Author: Simon Owen
Tuesday, 14 March 2000 - 07:29 am |        |
Harry , Jack DID put his name to the Goulston Street grafitti. Or rather the Jacks did... " The Juwes are not the men..." |
Author: R.J. Palmer
Tuesday, 14 March 2000 - 07:13 pm | |
The following might be an interesting line of inquiry. Eddowes is killed in Mitre Square, the killer flees across Houndsditch, etc. to Goulston Street. The general direction is toward Commercial Road. Let's assume he/she/they are headed home. Who lives in that direction? If the killer is Druitt, he's headed in the wrong direction (9 Eliot Place, Blackheath). The same can be said about Lewis Carroll (a long trot back to Oxford), Neill Cream (his jail cell in Juliet, IL); Deeming (South Africa); Maybrick (Aigburth); Sickert's Lodger (Camden); Bell Smith (Finsbury Street); George Chapman (Cable Street) etc. etc. If the killer is Prince Eddy he has a particularly long stroll ahead of him, since he's to have lunch with the Queen in Abergeldie, Scotland that afternoon. The suspects that would be headed in generally the right direction to escape home would be The Batty Street Lodger, Kosminski, 'David Cohen'(Leman Street Workhouse), and Joseph Barnett. I'm probably forgetting a couple of others...
Cheers. |
Author: The Viper
Wednesday, 15 March 2000 - 05:17 am | |
Good thinking R. J. Palmer. Whilst a lot of time and effort is expended in debating the relevance or otherwise of the Goulston Street graffito, which may be a clue, the definite clue left by JTR , namely his escape route from Mitre Square, is usually ignored.
Unfortunately it does appear that you have confused Commercial Road with Commercial Street. They were both main thoroughfares, but completely separate. An escape route through Goulston Street was a good way back to Dorset Street (Barnett), Commercial Street and to the Brick Lane area beyond it. However, Goulston Street was not a direct route for Commercial Road, nor consequently for Batty Street, Leman Street or even Sion Square (Kosminski).
Regards, V. |
Author: Simon Owen
Wednesday, 15 March 2000 - 05:54 am | |
| See my post , Thursday March 9th , 6.53 am. |
Author: R.J. Palmer
Wednesday, 15 March 2000 - 10:42 am | |
Hello Everyone.
Viper-- Thanks for the correction. You're quite right. Yes, I should have said Commercial Street. (Drats!)
Do you have any theory on whether JTR was walking north or south on Goulston Street? I think this would be the pivotal factor in whether or not to dismiss the Commercial ROAD crowd... (I confess the maps I currently have are very bad; a modern map and a copy of Greenwood's 1827 map).
I suppose one also has to consider the possibility that JTR was taking an indirect route to avoid incidental traffic, etc. but I think it is safe to say that his goal was certainly NOT to the west or to the south.
By the way, I recently read Scott Nelson's dissertation on Kosminski. He found a Kosminski family living ON Goulston Street, but wasn't able to link them to Aaron K. So this might not mean much of anything.
Thanks,
RJP |
Author: Guy Hatton
Wednesday, 15 March 2000 - 10:55 am | |
As I recall, Martin Fido argues that the murderer was probably heading South on Goulston Street, on the grounds, in part, that the entrance to #108-119 would then be the first convenient doorway into which he could throw the apron. Of course, he also has his own very specific idea of where JtR was heading, and a Southerly direction of travel conveniently supports this, but I think that it also fits more readily with any quick escape route from Mitre Square.
All the Best
Guy |
Author: David M. Radka
Wednesday, 15 March 2000 - 03:41 pm | |
Considering the time between the point at which he'd have to have left leave Eddowes' body to avoid detection and the time the graffito was likely written (at least 40 minutes), it would seem that we have no usable clue whatever concerning his direction of travel. Just as likely, he picked the Wentworth Model Buildings for the graffito for some as-yet unknown reason. This is where intelligint speculation should be applied, IMHO.
David |
Author: David M. Radka
Tuesday, 14 March 2000 - 11:41 pm | |
Considering the time between the point at which he'd have to have left leave Eddowes' body to avoid detection and the time the graffito was likely written (at least 40 minutes), it would seem that we have no usable clue whatever concerning his direction of travel. Just as likely, he picked the Wentworth Model Buildings for the graffito for some as-yet unknown reason. This is where intelligint speculation should be applied, IMHO.
David |
Author: Diana
Wednesday, 15 March 2000 - 09:30 pm | |
| As to the cryptic nature of the graffito, I don't think we are dealing with an erudite person who was trying to be cryptic so much as an uneducated person who was not good at writing their thoughts clearly. (Trust me on this one. I have graded some papers that . . . oh well you get the idea). As to whether the graffito just happened to be there or not, I think it depends how much graffiti was in the area at the time. If the walls were thick with it then we have to consider the possibility that he just happened to drop it under that particular message. |
Author: David M. Radka
Wednesday, 15 March 2000 - 09:39 pm | |
Very intelligint post, Diana.
David |
Author: Harry Mann
Thursday, 16 March 2000 - 05:15 am | |
Whether Messages were in letter form sent through the post,or in graffity style written on buildings
the killers intention surely would be to establish that they came from him.
The letters received prior to Eddowes death,nor the graffiti in Goulston St,succeded in doing this
There was doubt then as there is now,a situation that he must have been aware of,and could have corrected in Kelly's room.
A piece of the apron together with the Graffiti message posted in an envelope to the police,would have been more of a proof,and have greater effect. |
Author: Simon Owen
Thursday, 16 March 2000 - 07:18 am | |
| Very good point. But graffitti tends to be a spontaneous thing , and I think this is the case here. The fact that he did not post the apron suggests that the killer was not using the papers to get his message across , and that the Ripper letters are fakes unfortunately : I've always thought that the kidney was sent to Lusk by someone who had a reason to dislike him , and wanted to scare him somewhat. This is reinforced by the fact that the Mitre Square murder was not commited on Lusk's patch , but rather in the City of London. |
Author: Jeffrey
Thursday, 16 March 2000 - 08:29 am | |
Hello All !
I wonder why the killer actually dropped the apron at all? Why didn't he take it home with the rest of his newly acquired treasures? He could have then just probably thrown it on the fire. Could it be that he had to dispose of it before he entered his place of abode, or was it an intentional clue? Surely the killer was very clever about leaving no or very little evidence behind on all his other killings, why on this occassion? The only clue ever left behind was this apron, and all we have ever been able to gather from it was that it indicated a local man who was heading to ground into Whitechapel. Unless of course he actually did have something to say? Loads of questions, no answers.
The simplest explanation would be that he saw a policeman coming, and quickly threw it into the doorway so as not to get caught with incriminating evidence. This would then show that he couldn't conceal something of this size very discretely, while he could have pocketed the few organs he had plundered. It would make sense too that the organs had value to him (I don't mean money-wise) whereas the apron was simply taken as an immediate necessity. I would still not discount a connection between the apron and the graffiti, but the simplest explanation probably is the the correct one at the end of the day. I still can't get my head around the time lapse though, the killer would definitely not hang around in the streets unless he had to.
Jeff D |
Author: Simon Owen
Thursday, 16 March 2000 - 08:54 am | |
| Why take the apron at all , it was a very large piece as well ? Suggests the apron was used to carry something , possibly the organs , but if Jack could have carried them in his pocket why bother cutting the apron off in the first place. My guess is the organs were deposited somewhere , thus the apron became unnecessary and it was thrown away. This explains the time lapse. The only reason for the apron being thrown away in the street would be to draw attention to the graffiti , Jack would be too smart to leave such a clue otherwise. |
Author: Simon Owen
Thursday, 16 March 2000 - 09:39 am | |
I looked today at how the Ripper's victims had a period of time before their deaths where they were not seen , and I tried to think where they might have been during this time period. I stumbled on something interesting in relation to Catherine Eddowes ; it would have taken Eddowes about 10 minutes to reach Mitre Square from the police station , but suppose she never went that far. My guess is that Eddowes turned up Stoney Lane and headed towards Flower and Dean Street , she would probably want to see John Kelly her lover to tell him she had been released from jail. By about 1.22am she would have been in Wentworth Street and at the entrance to...Goulston Street ! Could this have been where Eddowes was picked up by the Ripper ? She may have been slumped having a rest in that very archway to Wentworth Dwellings when the Ripper met her. If the couple went down Goulston Street , into Aldgate High Street , then Aldgate , then Duke Street , then Church Passage then they could have been seen by Lawende at 1.35 am. So why did the Ripper leave the apron in the Goulston Street doorway : BECAUSE HE THOUGHT THAT WAS CATHERINE EDDOWES' HOUSE !!! If not that , then he left it there because that was the place he had met the victim. If you believe that the Ripper mistook Eddowes for Kelly then this makes even more sense , and even helps to explain why Kelly was killed at home ; the Ripper had been mistaken once , he thus searched out Kelly's true address with real vigour to make sure he was not mistaken again. And then he selected his time to attack. |
Author: David M. Radka
Thursday, 16 March 2000 - 10:53 am | |
Simon, please. You're swinging from the heels now, trying to hit a home run on every pitch. Don't you realize you're fictionalizing everything at this point? Your covering fiction with fiction, and the pile is getting quite high. There is no solution to the case which is not grounded in the case evidence.
David |
Author: Diana
Thursday, 16 March 2000 - 09:25 pm | |
| Maybe Jack was just tearing down Goulston Street, trying to juggle various organs, an apron, a bloody knife and who knows what else and he accidentally dropped it in the dark without really realizing he had. I like Mr. Mann's point. If Jack were all that interested in written communication he would have had plenty of time to leave something in Mary Kelly's room. He would, in fact, have had a lot more time on that occasion than he had on the night of the double event. |
Author: Scott Nelson
Friday, 17 March 2000 - 12:31 am | |
| The piece of apron, as suggested, probably held portions of Eddowes' organs as the killer fled, possibly to a nearby residence. As soon as he stored the organs at the residence, he returns to a nearby covered passageway near a major corridor of street traffic (Wentworth Street) to confuse the reconstructed police route of escape... It just so happens that a common piece of local graffito was written above the piece of discarded apron. |
Author: NickDanger
Friday, 17 March 2000 - 12:46 am | |
Hi all,
I would think that dumping the organs and then the apron would suggest that he was simply afraid of being caught with them. We have no way of knowing if he ditched his knife, but my guess is that JTR was justifiably frightened of being stopped and questioned and did his best to divest himself of anything incriminating.
Best regards,
Nick |
Author: Scott Nelson
Friday, 17 March 2000 - 12:56 am | |
| This piece of local graffito redirects the police inquiry to the "proper" area of search, quite by accident. Because they (police) believe the killer wrote the graffito because they were searching for a jew. |
