A close view of jack the ripper

IN 1888,THE  WORLD’ Smost  famous  serialkiller  stalked  the  dark,  grimy  streets  ofLondon’s East End. ‘Jack the Ripper’was the original celebrity mass-murderer, and seta  trend  for  homicidal  maniacs  which  seems to grow with each year. The fear surroundingthe  recent  Washington  sniper  incidents,  for example,  has  many  similarities  with  theterror  created  by  this  forefather  of  death-dealing criminals. In these types of cases, the impact  of  the  crime  is  heightened  by  the mystery   surrounding   the   actual   killer’s identity.  Unlike  many  of  his  modern  age copyists,  Jack  the  Ripper  was  not  caught  oreven  named,  and  to  this  day  it  has  never been conclusively proven who he really was.London’s White chapel district was knownas one of the poorest areas of the city, and atthe  time,  was  home  to  over  a  thousand prostitutes.

 It was also the area which wouldbecome the focus of the Ripper’s attacks. Hisreign of terror officially began in the openinghours  of  31st  August  1888,  when  a  marketporter  spotted  a  woman  lying  in  a  doorwayon  Buck’s  Row  in  Whitechapel.  Rather  thanapproach the woman, the porter went to find the  beat  policeman.  When  he  arrived,  hefound  the  woman’s  throat  had  been  deeply cut and a medical examination later revealed her  body  had  been  mutilated.  Her  identity was  also  discovered:  she  was  Mary  Ann Nichols,   known   as   Polly,   a   42-year-oldprostitute.Barely   a   week   later,   at   6am   on   8thSeptember,  the  body  of  another  woman  wasfound  in  Hanbury  Street,  near  Buck’s  Row.She  was  Annie  Chapman,  a  45-year-oldprostitute  whose  head  had  been  almost entirely severed from her neck; she had alsobeen disembowelled.Fear  was  beginning  to  spread  through outthe  community.  For  the  first  time  in  history,the  people  had  a  literate  public  and  a  scruti-nising  press,  who  were  putting  the  policeunder  a  new  sort  of  pressure.

  Not  only  werethe  police  there  to  protect  the  people  ofLondon, they also had to cope with the novelstress of proving their own competence. Just asin  modern  mass  murder  cases,  the  effect  ofsupposition,  myths  and  rumours  in  news-paper coverage led to a great deal of anxiety.By  the  time  the  Ripper  struck  again,  theWhitechapel area was interested in only onething. The Ripper did not disappoint. In thedark   early   hours   of   30th   September   acostume jewellery salesman arrived home inBerners Street, where he discovered the bodyof Elizabeth Stride, a prostitute who had hadher throat slit. As police rushed to the sceneand  searched  the  nearby  streets,  the  Rippermade  off  to  Mitre  Square,  in  the  City  ofLondon,  and  killed  Catharine  Eddowes.Although  the  earlier  victim  had  not  beenmutilated, many believe the Ripper had beeninterrupted during this procedure. Eddowes’remains were not so well preserved and shewas found disembowelled.

This  night  become  known  as  the  ‘double event’, and was the focus of many letters sent into  the  police.  Although  most  came  from members of the public offering advice, some purported  to  come  from  the  Ripper  himself and  were  given  more  credence  than  others.One dated 28th September goaded and teased the  police,  and  was  the  origin  of  the  nameJack  the  Ripper,  which  was  how  the  sender signed off. The second was a postcard dated1st October and referred to the ‘double event’of  the  night  before.  The  third  letter  was posted  a  fortnight  later  and  even  included  asection  of  a  kidney  allegedly  removed  from Catharine  Eddowes.  Although  the  police,  asin  modern  times,  had  to  suspect  that  the secorrespondences  came  from  a  crank  or  ahoaxer, the kidney included in the third letter was  shrivelled  and  diseased. 

 

An  interestingfact   is   that   not   only   was   Eddowes   analcoholic,  she  also  suffered  from  Bright’sdisease, and this organ displayed all the signsof being from such an afflicted body.The police believed they had discovered apattern  to  the  killings  the  first  occurred  on31st  August,  the  second  on  8th  September,the  third  and  fourth  on  30th  September.They believed the next would happen on the8th of October, but in fact the Ripper did notstrike for the whole of that month. His finalofficial  murder  actually  occurred  on  9thNovember in Miller’s Court, a building closeto  where  the  other  killings  had  taken  place.Another  prostitute,  24-year-old  Mary  JaneKelly  was  found  by  her  landlord  with  herbody   utterly   mutilated.   This   time,   themurder had taken place inside, and the killerhad had all night to dissect the corpseAlthough   these   five   murders   are   allassigned   to   the   Ripper,   there   is   thepossibility  he  may  have  killed  two  or  threemore  woman  in  London  around  that  time.

Annie Chapman, victim of the Ripper

However, the police were at a loss to find there al name of the man behind the crimes and employed     a     policy     of     information suppression  to  try  to  reassure  the  public.Despite  this,  Londoners  were  fully  awarethat  police  work  was  proving  fruitless  atobtaining  a  clear  picture  of  the  Ripper’sidentity.  But  some  of  those  in  the  force  didhave  their  own  theories,  and  many  police doctors  who  examined  the  victims’  bodies suggested   the   Ripper   was   likely   to   besomeone  with  medical  training.  In  1894  the Chief  Constable  of  the  Metropolitan  Police Force,  Sir  Melville  Macnaghten,  wrote  areport which named Montague John Druitt, abarrister who committed suicide shortly afterthe Kelly murder, as the most likely suspect.However,  at  the  time  Macnaghten  believedDruitt  to  be  a  trained  doctor,  which  subse-quent research proved to be false.

Macnaghten also named two more possibleRippers. One was Aaron Kosminski, a PolishJew  who  lived  in  the  Whitechapel  area  andwas  placed  in  an  insane  asylum  in  March1889. Although one of the chief investigatingofficers, Robert Anderson, had a great beliefin  Kosminski’s  guilt,  the  Pole’s  behaviouralrecords from his time in the asylum containnothing   to   suggest   he   was   homicidal.Macnaghten’s  final  suspect,  Michael  Ostrog,was  a  Russian  lunatic.  Despite  being  aconvicted   criminal   and   possibly   havingsome  medical  training,  his  behaviour  understudied  conditions  also  did  not  point  to  anability for multiple murders. In recent years,Ripper  investigators  have  considered  DrFrancis  Tumblety,  an  American  doctor  whofled   London   shortly   after   the   murders.Despite thinking him a possible suspect, theMetropolitan  Police  at  the  time  decided  torule him out of its enquires.As with many mysteries, the identityof theRipper  has  become  the  domain  of  conspiracytheorists. This has led to people from all walksof  life  –  members  of  the  monarchy,  royalservants, high-ranking police officers, Russianspies  and  even  crazed  evangelists  –  beingaccused  of  holding  the  Ripper’s  identity.However,  in  the  last  few  of  years  a  study  hasbeen  conducted  by  the  crime  writer  PatriciaCornwell.  She  used  $4million  of  her  ownmoney to investigate if there is a link betweenthe  Ripper  and  Walter  Sickert,  an  impres-sionist painter who may have had connectionswith  Whitechapel  around  the  dates  of  themurders. 

Twenty  years  after  the  killings,  hecreated a series of paintings that depicted deadand gruesomely mauled prostitutes. Cornwellhas  used  modern  technologies  and  intenseexaminations of his work, and is so convincedof  Sickert’s  guilt  that  she  is  staking  herreputation on him being the Ripper.Modern  Ripper  investigators,  just  like  theVictorian  London  police  forces,  fail  to  agreewith   each   other.   There   were   so   manyunsavoury characters roaming London at thetime  that  almost  any  suspect  could  havebeen linked to the murders in some way. Asthe years blur the truth, so the plausibility ofmany different suspects increases, whilst thedefinitive  proof  needed  to  decide  on  onedisappears in the fog of time..