Introduction
Victims
Suspects
Witnesses
Ripper Letters
Police Officials
Official Documents
Press Reports
Victorian London
Message Boards
Ripper Media
Authors
Dissertations
Timelines
Games & Diversions
About the Casebook

 Search:
 

Join the Chat Room!

Was the message misread? Log Out | Topics | Search
Moderators | Edit Profile

Casebook: Jack the Ripper - Message Boards » Letters and Communications » Goulston Street Graffito » Was the message misread? « Previous Next »

Author Message
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Stanley D. Reid
Chief Inspector
Username: Sreid

Post Number: 615
Registered: 4-2005
Posted on Wednesday, November 23, 2005 - 10:00 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Hi all,

Written on smooth brick, were they imagining what they saw? Sometimes chalk slides over a smooth surface without leaving a mark where one intends. What if it said "The clues are the means that will now be blamed for nothing"? Being a sort of enigmatic hint that he was leaving a false clue, as in the apron. Or maybe he was leaving a clue that he just wanted them to think was false. That would also rid of us the spelling and grammar errors.

Any other ideas what the writer might have intended the message to read?

That's not to say the original interpretation was incorrect; just trying to open things up a bit. Nor does it prove that Jack wrote it in the first place.

Best wishes,

Stan

(Message edited by sreid on November 23, 2005)
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Howard Brown
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Howard

Post Number: 1173
Registered: 7-2004
Posted on Wednesday, November 23, 2005 - 10:16 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Just a thought here Stan..

The time it takes to write that message, to me, indicates more than a random graffiti,since it was outdoors. An indoor message,taking the same amount of time,wouldn't be such a stretch.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Dan Norder
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Dannorder

Post Number: 1026
Registered: 4-2004
Posted on Thursday, November 24, 2005 - 1:24 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Hi Stan,

I can't really picture how "clues" would end up looking like "Juews/Juwes/Jewes" or etcetera. I think there is room for some level of misinterpretation, but there's only so much that would make sense, especially as the writing was said to be in a good schoolboy hand and not all messy and hard to read.
Dan Norder, Editor
Ripper Notes: The International Journal for Ripper Studies
 Profile    Email    Dissertations    Website
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Stanley D. Reid
Chief Inspector
Username: Sreid

Post Number: 616
Registered: 4-2005
Posted on Thursday, November 24, 2005 - 1:46 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Hi Dan,

A c and an l could be run together to look like a J. Beyond that, all you have to explain is the w which could have been a late ending of the u and an early beginning of the e run together. The w could also be an artifact of previous graffiti that had not been completely erased. That might be jumping through hoops but who can say for sure. They may well have gotten it right but there was some disagreement even at the time. Too bad the picture was never taken.

Stan
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

David Radka
Detective Sergeant
Username: Dradka

Post Number: 68
Registered: 7-2005
Posted on Thursday, November 24, 2005 - 8:42 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Mr. Reid wrote:
1. "That's not to say the original interpretation was incorrect; just trying to open things up a bit."

>>You "open up" nothing, Mr. Reid. You are completely incompetent. Unless you offer a reason to believe an interpretation that coincides with the case evidence, you are spinning fairy tales.

2. "A c and an l could be run together to look like a J. Beyond that, all you have to explain is the w which could have been a late ending of the u and an early beginning of the e run together. The w could also be an artifact of previous graffiti that had not been completely erased. That might be jumping through hoops but who can say for sure."

>>Who can say for sure? YOU can't say anything, because you have no evidence of these things. You are a particularly incompetent and promiscuous skeptic, Mr. Reid. You know nothing.
David M. Radka
Author: "Alternative Ripperology: Questioning the Whitechapel Murders"
Casebook Dissertations Section
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Stanley D. Reid
Chief Inspector
Username: Sreid

Post Number: 623
Registered: 4-2005
Posted on Thursday, November 24, 2005 - 9:09 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Hi David,

Thanks for answering my question. I shall put you down as a no on that. If we had proof, the case would almost certainly be solved.

Stan
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Stanley D. Reid
Chief Inspector
Username: Sreid

Post Number: 624
Registered: 4-2005
Posted on Friday, November 25, 2005 - 11:48 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

The evidence is the use of the word that instead of who indicates that he was referring to something other than a person or a people. What is the evidence that Juwes, which isn't even a word, means Jews?

Stan
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

c.d.
Detective Sergeant
Username: Cd

Post Number: 80
Registered: 9-2005
Posted on Friday, November 25, 2005 - 2:10 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Stan,

"I shall put you down as a no on that."

Great response, Sir. I got a laugh out of that one.

c.d.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Stanley D. Reid
Chief Inspector
Username: Sreid

Post Number: 625
Registered: 4-2005
Posted on Friday, November 25, 2005 - 2:28 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Hi c.d.,

Thanks. It's silly to get upset by these matters.

Stan

Topics | Last Day | Last Week | Tree View | Search | User List | Help/Instructions | Register now! Administration

Use of these message boards implies agreement and consent to our Terms of Use. The views expressed here in no way reflect the views of the owners and operators of Casebook: Jack the Ripper.
Our old message board content (45,000+ messages) is no longer available online, but a complete archive is available on the Casebook At Home Edition, for 19.99 (US) plus shipping. The "At Home" Edition works just like the real web site, but with absolutely no advertisements. You can browse it anywhere - in the car, on the plane, on your front porch - without ever needing to hook up to an internet connection. Click here to buy the Casebook At Home Edition.