| Author |
Message |
    
Howard Brown
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Howard
Post Number: 1145
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Friday, November 18, 2005 - 7:25 pm: | 
|
Babydoll:
It was the Times [ page 4, October 12th ] that mentioned the GSG [ Long and Halse being the witnesses questioned ] at the resumption of the Inquest. The article was entitled....The East End Murders.
Thats a pretty long time [ almost a fortnight ] to keep something like that under wraps. Again,the police and press [ if in fact the latter were compliant to police requests and not so concerned with "scooping" the other newspapers ] appear to have been on the same page.
Thanks a lot,sweetheart,for looking that information up before. Hope you are okay ! |
Sir Robert Anderson
Chief Inspector
Username: Sirrobert
Post Number: 641
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, November 18, 2005 - 7:30 pm: |
|
" it does give the possibility that it was genuinely to stop trouble that they took the action they did "
Honestly, now -- is there an iota of evidence to suggest that Superintendent Arnold and/or Warren misrepresented the reasons they gave for erasing the graffiti ? Do a quick reread of Sugden pp.184-186 where he quotes from both gentlemen. Do you think they were not being truthful with respect to their motives ?
Sir Robert
'Tempus Omnia Revelat'
SirRobertAnderson@gmail.com
|
Jane Coram
Chief Inspector
Username: Jcoram
Post Number: 632
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Friday, November 18, 2005 - 8:13 pm: |
|
Hi Howie,
This is the first one I have found from the Pall mall Gazette of the 8th October, which I found quite interesting,
THE EAST-END MURDERS.
_____
A STRANGE STORY ABOUT JACK-THE-RIPPER.
The following extraordinary story has been sent to us by the Central News. We publish it with all reserve, and without at present attaching to it any special importance:--
The Central News Agency says:--"A startling fact has just come to light. After killing Katherine Eddowes in Mitre-square, the murderer, it is now known, walked to Goulston-street, where he threw away the piece of the deceased woman's apron upon which he had wiped his hands and knife. Within a few feet of this spot he had written upon the wall, "The Jews shall not be blamed for nothing." Most unfortunately one of the police officers gave orders for this writing to be immediately sponged out, probably with a view of stifling the morbid curiosity which it would certainly have aroused. But in so doing a very important link was destroyed, for had the writing been photographed a certain clue would have been in the hands of the authorities. The witnesses who saw the writing, however, state that it was similar in character to the letters sent to the Central News and signed 'Jack the Ripper,' and though it would have been far better to have clearly demonstrated this by photography, there is now every reason to believe that the writer of the letter and postcard sent to the Central News (facsimiles of which are now to be seen outside every police-station) is the actual murderer. The police, consequently, are very anxious that any citizen who can identify the handwriting should without delay communicate with the authorities.'
The other papers don't seem to have got the story until the 12th, when the inquest evidence was given, unless I blinked and missed something, but I confess I have been speed reading the reports so could have messed up here.
Interesting though, because I'd never actually looked that closely at when the GSG was actually first mentioned in the press......mmmmmmmm
Hugs
Janie
xxxx |
Howard Brown
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Howard
Post Number: 1146
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Friday, November 18, 2005 - 8:40 pm: |
|
Thanks Janie !! Something tells me I should have known Stead's paper would be the first to mention it.....thanks for the correction !
Huggin' How |
Jane Coram
Chief Inspector
Username: Jcoram
Post Number: 633
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Friday, November 18, 2005 - 8:45 pm: |
|
HI Sir Robert,
I personally think that they were genuine in their reasons without any question, but I would never state anything as being as absolute certainty, because there are very few absolute certainties in this case.
Of course there are a number of authors that have based their whole case on the fact that more than one high official was lying through their teeth to cover up the true nature of the murders. I prefer the straightforward version that they were concerned about riots.
Perhaps the word 'probability' would have been more generous, but 'possibility' still leaves the option for people to make up their own mind. 
Hugs
Jane
xxx |
Jane Coram
Chief Inspector
Username: Jcoram
Post Number: 634
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Friday, November 18, 2005 - 8:50 pm: |
|
Hi Howie,
I didn't see your post until after I'd posted mine up, and I had thought exactly the same as you........that the first reports were on the 12th........in fact I found that one from the Pall Mall Gazette tucked in and then promptly lost it again and had to rake through the whole lot again to try and find it.......I had never seen it before......so you live and learn.
Possibly...........
Love Jane
xxxxx |
Donald Souden
Chief Inspector
Username: Supe
Post Number: 845
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Friday, November 18, 2005 - 9:46 pm: |
|
Jane,
Since the Pall Mall Gazette said its source was the Central News agency that means that most every newspaper in London and beyond received the same story. That the other papers did not run the story is further evidence that some "prior restraint" was being exercised by the other editors. A point I made in my Ripper Notes article in the January 2005 issue. Compared to their American counterparts at the time the British papers were rather timid (or quite principled, which is almost an oxymoron -- newspapers and principles?).
Don.
"He was so bad at foreign languages he needed subtitles to watch Marcel Marceau."
|
Jane Coram
Chief Inspector
Username: Jcoram
Post Number: 635
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, November 19, 2005 - 8:49 am: |
|
Hi Don,
 Newspapers are a great boon to humanity. They are very good for wrapping fish and chips in and lining kitty litter trays!
Seriously though, I am ashamed to admit that this is an area that I haven't taken much time over before and it is actually quite intriguing. So forgive me if this post is very naive and you can pull faces if you want. 
Looking back over the articles that were written...there are lots of indicators that something had been said to them about keeping a lid on things... I just hadn't noticed it before.
Even the Star, which was not known for it's tact and diplomacy generally seems to have gone out of it's way to be as generous as it can be. I found this snippet buried:
'The Star
MONDAY, 1 OCTOBER, 1888.
What the Police were Doing.
In the midst of the excitement following on the Berner-street murder, some of the police were mean enough to try to purchase tobacco and drink from some of the members of the Jewish club. Money was tendered when request was made, but was, of course, refused. The police were not so entirely absorbed in endeavoring to catch the criminal but that they could attempt to inveigle innocent persons into committing a petty crime for the sake of securing a paltry conviction.'
Now that is seems to be typical of the general attitude that the newspapers had towards things....using the term 'foreign' instead of 'Jew' for example. I thought it was interesting that the Star pointed out that the IWEC was frowned on by orthodox Jews for being socialists.
I suppose to be fair on the Pall Mall Gazette they did wait a while before running the story and put a lot of provisos in with it....but does anyone know why they chose to run it when they did? I'm curious.
I didn't see that article by the way Don, can you send me a copy of it please?
Hugs
Janie
xxxx |
Dan Norder
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Dannorder
Post Number: 1008
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, November 19, 2005 - 1:57 pm: |
|
Hey Jane,
Don's January 2005 article is the one that was put online as a sample from that issue. It can be found here: "The Murder in Cartin's Court"
I think that issue of RN is the only one of the current digest format that you don't have yet. We'll have to get that to you next time.
Dan Norder, Editor
Ripper Notes: The International Journal for Ripper Studies
 Profile  Email  Dissertations  Website
|
Jane Coram
Chief Inspector
Username: Jcoram
Post Number: 638
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, November 19, 2005 - 4:13 pm: |
|
Oh thanks for that Dan,
I'm looking forward to it.....I always love Don's stuff. The one he did for the present issue was really amusing and informative.
I'll grab that January 2005 article now.
Love Jane
xxxxx |
Rodney Peters
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Thursday, November 17, 2005 - 11:51 am: |
|
Hello Monty
You're absolutely right.
The graffiti was said to be quite fresh by Halse.
Although Sir Charles Warren gets the credit, or blame, for having it removed, he was very strongly advised in this course of action by Supt.Arnold.
I think that Arnold was in the best position to know just how much of a threat to peace, that the chalked message represented, and clearly he regarded it's removal as vital. Personally, in the light of that, I would think that the message had been there only a short time.
Regards
ROD |
Sir Robert Anderson
Chief Inspector
Username: Sirrobert
Post Number: 643
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, November 19, 2005 - 5:01 pm: |
|
"I think that Arnold was in the best position to know just how much of a threat to peace, that the chalked message represented, and clearly he regarded it's removal as vital. "
To me, it is very telling that Detective Hale's proposal to erase the first line was shot down. The coppers obviously felt the graffiti was a very clear and present danger, even if altered.
Sir Robert
'Tempus Omnia Revelat'
SirRobertAnderson@gmail.com
|
Howard Brown
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Howard
Post Number: 1153
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, November 19, 2005 - 5:29 pm: |
|
Dear Mr. Peters:
No offense, but Superintendent Arnold had to wait for Warren's approval. According to police heirarchy [ rank ], it was Warren's decision and his "fate" to be chided/praised for removing the GSG.
I'm sure that you are correct that both shared the same sentiments.
Sir Bob:
"To me, it is very telling that Detective Hale's proposal to erase the first line was shot down.."
Absolutely,Bob. I understand people [ Monty, especially,in his great story in Ripperologist..] when they dismiss the GSG as either "among other graffiti"..."blown out of proportion"...etc.
But for me,despite all the protestations by smart people and convincing counter-arguments...there was something that made the police take this to that extreme. |
David Radka
Detective Sergeant
Username: Dradka
Post Number: 55
Registered: 7-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, November 19, 2005 - 8:40 pm: |
|
Where has Glenn Andersson gone? He used to post the boards so often. What's the poop?
David M. Radka
Author: "Alternative Ripperology: Questioning the Whitechapel Murders"
Casebook Dissertations Section
|
Donald Souden
Chief Inspector
Username: Supe
Post Number: 846
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, November 19, 2005 - 8:51 pm: |
|
David,
Glenn is now a resident of England and quite busy with work. Between the commute both ways he often gets home just in time for bed. Moreover, his computer situation is a bit dicey. But he still pops in now and then and I'm sure he'll be glad you were asking for him.
Don.
"He was so bad at foreign languages he needed subtitles to watch Marcel Marceau."
|
Stanley D. Reid
Chief Inspector
Username: Sreid
Post Number: 596
Registered: 4-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, November 19, 2005 - 8:53 pm: |
|
Where is Steve Swift as well? Did they both get the old boot? Hope not. |
Glenn G. Lauritz Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 4229
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, November 20, 2005 - 3:33 am: |
|
Hi there,
Yes, Don is right; I am away from home thirteen hours every day when I work (because of the bad transport communications), so it's long days and I am usually quite beat when I get home.
Thanks for asking, David.
All the best
G. Andersson, writer/historian
-----
"It's a BEAUTIFUL day - watch some bastard SPOIL IT."
Sign inside the Griffin Inn in Bath
|
Helge Samuelsen
Inspector
Username: Helge
Post Number: 478
Registered: 4-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, November 20, 2005 - 10:16 am: |
|
My Sweet Jane,
Thanks for the info on the Jewish fruit marked near Mitre square. If this makes you wonder...what about the Great Synagogue and the history of the square itself?
Anyway. I agree with your previous statement that none of this is strong enough to draw absolute conclusions. But it might make us look in the right direction for a change.
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: 479
Registered: 4-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, November 20, 2005 - 10:17 am: |
|
Glenn,
You know we all miss you.
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: 4237
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, November 20, 2005 - 10:24 am: |
|
Helge,
I am not so sure about that, but thanks anyway.
I have a day off today, but I promise I won't be dragged into a discussion about Jewish implications in the Ripper crimes.
By the way, I just read through the old thread about the Brown Lady and noticed your very interesting contributions there. I don't know if you've come across anything new about it, but if and when you do, please feel free to post something there. I really enjoyed those discussions, especially since you have some experience in photography and apparently knew what you were talking about.
All the best
G. Andersson, writer/historian
-----
"It's a BEAUTIFUL day - watch some bastard SPOIL IT."
Sign inside the Griffin Inn in Bath
|
Helge Samuelsen
Inspector
Username: Helge
Post Number: 480
Registered: 4-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, November 20, 2005 - 12:45 pm: |
|
Glenn,
One more comment being posted on the Brown Lady thread shortly, as requested. No closer to solving the mystery, though. Although I tinker with new theories at times.
You know I would not defend the Jewish link as if it's proven. It is just one alternative path of research. And it pretty much hinges on the GSG being Jack's.
Anyway, see you on the Brown Lady thread then.
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)
|
Julie
Inspector
Username: Judyj
Post Number: 228
Registered: 2-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, November 20, 2005 - 3:24 pm: |
|
Hi Jane
Thanks for the comments. No I am not a journalist however you do know that I am writing a controversial book on my family. It will not be accepted with anything but contempt, however it must be done.
My experience with respect to mental health, mental incapabilities etc.,merely adds to the unacceptance of this book. According to my family,I should be spending my time curing those with these inflictions rather than tell the truth in a book.
Oh well. I am sure I mentioned to you that I was writing this book. Where it goes from here is beyond me, when or if it gets published is an entirely different story. My passion for truth though is not to be challenged.
Thanks for lending me your ear, so to speak.
regards
Julie
|
Julie
Inspector
Username: Judyj
Post Number: 229
Registered: 2-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, November 20, 2005 - 3:37 pm: |
|
Hi Jane
THanks for taking the time to dig up these reports.
I was under the impression that graffeti was a common occurance during this time in Whitechapel. I would have "ASSUMED" only that this graffeti would have been of an anti-semetic nature, considering the ill-feeling towards the Jews at that time.
This is why I find it unusual that if indeed the normal graffeti were to be anti-jewish(etc) in nature, that it would not have been compared.
I do not doubt your finding, of no mention of same, but why not?
regards
Julie
|
Julie
Inspector
Username: Judyj
Post Number: 230
Registered: 2-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, November 20, 2005 - 3:47 pm: |
|
Sir Robert
I do indeed believe that Arnold and Warren were sincere in their reasons for erasing the message.
My question though is very simple, if graffeti was commonplace, and if we are to assume that some of this graffeti was anti-semetic in nature, why was it not mentioned and compared to the graffeti on Goulston Street. After all the papers at the time, and now, needed scoups to sell their papers. The more the details, the better.
regards
Julie
|
Julie
Inspector
Username: Judyj
Post Number: 232
Registered: 2-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, November 20, 2005 - 4:16 pm: |
|
Howie Baby,
My big question, among others, is why in hell didn't Warren or anyone else make sure pictures were taken of the message.
I was under the impression that a picture taker had been requested (possibly incorrect on my part) so why not take a picture??
Looking forward to your remarks.
regards luv
Julie
|
Julie
Inspector
Username: Judyj
Post Number: 233
Registered: 2-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, November 20, 2005 - 4:20 pm: |
|
Glenn
I miss you too!! Your posts are always most informative.
I hope you do not disappear for too long at a time.
Hope to read a post of yours soon.
Have a great one!!
regards
Julie
|
Donald Souden
Chief Inspector
Username: Supe
Post Number: 850
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, November 20, 2005 - 4:48 pm: |
|
Julie,
I don't want to jump the gun on Howard because he has made a personal study of the GSG, but I think the reason they did not take a photograph was that they would have had to wait until there was sufficient natural light and by then many of the building's residents (as well as passersby drawn by the police presence)would be able to see what they deemed a dangerously anti-semitic message. Not only was flash powder photography a new wrinkle at the time, but if, as we've been told, the bricks were glazed it would have been quite impossible to get a decent inage.
Don.
"He was so bad at foreign languages he needed subtitles to watch Marcel Marceau."
|
Jane Coram
Chief Inspector
Username: Jcoram
Post Number: 642
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, November 20, 2005 - 4:48 pm: |
|
Hi Julie,
I didn't know about the book you were writing but it sounds fascinating, if you would like to send me a private message about it I would love to know more.
On the graffiti in the area generally.......yes, the newspapers did want to sell copies, but papers had already published stories which had turned out to be erroneous; like the story that there was a legend written by the Ripper in the back yard of Hanbury Street.
Too many false reports and careless reporting would not only reduce their credibility, but probably not do their sales any good either.
If we look at the report on the GSG. the preamble to the story was very cagey and almost a disclaimer.......and it wasn't published until over a week after the GSG was found, leaving a cooling off period to hopefully diffuse the situation.
The other papers didn't publish it at all until the day it was disclosed at the inquest so that they were absolved of blame in releasing the story.
If the story about the graffito had proven not to be true, well.....it would not have done their street cred much good anyway.......and mentioning that the area was littered with anti semitic graffiti would not really have helped racial harmony much either.
It does seem very obvious that the authorities had asked them to keep a lid on the situation.....and that is exactly what they were doing.......re reading the reports again over that first week, the press were being very cautious indeed about what they printed concerning the Jews.
As to why the GSG was not photographed. This is just a guess on my part, and I am sure Howie can answer it better than I can, but I have always thought that because of the way photographs were taken in those days, that the light source needed to be good and the exposure reasonably long.
If they had waited until it was light, there were have been quite a crowd gathered and they would not have been able to conceal it. I'm sure Howie will be able to enlighten us both on that one.
Hugs
Janie
xxxx |
Jane Coram
Chief Inspector
Username: Jcoram
Post Number: 643
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, November 20, 2005 - 4:53 pm: |
|
Great minds think alike Don, We must have posted at the same time!
Howie will probably say it was something totally different now......but as you say he has studied it in so much depth he probably dreams about it.  hee hee.
Hugs
Janie
xxxx
(Message edited by jcoram on November 20, 2005) |
Glenn G. Lauritz Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 4242
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, November 20, 2005 - 4:55 pm: |
|
Hi Julie,
Thanks for your kind words.
"My question though is very simple, if graffeti was commonplace, and if we are to assume that some of this graffeti was anti-semetic in nature, why was it not mentioned and compared to the graffeti on Goulston Street. After all the papers at the time, and now, needed scoups to sell their papers. The more the details, the better."
One of the more reasonable explanations is that it was the finding of the apron lying underneath that particular message, that made this message so explosive. The other writings were probably bad enough in an anti-semitic climate (and Warren still suffered from the public outbursts regarding his decision to violently crush the rioting earlier at Trafalgar Square), but the writing in Goulston Street had a way more dangerous meaning, implying that a serial killer cutting up prostitutes actually might be linked to the Jewish community.
As Jane says, the papers were probably quite cautious about deliberately fueling the anti-semitic tensions, and people in authority quite likely suppressed such attempts.
The writing in Goulston Street was the only one that had a genuine clue from a Ripper murder underneath it, which made it stick out from the others in a different way, and most certainly is why Warren decided to wipe it out.
If anti-Jewish writings were common knowledge on the walls of Whitechapel, then there was really no need to mention them, since many already knew they existed anyway. It was the link to the Ripper that gave the Goulston Street message news value.
All the best
(Message edited by Glenna on November 20, 2005)
G. Andersson, writer/historian
-----
"It's a BEAUTIFUL day - watch some bastard SPOIL IT."
Sign inside the Griffin Inn in Bath
|
Donald Souden
Chief Inspector
Username: Supe
Post Number: 851
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, November 20, 2005 - 5:00 pm: |
|
Jane,
Great minds think alike Don
True enough, but then what is our excuse?
Don.
"He was so bad at foreign languages he needed subtitles to watch Marcel Marceau."
|
Monty
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Monty
Post Number: 2021
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Monday, November 21, 2005 - 6:53 am: |
|
Guys,
How,
But for me, despite all the protestations by smart people and convincing counter-arguments...there was something that made the police take this to that extreme.
The fact that the apron was found a few feet away was enough to trigger an investigation into the writing. This is procedure. Procedure, as opposed to a sinister or ulterior motive for investigating the writing.
Cheers,
Monty
Ps. The extreme being?
It begins.....
|
Sir Robert Anderson
Chief Inspector
Username: Sirrobert
Post Number: 645
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, November 21, 2005 - 9:18 am: |
|
"The fact that the apron was found a few feet away "
Found a few feet below, not "away"....makes a big difference .
Sir Robert
'Tempus Omnia Revelat'
SirRobertAnderson@gmail.com
|
Monty
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Monty
Post Number: 2022
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Monday, November 21, 2005 - 10:32 am: |
|
Sir Robert,
Found a few feet below, not "away"....makes a big difference
And your point is?
The writing was at shoulder height, some feet off the ground...ergo a few feet away.
The reality was that the two items were in close proximity to each other.
Regards,
Monty
PS The positioning of the apron is not an ascertained fact.
It begins.....
|
Sir Robert Anderson
Chief Inspector
Username: Sirrobert
Post Number: 647
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, November 21, 2005 - 10:42 am: |
|
"And your point is? "
My point is rather obvious, no ? It's one thing for the graffiti and the apron to be a few feet away from each other, and another thing for the GSG to be DIRECTLY above the apron.
(Message edited by sirrobert on November 21, 2005)
(Message edited by sirrobert on November 21, 2005)
Sir Robert
'Tempus Omnia Revelat'
SirRobertAnderson@gmail.com
|
Monty
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Monty
Post Number: 2023
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Monday, November 21, 2005 - 10:50 am: |
|
Sir Robert,
Find me the evidence that states the writing was DIRECTLY above the apron.
Monty
It begins.....
|
Julie
Inspector
Username: Judyj
Post Number: 234
Registered: 2-2005
| | Posted on Monday, November 21, 2005 - 7:32 pm: |
|
Glenn Andersson
Hi Glenn
Nice to hear from you.
I am only assuming(big word) that graffeti was the norm., and judging by the problems between Jews and Non Jews at the time, again I can only assume that a lot of this graffeti was anti semetic in nature.
I do indeed accept the explanation given by Warren etc., that the writing had to be erased due to the possiblity of an uproar(so to speak) of the Jewish community, however as I mentioned to Donald Soudan, what would have been considered most important?
upsetting the Jewish community or taking a picture of what was considered at the time, a message from Jack.
Take a picture, study it, save it for comparison or whatever they did in those days, BUT don't destroy what may be your only clue.
Hope to hear back.
regards
Julie
|
Stanley D. Reid
Chief Inspector
Username: Sreid
Post Number: 605
Registered: 4-2005
| | Posted on Monday, November 21, 2005 - 7:44 pm: |
|
Hi all,
Do we know for sure if the message was printed or cursive?
Stan |
Glenn G. Lauritz Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 4266
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Monday, November 21, 2005 - 7:50 pm: |
|
Hi Julie,
I would suspect that Warren took no chances whatsoever facing the possibility of an anti-Jewish uproar and seen in retrospect I'd say his decision might have been a correct one, or at least understandable.
Personally I think it is questionable if the message was such an important clue at all, and although we today would have been very careful to secure it as evidence, I think, seen from Warren's point of view, that it was not of enough importance enough in order to risk a Jewish slaughter in East End. After all, he did try to secure it in a way by having it copied, so he didn't disregard it altogether. Today that kind of conduct would have been unacceptable, but in those days it was quite uncommon to photograph clues on crime scenes anyway. It was pretty much a new thing at the time and not yet normal procedure.
All the best
G. Andersson, writer/historian
-----
"It's a BEAUTIFUL day - watch some bastard SPOIL IT."
Sign inside the Griffin Inn in Bath
|
Julie
Inspector
Username: Judyj
Post Number: 235
Registered: 2-2005
| | Posted on Monday, November 21, 2005 - 8:09 pm: |
|
Glenn Andersson
Hi again Glenn
I cannot argue with your post at all. Under thecircumstances I agree that erasing the message was probably the best route.
No doubt they didn't know for sure that it was indeed a message from Jack.
Thanks for your comments.
regards
Julie
|
c.d.
Detective Sergeant
Username: Cd
Post Number: 72
Registered: 9-2005
| | Posted on Monday, November 21, 2005 - 8:24 pm: |
|
Glenn,
Hi. The action taken by Warren would indicate that the police took the message to be an anti-Jewish message. Was that the case or were they simply not taking chances? Today, we tend to see it as being more enigmatic.
c.d. |
Sir Robert Anderson
Chief Inspector
Username: Sirrobert
Post Number: 649
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, November 21, 2005 - 8:34 pm: |
|
"The action taken by Warren would indicate that the police took the message to be an anti-Jewish message. "
There is some indication that at least a few officials thought the GSG was posted by a Jew boasting of his crimes.
Sir Robert
'Tempus Omnia Revelat'
SirRobertAnderson@gmail.com
|
Glenn G. Lauritz Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 4267
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Monday, November 21, 2005 - 8:49 pm: |
|
Hi c.d.,
You are absolutely right and that is an interesting question.
The content of the message does not need to be ant-semitic as such, or its writer an ant-Jew. It all depends on how we choose to interpret it.
But that is in a way besides the point. In either way, it mentions Jews in connection with a piece of evidence (the apron) from one of the Ripper killings. I would say that would have been an explosive combination enough.
All the best
G. Andersson, writer/historian
-----
"It's a BEAUTIFUL day - watch some bastard SPOIL IT."
Sign inside the Griffin Inn in Bath
|
Harry Mann
Inspector
Username: Harry
Post Number: 219
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Tuesday, November 22, 2005 - 3:33 am: |
|
If the apron had lain in that position for some lenghth of time,would one expect to find that blood had seeped onto the ground.Was any blood,apart from being on the apron,noticed.
If the same person wrote the message and discarded the apron,it would depend on which was first,as to whether chalk dust was on the topside of the apron or bottom side,in the position that it lay.If there was chalk dust?.
Maybe the things we expext to be noticed today,were overlooked back then,and there the difficulty lies.We are left again with an incomplete investigation of important evidence. |
Monty
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Monty
Post Number: 2024
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, November 22, 2005 - 3:41 am: |
|
Glenn,
You are absolutely right and that is an interesting question.
The content of the message does not need to be ant-semitic as such, or its writer an ant-Jew. It all depends on how we choose to interpret it.
HOO-RAY !!
Exactly what I have been saying for the past fortnight cd & Glenn,
....keep with the programme ! 
Cheers,
Monty
It begins.....
|
Glenn G. Lauritz Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 4270
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, November 22, 2005 - 3:15 pm: |
|
Sorry, Monty,
I have only been skimming through this thread (and even the Boards) lately and haven't had the energy nor the time to read all that comes through.
All the best
G. Andersson, writer/historian
-----
"It's a BEAUTIFUL day - watch some bastard SPOIL IT."
Sign inside the Griffin Inn in Bath
|
Jennifer Pegg
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 3233
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, November 22, 2005 - 3:22 pm: |
|
Monty,
I understood you the first time if it's any consolation. Not that I suppose it is as its probably because its kinda what i think too!!
Jenni
"You know I'm not gonna diss you on the Internet
Cause my mamma taught me better than that."
|
Julie
Inspector
Username: Judyj
Post Number: 236
Registered: 2-2005
| | Posted on Tuesday, November 22, 2005 - 6:34 pm: |
|
Glenn Andersson
Hi Glenn
Your comments do make a lot of sense. And I agree with your explanation without question.
It makes me wonder though how they were ever able to catch a perpetrator at that time with so little technology at their disposal.
all my best Glenn
regards
Julie
|
Julie
Inspector
Username: Judyj
Post Number: 237
Registered: 2-2005
| | Posted on Tuesday, November 22, 2005 - 6:41 pm: |
|
Monty,
You are correct in that the writter could have been a person who wrote the message with anti-semitism in mind, or he could have been a jew blaming his own race, etc, etc,
It is all in the interpretation, no doubt, but whose?
Our interpretation over 100 years later, or the police officials over 100 years ago.
regards
Julie
|
Monty
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Monty
Post Number: 2027
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, November 23, 2005 - 3:38 am: |
|
Glenn, Jenn 'n' Julie,
Glenn,
I was joshing.
Jenn,
It is a consolation.
Julie,
There is a myth that the Police viewed the writing solely as anti-semetic. Whilst they investigated that possibility, for obvious reasons, there were (even after a period of years) some that did not beileve this view and some that did.
And its this confusion with personal beliefs of some comtemporary Police officers and officials, that some 'Ripperologists' take as official Police stance.
Every angle of the writing would have been looked at, not just the one.
Regards,
Monty
It begins.....
|
