Sources B and C are linked because they are both official reports and are very reliable evidence. Whereas Source A is not very reliable because it is a newspaper article and it dramatises the murders of Martha Tabram and Polly Nichols. Newspapers often exaggerate and extend the truth to catch the reader’s attention. Source C supports source B because both imply that the murderer knew what he was doing. Both sources base their comments on evidence that they have investigated.
3. Source D and E are very useful in helping me understand why the Ripper was able to avoid capture. Source D is the evidence of Elizabeth Long at the inquest into the death of Annie Chapman; she was describing the man seen talking to Annie before she was killed. This source is not useful because it is too vague and does not provide enough evidence. It is obviously not very reliable. Elizabeth Long did not have a clear view of the man when she supposedly saw him taking to Annie Chapman shortly before her death, the reason for this is: her description of the man is not detailed or reliable e.g. she identified the man’s complexion and age but she could not be sure if he was wearing a dark coat.
Although, Source D is useful to help us understand the lack of real evidence that the police worked from and how they worked hard to follow up every lead. The police did take Elizabeth’s evidence seriously and they used it for their investigation; it is thought that the police then spent a great deal of time looking for a foreigner based on her evidence. Therefore, it suggests that the lack of real evidence wasted the police time and prevented them looking at other areas of investigation.
Source E is useful because it suggests that the police did not take leads very seriously; however the source is not that reliable because the newspapers were somewhat biased and clearly attacked the police for not attempting to capture the murderer and not competent to do so; “the police force on the spot should be strengthened ad some kind of order created on the streets by night”.
4. From the sources and my own knowledge, there is evidence to suggest that the police used a variety of methods to capture the murderer. Sources F and G identify the practical methods they tried and other evidence suggests several of their techniques used.
Source F is a police leaflet published after the murders of Elizabeth Stride and Kate Eddowes. It is a useful source because it is an official police leaflet produced at the time of the murders. From the source, we learn that the police tried to collect as much evidence as possible from the public and were encouraging people to come forward with the evidence.
Source G is part of a letter from the Home Secretary to the MileEnd Vigilance Committee on 17th September 1888. The source explains that the Government were not prepared to offer a reward for the discovery of criminals. The source suggests that in the past, offers of reward tended to produce more harm than good. This may be because people would come forward and ‘claim’ to know of the Whitechapel murderer to receive the reward.
Other evidence suggests there were however other methods used. The Metropolitan police force used other methods to capture the murderer such as decoys; they would disguise an officer as a person most likely to be targeted by the murderer. They visited common lodging houses and interviewed over 2000 lodgers for information. The police produced and distributed leaflets in the neighbourhood to encourage witnesses to come forward. They interrogated butchers and slaughterers about their occupations and employees and also interviewed sailors working on the Thames Riverboats. But the police force had limitations as well such as forensic science didn’t exist at the time of the murders, the two police forces in London did not co-operate well and they didn’t offer rewards to the public which meant lack of information from the local people.
- ‘The police were to blame for not capturing Jack the Ripper.’
I disagree with this view. When the Metropolitan Police force began, the people of London did not have respect for the police and felt they were incompetent. The public did not support the police and hated the police whether they were poor or rich. Policemen suffered violent attacks because the people did not like being told what to do by someone in uniform. I feel that there would have been a greater chance of capturing the Whitechapel murderer if the public had supported the police force.
The police investigation of the ‘Ripper’ case was made even more difficult by the numerous false starts and red herrings that they faced in 1888. The first major false start in the murders was the investigation of ‘Leather Apron’. This man required prostitutes to pay him money or he would beat them. The police arrested a man who fitted the description of this man. The police thought they had solved the case but it turned out that ‘Leather Apron’ had alibis for all of the murders. There were a number of other red herrings that mislead the police force.
Another problem that the police faced was the Press. When a murder took place, the press would print a very detailed and gruesome description of the murder, which startled the people of London. People would then complain to the Government; this brought about the constant changing of police officers working on the ‘Ripper’ case. This caused experienced officers to be transferred unnecessarily. This halted the progress of the ‘Ripper’ case and a direct result of press interference. Things definitely took a turn for the worse when the press started to receive letters from people claiming to be the murderer. The press were positive that the letters were fakes and did not take them seriously. There was one letter, however, which people still believe to this day was from the ‘Ripper’. The press believed it was a hoax and did not send it to the police for a few days. The night after the police received the letter; Liz Stride and Kate Eddowes were murdered. The delay of the press sending the letter to the police could have meant that the police missed their only chance to capture the killer. Also, the press did not support the police force during the investigation, they felt they were incompetent to catch the killer; “the police force on the sot should be strengthened and some kind of order created on the streets by night”. It is thought that the press may have actually helped the ‘Ripper’ remain free.
The limitations of the police force made it difficult to investigate the case. They worked hard and followed every lead but their techniques were limited. Source D is an example of little evidence the police had to work from. Forensic evidence was not available at the time of the murders, the two police forces of London failed to co-operate and lack of reward for the local population all delayed the solving of the case. Also, the way that the police used evidence was poor. The case was difficult to investigate because the murderer had no motive for the murders; “no adequate motive in the shape of plunder can be traced”.
From the sources, we can learn that the police followed every lead and worked from little evidence. I feel that the police were not to blame for failing to capture ‘Jack the Ripper’.
