|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Mr Poster
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 14, 2005 - 8:03 am: | 
|
Halse reported: "There were three lines of writing in a good schoolboys round hand. The size of the capital letters would be about 3/4 in, and the other letters were in proportion"
I tried (literally) this morning, while having my morning cigarette, to write a few lines with the capitals being 3/4 inch high on a smooth concrete wall with an average piece of school chalk and its not easy at all.
The letters quickly broaden out as the chalk wears down quickly and the lines were illegible very soon indeed unless I kept sharpening the chalk. And this was on a relatively smooth dry wall, not a dirty damp old fashioned brick, using nice modern chalk, without a hurry in th eworld and in broad daylight and I didnt have a kidney in my pocket.
After trying it, I am left a little dubious as to either the reported height of the letters or the legibility of the text. If you dont believe me, just go out and try writing letters of less than 1 inch high on brick in "well rounded" handwriting.
Mr P.
|
Helge Samuelsen
Inspector
Username: Helge
Post Number: 261
Registered: 4-2005
| | Posted on Thursday, September 15, 2005 - 5:56 am: |
|
Mr. P.
Have done it. Had no problems.
But then I have experience, I write a lot with chalk when teaching.
You need to twist the piece of chalk sort of to keep it sharp.
Had more trouble reading what I wrote, though. So I may imagine we should not necessarily think the police were THAT daft getting a couple of alternative spellings.
Helge
"Logic is the beginning of wisdom; not the end." -- Spock (Star Trek VI)
|
Maria Giordano
Inspector
Username: Mariag
Post Number: 465
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, September 17, 2005 - 2:03 pm: |
|
Maybe he didn't mean "three quarters of an inch" . Maybe he meant "three to four inches".
I just love a man who experiments in writing on walls!
Mags
|
Baron von Zipper
Detective Sergeant
Username: Baron
Post Number: 52
Registered: 9-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, September 17, 2005 - 5:22 pm: |
|
Helge and Lars,
One of you found it difficult to write on a wall in the fashion that the Grafitti artist did, and one of you found it easy. Helge did say it was probably because he was a teacher. That does tell us something about the grafitti person. In order to write neatly in that size of lettering, he/she had to either have had plenty of time to make a neat, legible message, or he/she was used to writing on blackboards, probably on a very regular basis. I sometimes have to write in chalk, and though I do it once a week or so, I find it difficult and sloppy if I'm trying to write quickly as I speak.
This has probably come up before, but it is good stuff. You guys have discussed something really important, in my estimation.
Cheers,
PS. I'm not suggesting MJ Druitt is a good candidate (ha, ha, ha)
Mike the Mauler
|
Gareth W
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 14, 2005 - 3:18 pm: |
|
Just a thought - without looking it up (sorry!) - could Halse simply have meant "three or four" inches high, rather than "three-quarters of an inch"? Four inch high capital letters would have much greater impact as graffiti than 0.75 inch capital letters.
If the latter, then the lower-case letters would presumably have been merely 1 cm high. Hardly eye-catching and positively timid, in fact - not to mention difficult to write (as has been helpfully pointed out above).
If you write a message on a wall, the intention is usually to make a loud, proud statement. Whoever heard of "introverted graffiti"?
|
Mr Poster
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Thursday, September 15, 2005 - 6:29 am: |
|
Godag Helge
Last night I tried again. My chalk was approximately 8mm in diameter, writing on smooth concrete again.
The capital letters were said to be 3/4 inch tall or about 1.9 cm high. If the lower case letters were assumed to be 3/4 the height of the upper case letter that makes them about 1.5 cm high and assuming they were approximately square, 1.5 cm wide.
The thinnest vertical stroke I could make with my chalk was 4 mm. In a letter such as "w" with three vertical strokes, that leave 0.1 mm space between each vertical stroke which just wasnt legible. The thinnest horizental stroke I could make under optimum conditions (using the edge of the chalk) was about 3 mm. in a letter such as "e" that left little more than 0.1 mm between vertical strokes.
I just could not read anything under optimum conditions. I doubt, as you seem to have experienced, that anyone can write in joined up handwriting with letters less than 1.5 cm using normal chalk and retain legibility.
So either the height of the letters was wrongly recorded or else we should just accept that aside from maybe the capital letters, the rest of the graffiti should be just discarded as evidence as its less reliable than seeing FM on MJKs wall.
vennligst hilsen
Mr P |
Mr Poster
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Sunday, September 18, 2005 - 4:22 am: |
|
Howdy again
If the graffiti came from JTR's hand or at least th eone that did for Eddowes, did he get the chalk from her or was it his own?
Somehow I dont see her carrying chalk (why would she) and all here other possessions seemed of use to someone such as herself.
If it was JTR's chalk, what sort of man carries chalk around? Is it involved in a trade or something?
Mr P. |
Caroline Anne Morris
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Caz
Post Number: 2135
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, September 23, 2005 - 8:44 am: |
|
What sort of man carries chalk around, Mr P?
Why, the sort of man who wants to write a message on a wall with chalk, I'd have thought.
Someone did it, it's just a case of working out who could have been there, and who could have had his own reasons for writing something about Jews and blame, within a short time of Leather Apron being cleared. 
Love,
Caz
X |
Monty
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Monty
Post Number: 1892
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Friday, September 23, 2005 - 8:51 am: |
|
Mr P,
Someone did it, it's just a case of working out who could have been there, and who could have had his own reasons for writing something about Jews and blame, within a short time of Leather Apron being cleared.
...coupled with his own reasons for not mentioning murder, the apron itself, Mitre Square, Berner Street, victims wounds or Jews even.
Cheers,
Monty
My prediction? 3-0 to us. 5-0 if the weather holds out. - Glenn McGrath
|
Helge Samuelsen
Inspector
Username: Helge
Post Number: 326
Registered: 4-2005
| | Posted on Friday, September 23, 2005 - 10:34 am: |
|
Mr. Poster, well, I did write that easily. What can I say?
Although I did mention legibility was somewhat poor, although decent enough. And I actually used a chalk closer to one centimetre thick. You do need to write with the edge at all times, you know. That is the trick, if there is one.
My problem have always been why someone would write this small when writing grafitto at all. My answer (and, yes, I'm speculating) is that someone "playing games" would perhaps do just that. "Would they even get the clue?", Jack might have thought. "Surely they would, but it would make for endless speculation..."
And it did. Clever Jack.
Another thing, much has been said about why Jack would carry chalk. No one seem to ask why the "random" grafiteur (I know, I just invented that word..) carried chalk. If it was common to write grafitti with chalk back then (and it apparently was), anyone sometimes writing grafitti would carry chalk. Just like certain kids nowadays carry spraycans. Although Chalk is actually easier to carry.
No one says that "mr random" must have been a teacher or whatever, and neither do Jackie Boy need any special profession to carry chalk.
Anyway, suffice to say that people back then might have been more trained or used to using chalk than most modern folks. Anyway, it might indicate that the writer, whoever it might have been, had indeed some basic education.
Helge
(Message edited by helge on September 23, 2005)
"If Spock were here, he'd say that I was an irrational, illlogical human being for going on a mission like this... Sounds like fun!" -- (Kirk - Generations)
|
Helge Samuelsen
Inspector
Username: Helge
Post Number: 327
Registered: 4-2005
| | Posted on Friday, September 23, 2005 - 10:48 am: |
|
Monty,
NOT mentioning Jews..
Uh...he had some basic education with emphasis on basic...?
Helge
"If Spock were here, he'd say that I was an irrational, illlogical human being for going on a mission like this... Sounds like fun!" -- (Kirk - Generations)
|
Monty
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Monty
Post Number: 1893
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Friday, September 23, 2005 - 10:53 am: |
|
Helge,
Ah, that'll explain it.
Especially the silent 'e'.
Monty
(Message edited by monty on September 23, 2005)
My prediction? 3-0 to us. 5-0 if the weather holds out. - Glenn McGrath
|
Helge Samuelsen
Inspector
Username: Helge
Post Number: 328
Registered: 4-2005
| | Posted on Friday, September 23, 2005 - 10:54 am: |
|
Oh, one more thing...
Just checked, my writing still survives, although pretty weathered! (The neighbours must think I'm a crackpot or something..and they are probably right..although I see it's possible certain ladies like it, hahah).
For the record, my lines are approximately two millimetres thick.
Helge
"If Spock were here, he'd say that I was an irrational, illlogical human being for going on a mission like this... Sounds like fun!" -- (Kirk - Generations)
|
Helge Samuelsen
Inspector
Username: Helge
Post Number: 329
Registered: 4-2005
| | Posted on Friday, September 23, 2005 - 11:00 am: |
|
Oh, and it just occurred to me that seeing me actually MEASURING my little grafitto, might have clinched the case re my neighbours...
(can I get a kiss now Mags?)
Helge
(Message edited by helge on September 23, 2005)
"If Spock were here, he'd say that I was an irrational, illlogical human being for going on a mission like this... Sounds like fun!" -- (Kirk - Generations)
|
Helge Samuelsen
Inspector
Username: Helge
Post Number: 330
Registered: 4-2005
| | Posted on Friday, September 23, 2005 - 11:25 am: |
|
Monty,
Well, even I might have considered spelling Juwes..eh, Jews that way. (no, I'm kidding)
Seriously, someone with only rudimentary understanding of writing will often use silent letters where they "think" they should be.
I work with that sort of thing, so I should know.
You see, "breaking the reading/writing code" (as we call it) is not that easy. A total novice might never use silent letters, but someone more advanced might easily use silent letters in error.
That's the way it is!
Think about it. First we tell kids that each letter has a sound (in modern education), then we tell them that..oh wait, it's not that simple, some letters can have several sounds depending on context. Then we say, actually, sometimes they have no sound at all.
Our guy may never have got to the point where he got it all. Not at all uncommon in 1888 I would think.
Besides, if Jack did not write it, then someone else did. Making that same mistake. Is there any special reason why Jack should not have been able to make the mistake?
In other words, Monty, do you know something I don't?
Helge
(Message edited by helge on September 23, 2005)
"If Spock were here, he'd say that I was an irrational, illlogical human being for going on a mission like this... Sounds like fun!" -- (Kirk - Generations)
|
Glenn G. Lauritz Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 4030
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Friday, September 23, 2005 - 11:48 am: |
|
Regardless of the very intriguing discussions above, my question marks regarding the whole Goulston Street message remains.
First we have the rather small scribbling, which probably was only noticed because the apron was found and the PC thereafter lighted a pots of the place up with his bull's eye lantern. There is no way he could have felt sure of that the message would be noticed, or even the apron!
So, why would a killer who've just committed a spectacular murder, leaving a crime scene with the police pretty soon on his tail, suddenly stop and write - in a neat school-boy's hand, mind you - an obscure message on the wall to a dark passage, and in very little writing?
I'll accept that the apron underneath is a weird coincidence, but personally I don't buy this for a minute and I do not think the Ripper had anything to do with that writing, especially since it appears more or less obvious, that he wasn't the kind of person who needed, or wanted, to communicate or make a statement anyway in a similar fashion.
As for the size of graffiti... from what I've seen, much pointless and random graffitti made of pencil and chalk is actually rather small, like the ones you find in public toilets etc.
All the best
G. Andersson, writer/historian
|
Mr Poster
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Friday, September 23, 2005 - 10:24 am: |
|
Hi ho
To some extent I also am dubious that JTR wrote the graffiti.....
but if it was him, was it common for chaps to go around with lumps of chalk (assuming he hadnt left his house and said to himself "musnt forget the chalk, I think I'll do some graffiti tonight").
Just wondering.......
Mr P |
Helge Samuelsen
Inspector
Username: Helge
Post Number: 332
Registered: 4-2005
| | Posted on Friday, September 23, 2005 - 12:19 pm: |
|
Glenn,
Your points are valid, and, unless something really interesting turns up to shed more light on this, there will probably always be two schools regarding the GSG.
My two cents:
You are right that Jack could not be certain the graffito would be seen. It would have to be a chance he had to take. But the piece of apron was pretty much certain to be found, and most likely be connected with the crime. If for no other reason than that it was bloody, and everyone would hear about the murder sooner or later and put two and two together.
If and when the apron was found, he could also count on the police actually doing a search in the staircase, etc. Odds were that they would also see the graffito at that time. Maybe Jack did not expect that to happen until daytime, when many people had seen it, and word would spread.
According to the police, this scenario might have had grave ramifications indeed... As spectacular, if you will, as the murder itself.
Your point about small grafitti is taken. But if Jack was concious about making grafitti, that says nothing more than that he actually wrote a small grafitto, something that is not that uncommon, as you yourself admit!
Helge
"If Spock were here, he'd say that I was an irrational, illlogical human being for going on a mission like this... Sounds like fun!" -- (Kirk - Generations)
|
Helge Samuelsen
Inspector
Username: Helge
Post Number: 333
Registered: 4-2005
| | Posted on Friday, September 23, 2005 - 12:21 pm: |
|
Lars,
If it was not Jack, what made "the other guy" bring chalk?
Helge
"If Spock were here, he'd say that I was an irrational, illlogical human being for going on a mission like this... Sounds like fun!" -- (Kirk - Generations)
|
Glenn G. Lauritz Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 4031
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Friday, September 23, 2005 - 1:33 pm: |
|
Helge,
Your points are taken, although I may not share your belief in that the apron would be found with such certainty (at night, that is). At night it is not certain that a piece of cloth would have been noticed or examined more closely - that would be up to the PC, I would imagine, and it would probably take a lantern directed towards it in order to be able to spot what it really was or the blood smears on it.
Furthermore, even if the apron was found, there would be no guarentee that the message would be seen.
However, your point that he might have relied on daylight revealing the messsage and possibly the apron, is a very good one and is worth considering.
That being said, killers who wants to display messages in connection with a murder, really takes no chances. They wants to be certain of that the message 'gets through'. It is an important part of the 'game'. for them.
Most killers who feel the need to deliver some sort of message in connection with the murder (if they don't write letters), do so on the actual crime scene, in direct connection with the body. He could of course have been interrupted in Mitre Square and close to capture, and therefore felt he had to come up with some kind of plan B in a hurry along the way, but still... writing in a small school-boy's hand on a wall is not a very efficient or quick considering his situation.
I must say I find it a bit doubtful that he would have taken the time to write an obscure message in a small writing and a neat school boy's hand, after leaving a crime scene, knowing the victim would be discovered by patroling PCs a few minutes after the murder. It just doesn't ring true to me and it never will, although we can never say with certainty what he would or would not do.
But interesting points, Helge, and food for thoughts.
Thanks for wishing me well on another thread, Helge; still feel like crap, though. I'm on my fourth week now. Better get back to my onion soup...
All the best
(Message edited by Glenna on September 23, 2005)
G. Andersson, writer/historian
|
Helge Samuelsen
Inspector
Username: Helge
Post Number: 334
Registered: 4-2005
| | Posted on Friday, September 23, 2005 - 2:20 pm: |
|
Glenn,
Well, I do manage to see it your way, and it's in no way an impossible scenario.
However, I remember reading somewhere that the PC's at the time were specially instructed to search staircases and entrances (Think it was in "the Facts"), if Jack, simply by observing a PC doing his round, found that he often looked into this place in Goulston street, things also look a bit different.
One of the reasons I think Jack did the graffito where it was, if you remember, is that I think he conciously wanted to blame the Jews. Now, killing Eddowes on the stair of a Jewish tenement building might have been better for this purpose, but needless to say, extremely more difficult to pull off! Plan "B" might have been plan "A" all along.
Well, actually, if he wanted to give the impression that the killer lived in that building, the effect could only be achieved by using the apron to create a "trail". If the police actually had stumbled into this potential ruse, I think he would have achieved his goal, chaos and uprisings.
(This goal is one of the reasons I think he may have been politically interested, the "Jack as Radical Socialist Scenario". But I admit, this deduction rests on thin ice indeed!)
My reasoning kind of hinges on the anti-Semitic touch (or at least a desire to cast blame in that direction), and without it, I actually must say my scenario stands very much weaker.
But I'm not willing to let anti-Semitic Jack off the hook yet!
Rats! Get back to that onion soup, pronto.
Helge
"If Spock were here, he'd say that I was an irrational, illlogical human being for going on a mission like this... Sounds like fun!" -- (Kirk - Generations)
|
Phil Hill
Chief Inspector
Username: Phil
Post Number: 917
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Friday, September 23, 2005 - 4:32 pm: |
|
Was not this the period when "Slates" (pieces of grey stone usually mounted in a wooden frame) were in use in schools rather than paper? And slates need chalk.
Shopkeepers, I seem to recall used to write up advertisements on blackboards with chalk.
Tailors use chalk, as do school-teachers.
Some stones can also be used to make whitish lines on stone - I recall doing it to mark out a hopscotch grid. Street games often marked out their areas on the pavements (sidewalks for US readers).
So, IMHO, any number of people might have carried chalk or had access to it, from children to tradesmen. A good hand might indicate an educated man. The mis-spellings suggest the opposite (given that they have no obvious alternative meaning) and thus might indicate a child (9 plus?) as the writer of the graffito.
Phil
|
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 2559
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, September 23, 2005 - 4:58 pm: |
|
I just think that the brothers 'Albu' might have played a role in any Jewish-related writings on walls at this time period. |
Helge Samuelsen
Inspector
Username: Helge
Post Number: 345
Registered: 4-2005
| | Posted on Friday, September 23, 2005 - 5:11 pm: |
|
Phil,
Good points,
And today your child theory might be spot on. But 1888? My guess is that lots of people wrote on a 9+ level back then, if at all.
AP,
Yes, but would the Albu bros. have made such an inconspicuous graffito?
Helge
"If Spock were here, he'd say that I was an irrational, illlogical human being for going on a mission like this... Sounds like fun!" -- (Kirk - Generations)
|
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 2560
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, September 23, 2005 - 5:33 pm: |
|
No, Helge. but the folk who had it in for them may well have done so.
That would have been half of London. |
Helge Samuelsen
Inspector
Username: Helge
Post Number: 347
Registered: 4-2005
| | Posted on Friday, September 23, 2005 - 5:38 pm: |
|
AP,
I withdraw my question
Helge
"If Spock were here, he'd say that I was an irrational, illlogical human being for going on a mission like this... Sounds like fun!" -- (Kirk - Generations)
|
Howard Brown
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Howard
Post Number: 1019
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Friday, September 23, 2005 - 10:49 pm: |
|
Mr.Poster:
"I tried to write a few lines with the capitals being 3/4 inch high on a smooth concrete wall with an average piece of school chalk and its not easy at all."
Remember,you were trying to achieve those parameters...there's a bit of difference when you are "winging" it and trying to be technical...
Mags....Bricks usually have a two- two and 1/4 inch exposed width....so Halse couldn't have meant three inches unless....the writing of the GSG words spread over more than one brick and were not entirely within one brick....if you see what I mean.
Mr. Poster:
"The letters quickly broaden out as the chalk wears down quickly and the lines were illegible very soon indeed unless I kept sharpening the chalk. And this was on a relatively smooth dry wall, not a dirty damp old fashioned brick, using nice modern chalk..."
Which is why when I did my experiments back in December, I suggested others try this out. While not disputing you in any way at all,allow me to direct you to an article which Mr. Begg and Co. put in a past Ripperologist [I will placate the URL in a minute...].
Two quickies....One,is that we are uncertain that the bricks were damp. The GSG was just as likely inside the Wentworth and not on the outside as some believe.
It had rained that night,in case you were not aware,and the rain was heavy.
Two...read as to the time it took me to write the GSG,in the article. It implies intent on the part of the author of the GSG to be understood.
Ever see graffiti in men's rooms? The ones that are legible have a purpose to them that the illegible or hastily written ones don't. The former "messages" are intended with a little more "oomph" as we say.
Here is the URL
http://casebook.org/dissertations/rip-offthewall.html
(Message edited by howard on September 23, 2005)
How Brown
Prop.
WWW.JTRForums.com
|
Phil Hill
Chief Inspector
Username: Phil
Post Number: 919
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, September 24, 2005 - 1:40 am: |
|
Helge - talk about picking on one minor point and seeking to deconstruct a whole post!!
My suggestion of a child as the writer of the graffito was only ONE of a number of alternatives. But take away any connection with the apron and why should NOT a child have written it?
The words, and their lack of actual or clear meaning might easily be the result of a child aping the anti-semitism of their elders and the mood of the Leather Apron scare of a few weeks earlier, without understanding the implications of the words or the point of them.
Look at the way that children will copy obscenities (written and oral) without having a clue about what they are saying - perhaps they are more street-wise now, but could equally have been then witrh the lack of privacy.
Phil |
Helge Samuelsen
Inspector
Username: Helge
Post Number: 348
Registered: 4-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, September 24, 2005 - 2:37 am: |
|
Phil,
What I said was a valid point, IMO. If you don't find it valid, it is up to you. Maybe you can explain why, if don't find it valid? Maybe you have evidence that public schooling in 1880's was as good as (and as available as) modern schooling?
"A schoolboy hand". Something misspelled. And suddenly it is beyond all doubt that the author was a child? Come on. It's possible, but it's not exactly proven in a society with quite a bit of illiteracy? Actually I know people who write like that TODAY and they are over forty!
(Well, actually I know that you did not mean it was beyond all doubt. But why then this strong reaction?)
The police at the time clearly though it was possible that Jack wrote the message. Even if it was written in a "round schoolboy hand", and even if was a bit cryptic and Jews was misspelled. (well, actually, was it?) All I'm saying is that I actually agree with the police. It is quite possible the graffito was written by an adult.
I don't think it can be said in any way that this is a minor point, because if a child really did it (and I'm not saying it is an impossibility!), then clearly Jack did not write it! Since this is a rather major point IMO, I cannot follow your reasoning there.
I know it was only one out of many options, all I ask is can I please state my opinion on that point If I wish?
It's not deconstructing "an entire post" to comment it. Come on!!!!
Besides, I actually started my post by saying "Good points". Do you think it was irony? Do you think I am being dishonest? Just because we have disagreed before does not mean I hold a grudge. Maybe you do, and maybe you are entitled to.
And now we are arguing again instead of discussing, so I'll stop right here.
And all this probably sounded a bit harsh, but it is said without any form of malice or anger.
Helge
(Message edited by helge on September 24, 2005)
"If Spock were here, he'd say that I was an irrational, illlogical human being for going on a mission like this... Sounds like fun!" -- (Kirk - Generations)
|
Helge Samuelsen
Inspector
Username: Helge
Post Number: 350
Registered: 4-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, September 24, 2005 - 4:41 am: |
|
"If don't find it valid?"
(re my previous post)
What was that? Actually it was not intended. I just noticed, and it was too late to edit. I know better than to write "If don't find it valid?"!
And I was not even in a hurry. Actually I even edited the post after submitting it. People make mistakes all the time. Jews, Juwes, double negatives, we can't even know if it was intended that way, so analyzing it is kind of hard!
Helge
"If Spock were here, he'd say that I was an irrational, illlogical human being for going on a mission like this... Sounds like fun!" -- (Kirk - Generations)
|
Helge Samuelsen
Inspector
Username: Helge
Post Number: 351
Registered: 4-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, September 24, 2005 - 5:09 am: |
|
Phil,
I feel like I need to explain why I said your post had "good points".
As you say, people used chalk to a much greater extent back then than now. You give some good examples. I totally agree. Well made points.
It would not be so rare to find people having chalk in their pockets back then as it is now. On that we entirely agree.
I have tried to make this point before, but you did it much better.
I do see that you mentioned the possibility of a child having written the graffito as an option, not a stated fact.
But you did say "...thus might indicate a child (9 plus?) as the writer of the graffito." My intentions were only to emphasize the fact that it is not that simple. It does not indicate this, it only very vaguely opens up this possibility, as I see it. (You might not want to use the word vaguely, I know)
And, perhaps it is clear that we disagree less than it initially would seem?
If that was what you meant by a "minor point", then actually I agree! It is indeed a minor point in the overall picture, and this is why I did not see why you should mind me disagreeing to the extent of using multiple exclamation marks
And this is why you felt it was not worth me commenting in the first place, perhaps?
Could it be that we both have a bit of a temper? And that we are both a bit fast on the trigger sometimes?
Maybe. I admit I am. Peace?
Helge
"If Spock were here, he'd say that I was an irrational, illlogical human being for going on a mission like this... Sounds like fun!" -- (Kirk - Generations)
|
Phil Hill
Chief Inspector
Username: Phil
Post Number: 922
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, September 24, 2005 - 6:48 am: |
|
WOW, Helge - was it something I said??
I did use the word "might indicate" - I don't think a child graffiti-artist has been discussed much, if at all before. And children often carry chalk - at least they did in the 50s and 60s when I was one!!
I quite understood the point you were seeking to make - my respionse was to ensure the main thrust of my post was not overlooked as a result. Your caution is accepted and I agree with it.
Peace,
Phil |
Helge Samuelsen
Inspector
Username: Helge
Post Number: 355
Registered: 4-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, September 24, 2005 - 8:59 am: |
|
Cool, Phil
I remember it was discussed a while back that the height of the graffito might indicate a child. That is one thing to consider, I guess.
The actual height of it is disputed anyway, but still...
However, I also remember that I tried to write at the approximate height that was discussed back then (think it was about 1 1/2 meters, although everyone else was being so unmetrical..hahah). Anyway, it was really easy to do (for my height, and I'm not really that tall) when I was kneeling. It flowed perfectly natural.
Anyway. I see no way to verify this any way, the only possible solution would be to connect the apron to the graffiti circumstantially. I still think location and time happen to be pretty strong indications, but in no way would that constitute proof.
The reactions of the police are also a strong indication, IMO. That is, if the graffito had been unreasonably far from the apron (whatever that might be, we are talking about subjective perception here), then the police would have been less likely to jump to the conclusions about any connection. They might still have wanted the graffito erased, though, to supress anti-Semitism.
But it is clear they believed a connection MIGHT exist. Thus the context, as subjectively perceived at the time, have been established. Such a correlation can only be the result of a statistical fluke, and that also makes me tend to think there would be a connection.
Statistical flukes do happen, though, and on the basis of ONE incident, we really cannot say that it is an impossible coincidence.
I have tried to establish that Jack most probably had a REASON for carrying the apron this far, but so far this is only a working hypothesis. I think the hand-wiping is off, the carrying suspect. Thus it might seem reasonable that he wanted to blame the Jews. (IMO) If that is true, it becomes statistically even less likely that the apron and an anti-Semitic graffiti should end up literally at the same spot.
Nothing can be proved, but this is my take on it.
I agree that all things considered, a child might have written that graffito. My position is that, on balance, that is unlikely. But I agree, it cannot be ruled out.
Helge
"If Spock were here, he'd say that I was an irrational, illlogical human being for going on a mission like this... Sounds like fun!" -- (Kirk - Generations)
|
Baron von Zipper
Detective Sergeant
Username: Baron
Post Number: 82
Registered: 9-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, September 24, 2005 - 10:04 am: |
|
Hi,
I don't know why I'm revisiting this, but...
As a kid... well up to my early 20's anyway, I used to draw a lot on paper. I could draw most anything, and with good detail. By using the paper I did (8 1/2 x 11), I was restricted to drawing on a small scale. I drew that way for so many years that when I was in college, and was trying my hand at pencils, I had a difficult, no extremely difficult time trying to draw on the bigger paper. I had to make everything bigger and it became distorted and disproportionate. I never fully got over that. What's my point? Someone who is used to writing in a specific size, or in this case 3/4 inches, on a regular basis, may find it difficult to write larger without distortion. It appears that this person had an important message to impart, and didn't want it to be confused by the possibly poor chalksmanship (new word) he/she may have done if working on a larger scale.
After all that, I guess I'm saying the person almost always wrote in small letters on slate or on cloth or something, or perhaps even on some sort of tally board. If this line of thinking is reasonable, I don't know if it can mean anything more than that. Maybe an artist in this gathering of oddities (casebook) can bear me out on this one.
Cheers
Mike the Mauler
|
Phil Hill
Chief Inspector
Username: Phil
Post Number: 923
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, September 24, 2005 - 12:12 pm: |
|
Helge - why on earth have you ruled out the hand-wiping as a reason for removing and carrying the cloth? It works for me. And seems the most straightforward explanation.
Phil |
Helge Samuelsen
Inspector
Username: Helge
Post Number: 356
Registered: 4-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, September 24, 2005 - 2:48 pm: |
|
Mike,
I guess you could be right, but have you considered that whoever wrote the small writing actually considered the size of the bricks as a limiting factor?
Phil,
Wiping hands and knife is pretty straighforward, I agree. No, I know what you meant... Actually in my experience (dont ask..well, ok, I cut myself badly once) no matter how hard you rub, you will never wipe all traces of blood off with any type of cloth. And it takes no more than, say, half a minute (and even that is stretching it IMO) to rub the wet blood from your hands. A knife takes about ten seconds to wipe. And once that was done, there would be no need for the apron. Most likely, it would then have been discarded pronto. In the middle of the street, wherever Jack happened to be, no need to find a staircase at all.
Wiping his hands while walking/running, Jack would have been at his most vulnerable. Anyone doing anything suspicious would most likely have been stopped if seen by a PC, and at any rate I think Jack did not wish to stand out regardless.
So the apron might have served a purpose, and actually, it did. There were reported spots on it consistent with him wiping hands\knife. But, again, how much time would Jack need doing that?
Granted, the distance between Mitre square and Goulston street is not huge, but I simply see no reason why any wiping should be continued all this time. Jack would stand out as a sore thumb while doing it!
It makes little sense in my opinion, simply because Jack would be more cautious than that.
So, the only reason why Jack still held on to the apron after the wiping, would be if he had plans for it.
Let me quote Jon Smyth in one of his dissertations:
"If Jack left Mitre Square by St James Place, he would be crossing the square about 100 ft, to the northern passage exit, then up the passage, 55 ft, (still wiping his hands) then diagonally across St James Place, passing the all night manned mobile Fire station and the nightwatchman at the roadworks, about 120 ft, then eastward along little Duke Street passing several houses, (still wiping his hands) crossing Hounsditch then along Stoney lane passing about 40+ houses (still wiping his hands) to Middlesex street, about another 850 ft, still carrying the rag presumably not finished wiping his hands. Turning right running down Middlesex street for about 100 ft passing another 6 houses, then left, eastward again along New Goulston street until the end, another 250 ft. At this point he crosses the road and presumably discards the rag in the doorway of 108-119 Goulston street."
It does not ring true to me.
If that was the only purpose of the piece of apron, there is also the question why it ended up where it did, beneath the graffito. The graffito was described as being "In plain view" from the street. Thus the apron would probably also have been spotted, at least come daybreak, from the street. In other words, it was not actually hidden away.
If Jack wanted to hide it, he could have done better.
And we need to look at context! It is everything! The Wentworth buildings were not only inhabited by Jews, outside there were also vendors during daytime. Jewish vendors, mind you. And their customers were for the most part Gentile. From the surviving postcards and photographs from the period it is possible to see just how crowded the streets were.
So both the apron, and the graffiti would have been in plain sight to anyone during the day!
So what?, one might ask. It was night.
Well, how long would the graffito survive in those conditions at daytime? As a matter of fact, would anyone actually have the nerve to write it at daytime? With the Jewish population out on the streets? Probably not.
So the GSG was most likely written in the previous evening, or during the night in question. This further reduces the statistical probability of it being unrelated to the apron.
So you see, wiping hands is IMO just part of Jack's intentions. He took an extra risk carrying it this far, writing the GSG would take less than half a minute extra, and he could even hide in the shadows of the stairwell if he heard anyone approaching.
The extra risk in writing the graffito, once he actually was in Goulston Street, was minimal. Besides, I think it is proven that Jack was not one to shy away from risks anyway.
He was IMO clever, but also lucky. And I think he felt like he was invincible, but that is another story.
Helge
(Message edited by helge on September 24, 2005)
"If Spock were here, he'd say that I was an irrational, illlogical human being for going on a mission like this... Sounds like fun!" -- (Kirk - Generations)
|
Glenn G. Lauritz Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 4033
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, September 24, 2005 - 3:30 pm: |
|
Helge,
There is no need to assume that the Ripper wiped his hands or knife for all that time (which, by the way, isn't that long).
This comes up on occasion and I can't understand why people seem to believe that.
The most logical conclusion is that he tore of the piece of apron and fled (he either was interrupted at Mitre Square or felt he couldn't risk remain there any longer since they had changed the police beats) and then stopped and wiped off his hands or the knife when he felt he had enough distance laid behind him. This happened to be in Goulston Street. He probably then continued away from there as soon as he could.
The apron, in my view, was left in Goulston Street, simply because that's where he decided to pause and take the time to wipe of most of the stuff from his knife, nothing else.
It is unreasonable to think, that he would remain there and write a very small message on the wall after having just left a crime scene and knowing that the police soon would discover the body and search for him.
As for the message, I believe it was already there (regardless if the Ripper really spotted it or not), and the PC just didn't see it (or bothered to check) the first time.
All the best
G. Andersson, writer/historian
|
Baron von Zipper
Detective Sergeant
Username: Baron
Post Number: 84
Registered: 9-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, September 24, 2005 - 4:08 pm: |
|
Helge,
That's possible, but if you were more comfortable writing a big message, I think you would do it. As long as there was more surface to write on, I think you would extend into it unless you were very comfortable writing in confined spaces.
Cheers
Mike the Mauler
|
Frank van Oploo
Chief Inspector
Username: Franko
Post Number: 758
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, September 24, 2005 - 4:55 pm: |
|
Hi Caz,
"Someone did it, it's just a case of working out who could have been there, and who could have had his own reasons for writing something about Jews and blame, within a short time of Leather Apron being cleared."
Although it wasn't your point this time, I do have a question for you.
If Jack the Graffitist was so set on redirecting the blame on the Jews, if that was so much on his mind, why did he write "will not be" instead of "were not" or even "are not"?
All the best,
Frank
"There's gotta be a lot of reasons why I shouldn't shoot you, but right now I can't think of one."
- Clint Eastwood, in 'The Rookie' (1990)
|
Frank van Oploo
Chief Inspector
Username: Franko
Post Number: 759
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, September 24, 2005 - 5:14 pm: |
|
Hi Mike,
Although your suggestion makes sense, maybe there is a general relation between the measurements of the writing and the measurements of the space/room in which a message is written.
Cheers,
Frank
"There's gotta be a lot of reasons why I shouldn't shoot you, but right now I can't think of one."
- Clint Eastwood, in 'The Rookie' (1990)
|
Baron von Zipper
Detective Sergeant
Username: Baron
Post Number: 88
Registered: 9-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, September 24, 2005 - 5:48 pm: |
|
Frank,
That's possible. If the space was small the writing would have to be that way too. Unfortunately, I have no idea what the wall is like. I think that's what I was trying to say above. If there was more surface area and the guy/gal was comfortable writing in large script, I think he/she would use it. If there was a lot of room, but the person chose to write in small letters, it would make sense that it was because that was what they were used to.
Cheers... back at you
Mike the Mauler
|
Ben Holme
Sergeant
Username: Benh
Post Number: 22
Registered: 8-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, September 24, 2005 - 8:49 pm: |
|
Phil wrote:
Helge - why on earth have you ruled out the hand-wiping as a reason for removing and carrying the cloth?
Because JTR could have performed such a brief expedient at the scene of the crime. If it is factually accpted that viscera was removed from the body of Kate Eddows, is not reasonable to fathom that he used the apron to conceal the organs? |
Glenn G. Lauritz Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 4035
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, September 24, 2005 - 9:00 pm: |
|
Ben,
Again - it was actually stated at the time that the traces of blood and faceal matter appeared to be 'smeared' and like someone had 'wiped' something off. It is all there in black and white.
Besides, there is a possibility that JTR never had time to wipe off the stuff on the crime scene. The time schedule was tight and they had changed the police beats. Maybe he even was disturbed by sounds from a PC approaching, for all we know.
All the best
G. Andersson, writer/historian
|
David O'Flaherty
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Oberlin
Post Number: 1036
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, September 24, 2005 - 9:51 pm: |
|
Hi all,
Respectfully, it's no enigma. The missing organs, the womb and kidney portions, don't leak apparent fecal matter. If the apron was used to carry organs, that wouldn't account for its presence on the apron; the matter came from the intestines, of course, which were left at the scene. Apparent fecal matter at the crime scene, apparent fecal matter on the apron. How'd it get there? He got the stuff on his hands, that's how. The matter on the intestines was smeared--obviously by hands. He heard Morris or Watkins and simply felt he had no time to wipe the stuff off. He needn't have been continuously wiping during the entire walk to Goulston street.
Dave |
Phil Hill
Chief Inspector
Username: Phil
Post Number: 924
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, September 25, 2005 - 2:12 am: |
|
I agree entirely, David.
Indeed, if he were distancing himself from the scene by a mixture of hiding in shadows, running for periods and walking, it might be that when he found the stairwell, he simply ducked in to finish the job of cleaning up and dropped the rag where he stood.
But we simply don't know the route, or the manner of Jack's departure from Mitre Square - only that, at some point, he was in Goulston St. That said, to me it is clear that he used the time to wipe his hands on the rag - that is logical, consistent with the evidence and contemporary views (smearing) and accords with the situation on the ground as well set out by David.
Phil |
Helge Samuelsen
Inspector
Username: Helge
Post Number: 358
Registered: 4-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, September 25, 2005 - 4:53 am: |
|
Glenn,
I can't argue against the killer being scared off, behaving irrationally, or even doing the almost unimaginable. (And I did not say your proposition necessarily imply all this)
I just try to look at the most likely scenario. (And I know we all do) The point is that the mutilations in the case of Eddowes was such that there were fecal matter everywhere. Jack must either have worn gloves, or his hands would have been covered in it. So it makes perfect sense to wipe his hands.
Actually, most people would do that, and the available evidence seem to indicate that he did just that.
So far so good. Now he has a piece of cloth full of blood an faeces. The obvious thing to do is to toss it away.
You (and others) seem to think it was natural to do that in Goulston Street.
That is possible. There is no way we can know for sure. And I agree, on the surface it is a "simple scenario". It accounts for the facts known, no trouble at all.
Except there is that darned coincidence with the graffito. And human instincts.
If your hands are smeared with blood, and especially faeces, I would think the instinct would be, not to walk several blocks carrying a piece of rag that you INTEND to wipe yourself with, but actually start the cleaning process on the fly.
And I beg to differ about the distance. IF you do as you propose, wait to clean yourself..then it's pretty far walking with hands smeared with blood an faeces in the middle of the Ripper Scare period. IF you clean yourself on the move, then it is unreasonable to think you'd spend that much time doing that.
We will never know the thruth, I guess, but my point is that we cannot dismiss the POSSIBILITY that Jack had other things in mind (the GSG) based on distance or wiping of hands.
The reason we see it differently, is probably that I interpret the GSG to be Jack's, while you do not. But even WITHOUTH the GSG we still have the possibility of the "blaming game" being played by Jack.
Not so much because of the Wenthworth buildings, perhaps, but because the street was a place for Jewish vendors. It would be known as such. It was not just one randomly picked Jewish residence! (I agree there were other alternatives, but that is not the point)
Also, "the very small writing". Yes, it was small. But it was, as I interpret things (and I know it can be contended), on the jamb of the doorway, visible from the street.
There would have been limited space, not just because of the bricks (that would limit letter height), but also because of the limited area available!
Now, why not write big on the outside wall? It rained... It was not possible.
Why not write inside the stairwell? It would be too inconspicuous. And too dark.
That small writing was bound to be seen by daylight, as would the apron. One murdered woman outside a Jewish club (Stride), one spoor from another crime scene leading to a definitely Jewish area, and finally, one anti-Jewish graffito.
It is possible I am suffering from some kind of "fact-pareidolia", seeing patterns that are not really there, but there you go, that is my take on it. I may be wrong, but the opposite school of thought may also be wrong, failing to see the patterns that are there.
Mikey,
I have said why I think there actually was a limited space to write on, but I will elaborate slightly. From looking at the maps, and trying to establish the available streetlamps, I have noticed something. Some entrances would have been lit pretty well, some entrances were pretty dark, and one entrance was semi-dark.
I have yet to prove this, I know, but here is my preliminary thoughts. The entrance Jack chose was just dark enough to offer protection, but the jamb was just lit enough to write on.
Another coincidence? Maybe. And maybe my preliminary results here are wrong, but so far they intrigue me.
Frank,
Welcome back by the way, been a while!
I just have to add something here. I think Jack was clever. Very clever in fact. That is, I think he was the kind of person who did not only act in a vacuum, he actually considered how his actions would manipulate others. Now this migh be called a psychopathic trait rather than cleverness, but lets not go there this time...
He would INDICATE, or PLANT, or SUGGEST...a notion into the minds of people. Not the police as such, necessarily, but the general population, that, I'm sorry to say, harboured quite strong anti-Semitic sentiments.
He did not intend to state "I killed a woman, and I am a Jew". That is far too obvious. It is like saying "this is a faked clue". He led the police to Jewish quarters, then wrote the graffito, and gambled that people would put two and two together and get at least five!
Ben, Glenn
I asked a veterinarian if a pig's uterus (well, I kind of did not want to get arrested on the spot) cut in half, would bleed as much as to bleed through a reasonably thick cloth. The answer was yes, of course.
I see carrying as off. However, that is based on how I interpret the details from the Inquest as written by The Times.
Do realize, this information came at a reasonably high personal prize...the veterinarian is a she, and now I KNOW she think I'm a total crackpot!!!
Hahah
Dave, Phil,
Totally agree that he did wipe. But not for all the distance, as explained before.
I agree that we don't know the actual route, but would suggest that in all probability Jack would want to get the blood and fecal matter off his hands as soon as possible.
He could, IMO, have gone through St James Place, through Duke Street (Possibly through Church's passage directly to Duke street), cross Houndsditch, up Gravel Lane, through Stoney Lane, cross Middlesex Street, New Goulston Street (Petticoat Lane), and cross over Goulston Street to the Wenthworth dwellings. From there he probably escaped through Wentworth Street or Bell Lane. (again IMO)
I think it most likely he stayed out of the High Streets.
At any rate, and this is a subjective opinion of course, I think it highly unlikely that Jack waited all this time to wipe his hands from highly incriminating blood and faeces. The walk was easily from ten to fifteen minutes!
And now I will suggest something that occurred to me a while back. The Times Inquest report states:
(Dr Gordon Brown)
"On the piece of apron brought on there were smears of blood on one side as if a hand or a knife had been wiped on it"
Now consider this, Brown says a hand OR knife. That is, he could not determine whether the smears were from a hand or knife. Yes, obviously...
But this is actually an extremely valuable observation!
How much blood/faeces would stick to a knife?
How much blood/faeces would stick to a (or probably two) hand(s)?
Get it? IF Jack wiped a hand, he did not actually have that much filth on him!
So either he cleaned the worst off with something else, or he wore gloves that he tucked away in his little shiny bag...
Or something like that.
Helge
(Message edited by helge on September 25, 2005)
"If Spock were here, he'd say that I was an irrational, illlogical human being for going on a mission like this... Sounds like fun!" -- (Kirk - Generations)
|
Glenn G. Lauritz Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 4036
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, September 25, 2005 - 5:14 am: |
|
Helge,
"Do realize, this information came at a reasonably high personal prize...the veterinarian is a she, and now I KNOW she think I'm a total crackpot!!! "
LOL
"You (and others) seem to think it was natural to do that in Goulston Street."
Nah, natural... we can't know why he chose to do it in Goulston Street and I assume that other streets would have worked as well, but for whatever reason, he DID chose Goulston Street. Maybe that is where he felt he had laid enough distance behind him, who knows? It felt natural for HIM at the time, but why only he knows.
"If your hands are smeared with blood, and especially faeces, I would think the instinct would be, not to walk several blocks carrying a piece of rag that you INTEND to wipe yourself with, but actually start the cleaning process on the fly."
No, not if you are being disturbed for example, or are scared off by an approaching sound (which I think from a logical point of view is the answer to the mystery of the apron cloth). The only thing that's in your head at that moment is to get away as far as possible and as quickly as possible. Period!
So I have to disagree with that. And at the end of the day, we don't know if he HAD any blood or facael matter on his hands at all to such an extent. I believe it was the knife that was wiped off, not his hands.
"And I beg to differ about the distance. IF you do as you propose, wait to clean yourself..then it's pretty far walking with hands smeared with blood an faeces in the middle of the Ripper Scare period. IF you clean yourself on the move, then it is unreasonable to think you'd spend that much time doing that."
Well, I think it was a couple of people here (Monty?) who actually made an experiment on the spot and the result was that it was NOT a very long distance as some would want us to believe. I am soon going in to London, so I will test this as well.
I can't say if Jack would have any interest in blaming the Jews, but most killers of this nature are not really interested or aware of such agendas - I don't believe in a cunning, intelligent-over-average Ripper with great plans and ideas popping up in his head along the way.
Still, Jack being anti-semitic can't be ruled out. But what if himself was Jewish?
"Also, "the very small writing". Yes, it was small. But it was, as I interpret things (and I know it can be contended), on the jamb of the doorway, visible from the street.
There would have been limited space, not just because of the bricks (that would limit letter height), but also because of the limited area available!"
True, but again, why waste time on a message of that character in his situation, after having left a crime scene and the police would soon be on his tail and search the area? Would it really be worth the effort and the risk to remain there and writing a message in a NEAT school-boy's hand? I would think not.
My main reason for dismissing the message, however, is that I don't think the Ripper was that grandiosity kind of person. As I've said before, if he was, then we could have expected other forms of communications from him before and after the Eddowes murder, and even if the Lusk letter would prove to be genuine in the future for some reason, then it is quite apparent that the writing style does not at all corroborate with the writing on the wall in Goulston Street. As far as we know to this date, there doesn't seem to exist any communications from him, so why would he leave that kind of scribbling in Goulston Street? From a psychological point of view, my opinion is, that he simply was not that kind of person and that such elements were not part of his 'games' or his thrill from doing the murders, since we have no other confirmed messages from his hand.
For murderers that indulge in leaving communications, this is a very important and big deal; a very crucial part of the agenda. We don't see this in the Ripper.
But yes, I agree, the apron beneath the message is a coincidence, but weird coincidences do happen, like I believe Stride's murder was a pure coincidence.
All the best
(Message edited by Glenna on September 25, 2005)
G. Andersson, writer/historian
|
Chris Phillips
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Cgp100
Post Number: 1444
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, September 25, 2005 - 5:45 am: |
|
Helge
The walk was easily from ten to fifteen minutes!
I really don't think it's anything like that long. I'd say it would definitely be under 5 minutes, walking briskly.
Chris Phillips
|
Helge Samuelsen
Inspector
Username: Helge
Post Number: 360
Registered: 4-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, September 25, 2005 - 5:56 am: |
|
Glenn,
Yes, but even if you do run away, it is fully possible to wipe your hands as you go along!
I don't think Jack, having had the wits to actually cut the apron for that very purpose, then "forgot" for 12 - 15 minutes.
And that was actually the time estimated at the inquest to traverse the distance from Mitre square to Goulston Street. They even mentioned two different routes, but that the difference was minimal. So they DID think about it then, and we need not dispute that.
That Jack was disturbed is conjecture only. We do not know that. We do know, however, that he took the time to cut the apron. I think it is reasonable to say that at that time he was not startled at all.
About the "neat" schoolboy hand. I think you read too much into this. It is a fact that people write pretty much similarly with chalk as their original handwriting (yes, I know this, I know a lot about chalk writing ) And if the Graffitist did write like this, well, that is how the graffito would look like. It does NOT imply that he spent any amount of time MAKING his handwriting "neat".
I write the GSG in less than fifteen seconds (yes, fifteen seconds, and I'm not rushing it!), there is no reason whatsoever that the graffitist should not do the same, Jack or no Jack.
And as you might have noticed, I don't think Jack COMMUNICATED at all. He played the "blaming game". The reason is obvious, to perpetuate the misconception in the media and among people that a "leather apron" type of person was the culprit.
About Stride...Ah, that is a different kettle of fish, I must confess. Presently, I give her only 50/50 chance of being a Ripper victim. But my gut feeling says she is, and I'm working on several hypothesises that may substantiate that.
But that will have to wait, my friend!
Helge
"If Spock were here, he'd say that I was an irrational, illlogical human being for going on a mission like this... Sounds like fun!" -- (Kirk - Generations)
|
Helge Samuelsen
Inspector
Username: Helge
Post Number: 361
Registered: 4-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, September 25, 2005 - 5:58 am: |
|
Chris,
I base my estimate on what was said at the inquest. I don't live in London, so I have no other way of dealing with that.
Helge
"If Spock were here, he'd say that I was an irrational, illlogical human being for going on a mission like this... Sounds like fun!" -- (Kirk - Generations)
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
