how others might interpret it especially if they were part of a crowd who were not overly fond of Jews to begin with.

That, my friend, was exactly my point all along that so many have read other things into. I have no idea what the GSG meant or who wrote it. I have no idea if it was 10 minutes or a day old. It was the possible interpretation that would be the catalyst to set people off, to Warren's thinking, and he may have been correct.

Mike

[c.d.]

Hello Good Michael,

I think the key point to take away from this besides your admiration and respect for me is that regardless of how Warren himself interpreted the message his concern was how others might interpret it especially if they were part of a crowd who were not overly fond of Jews to begin with.

c.d.

P.S I just assumed the admiration and respect part. I could feel it lurking there behind your words.

[The Good Michael]

Hello Good Michael,

I am not arguing with you. I will simply repeat that unless Warren himself wrote the GSG he does not know with absolute certainly what it means. So I am not sure why you responded and quoted me.

c.d.

Because I like talking to you? Thats true, but I was just sort of agreeing with you while showing that he didn't give an opinion on its meaning which is what you seemed to imply at the end of your post.

Mike

[c.d.]

Hello Good Michael,

I am not arguing with you. I will simply repeat that unless Warren himself wrote the GSG he does not know with absolute certainly what it means. So I am not sure why you responded and quoted me.

c.d.

[The Good Michael]

You're so anti-Canadian.

It's just Torontonians. They are like New Yorkers or Londoners on steroids. Just ask anyone from Newfoundland or Nova Scotia.


Mike

[The Good Michael]

Hello Michael R.,

The message as it is can just as easily be construed as being pro-Jewish. It is simply not clear either way. Assuming Warren himself didn't write it he has no way of knowing what the author intended. If he felt it was anti-Jewish that was simply his belief.

c.d.

From Warren's letter

Two things:
"The most pressing question at that moment was some writing on the wall in Goulston Street evidently written with the intention of inflaming the public mind against the Jews, and which Mr. Arnold with a view to prevent serious disorder proposed to obliterate, and had sent down an Inspector with a sponge for that purpose, telling him to await his arrival."

And:

"the Acting Chief Rabbi wrote to me on the subject of the spelling of the word "Jewes" on account of a newspaper asserting that this was Jewish spelling in the Yiddish dialect. He added "in the present state of excitement it is dangerous to the safety of the poor Jews in the East [End] to allow such an assertion to remain uncontradicted."

OK, three things:
"I do not hesitate myself to say that if that writing had been left there would have have been an onslaught upon the Jews, property would have been wrecked, and lives would probably have been lost; and I was much gratified with the prompitude with which Superintendent Arnold was prepared to act in the matter if I had not been there."

In summation:

Warren doesn't say what the message means.

Warren says 'Jewes' was portrayed as having been in the Yiddish dialect (meaning that it could look like a Yiddish-speaker wrote it, and never mind the lack of Hebrew alphabet for the ignorant non-Yiddish-speaking locals)

Warren explains an anti-Jew backlash, not an anti-semitic message

Also, remember everyone that it was visible to anyone passing by on the street, presumably non-Jews and serial killers going to work. Anyone seeing this and believing a Jew wrote it, might see it as a slap in the face.


So, that's my argument, and I agree with Warren's logic, if not his decision. The decision was supported by Arnold.

[c.d.]

Hello Michael R.,

The message as it is can just as easily be construed as being pro-Jewish. It is simply not clear either way. Assuming Warren himself didn't write it he has no way of knowing what the author intended. If he felt it was anti-Jewish that was simply his belief.

c.d.

[c.d.]

I am not so sure that Warren was so concerned that the message in and of itself could cause a riot as much as he was concerned that the message would draw a crowd. If word leaked out that the message was found near the apron and mentioned Jews all it would take would be for one person to yell out "see I told you it was a Jew doing the killing" and you are off and running.

c.d.

[Tom_Wescott]

You insult yourself. Never did I say the graffiti supported the Jews. You don't read. You just infer things because you have your own inane plots going on in that large, complex brain of yours; a brain I wish I could have because I think living in delusion-land might be a good thing.

Mike

You're so anti-Canadian.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott