“The body has not been dissected,…”
The source C supports a lot of good evidence in the sources but especially source B; this is probably because B and C are both professional eyewitnesses of examining the body, where as source A is part of an article in the East End Observer.
Question Three
Study sources D and E
How useful are sources D and E in helping you to 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.
Source E is part of an article published in a local newspaper after the murders of Polly Nicholls and Annie Chapman.
These are useful in helping us to understand why the Ripper was able to avoid capture, although the reliability of these sources may be questionable.
In source D, Elizabeth Long was shown to be an unreliable person, for an example of this in her statement she does not sound reliable by her sayings when describing this male;
“I think…”
“…but I cannot be sure,”
“…as far as I could tell.”
“…as well as I could make out.”
She describes what the man is wearing, a deerstalker hat and a dark coat, and she suggests that he was a man over forty and that he was tall, she also mentions that he was dark complexioned and that he looked to be like a foreigner.
We are lead to believe her inquest statement because it is an official report under oath inside a court, this helps the Ripper because if who she saw was not the murderer which the police are likely believe it is they are going to follow this statement and start looking for a man that fits that resemblance and not focus so much on what he would look like if the statement is incorrect and if it was not the murderer talking to her.
D is describing the appearance of the male, as a “…shabby genteel.”
At this time of period and in the area of West London, most males would have looked like this appearance suggested as of the low social class in the area with the likes of prostitutes etc so he would have fitted in just right and camouflaged along with everyone else.
As source E is a newspaper article report we do not know that the information stated in the article is correct, because we do not know the true origin of this information given to us, and that newspapers may not receive right or good information. The informant in the article looks to be ‘Jack the Ripper’ as it is telling the police force what to do and they are warning them;
“…there would be more mischief unless they could clear the streets…” but this information they received may not be from the ‘Jack the Ripper’.
E helps us understand his avoiding capture at the murder scenes as of the area of Whitechapel is “…connected by a network of narrow, dark and crooked lanes.” This would make it much easier for the ‘Ripper’ to avoid capture and getting caught after just committing the murders.
So overall it helps us learn how he got away with these murders in the long run by his appearance and in the short hand when carrying out his acts by the location he choose to carry out these murders and how Whitechapel is networked by its streets.
Question Four
Study Sources F and G
Use sources F and G, and your own knowledge, to explain how the police tried to catch Jack the Ripper.
Source F is a police leaflet published after the murders of Elizabeth Stride and Kate Eddowes, this helps us to understand some of the factors the police used to try and catch the Ripper and source G is part of a letter from the Home Secretary to the Mile End Vigilance Committee on the 17th September 1888.
The police tried to catch Jack the Ripper with using different methods;
They published this leaflet to the general public requesting communication off anyone who “knew of any person to whom suspicion is attached...” As well as appealing for anymore general information. In this leaflet they state;
“…supposed by someone residing in the immediate neighbourhood.”
This lead to enquiries made by the police.
The police did not state any kind of description of the killer, this portrays the police was very clueless, still after four murders they have no clue to who the killer is, hence came publicising of the leaflet showing they have no other means of finding the killer.
The head of the Metropolitan Police sent a letter to the Mile End Vigilance Committee explaining why the police stopped a reward, as it could cause “…more harm than good.” This may have been an advantage as it could have encouraged hoax witnesses after the reward who didn’t really know anything about the murders.
But they did not actually state a reason why or a rule to why it was stopped, so this says to me ‘How serious did they actually take it?’
The police carried out house to house enquiries, which was lead on from thinking the killer was local.
The police evidently had more police on the beat through Whitechapel; this is shown when another body was found after the murder of Elizabeth Stride. When Watkins passed through Mitre Square at 1.30am he saw nothing, but on his return at 1.44am he found a body who belonged to Catherine Eddowes, but at 1.42am another policeman had been through the square and seen nothing.
Police also went under cover dressing out of uniform in plain clothing, some even dressed as prostitutes to try and entice the prostitute serial killer.
They thought it was a good lead to interview to all slaughter men in the area, and arrested ‘Leather Apron’ because there was a leather apron found next to body of Annie Chapman, which says the police did follow some leads, this one was from Dr Bond, the only medical expert who did not believe that the Ripper had any medical knowledge and training as he said;
“In each case the mutilation was inflicted by a person who had no scientific nor anatomical knowledge…”
The police did also try and obtain some information by publishing what was believed to be letters from Jack the Ripper yet again appealing to the public linked with the publishing their leaflet requesting for information delivered to households in the area of Whitechapel.
So overall the Police did not really know much about this serial prostitute killer and did not really know how to deal with it and what leads to follow that they had.
The police did try and follow what they thought to be good leads, bearing in mind the police were not trained to carry out investigations of this type, there were just there to prevent disorderly behaviour on the streets, the main duties of the Metropolitan Police Force were to deal with drunkenness, beggars, vagrants, and prostitutes, and not to solve crimes.
Question Five
Study all of the sources
“The police were to blame for not capturing Jack the Ripper.”
Use all the sources and your own knowledge to explain whether you agree with this view.
It is very commonly said that the police were responsible for not capturing Jack the Ripper, for example, when they were investigating the second murder of Annie Chapman, the police tended to believe professional sources over witnesses as of an argument over time of death. The evidence of the three witnesses created a problem for the police, the police surgeon had given the time of death as about 4.30am but the witnesses suggested that 5.30am was a much more likely time.
The police tended always to believe professionals over others in lower classes, this is as in that period of time the police viewed the upper class much more highly, and as the witnesses were all working class the police believed the coroner and the doctor this was seen as very prejudice but it may be factor linking to why Jack the Ripper was not caught.
Source B and C explain that the police and others along with them had the opinion that the killer had to have medical knowledge as of his victim’s wounds, but the police wasted more valuable investigation time by interviewing all the four slaughter houses in the area which was a waste of time as slaughters do not have anatomical knowledge and skill.
But these first three sources show the killer, Jack the Ripper had no adequate no motive, the question is why would someone want to kill a prostitute, they have no money and there would be no reason to rob them and if the killer was after something in particular he would have not spent so much time cutting up the bodies.
The police were given a statement of the description of what the killer may have looked like, there source was a witness who was thought to be unreliable as of her low social class, and also because in her statement she did not sound sure of anything;
“…as far as I could tell,”
“…as well as I could make out, but they still took a lot of time looking for someone who was believed to look like a foreigner.
When an article was published in a local newspaper after the murders of Polly Nicholls and Annie Chapman, the article was warning the police and advising them what actions they should take, the police did not listen to the advice and their biggest mistake I believe is that they did not interview that informant even though the origin may have not been reliable.
The police only carried out house - to - house enquiries requesting for information on “anyone suspicious” and not really carry out and other real detective work, this did not advantage the police as they did not find any leads that they could follow.
The home secretary, the head of the metropolitan police decided that a reward was not to be offered their explanation for this was;
“The practice of offering reward for the discovery of criminals was discontinued some years ago because experience showed that such offers of reward tended to produce more harm than good.”
This was bad in a way because people may not want to come forward and give information now, but then again it would stop people coming forward giving false information just to claim the money reward.
From source H, the polices only hope of catching the Jack the Ripper was by an accident as the police did not have any clues, the police did not solve crimes but to prevent crimes, they did not have means of hand prints and the means of investigation like they have today, they were not trained to solve crimes of this type.
The photograph of the back yard of 29 Hanbury Street, where Annie Chapman was found is showing that the police were using new methods but the real evidence they should have used was photographing the chalk letter on the wall, which would have given them evidence to who the murder was from the handwriting, this shows they are using new methods but not to the best of their ability, as the head of the metropolitan police ordered it to be moved in case of any prejudice it may have caused without thinking of the evidence it could have brought them.
The media coverage that was produced as of these killings, the first article in the East End observer was a summary of the murders of Martha Tabram and Polly Nicholls, next published was a police leaflet to all the house tenants in Whitechapel requesting for information of anyone who might be suspicious, and the last article in ‘The Times’ describing the murder of Mary Kelly. All these articles though may just be exaggeration from the newspapers as in the first article it states the killer as a “…demented being…” which of course was not really there fault if the press exaggerated their information.
The media had a lot of involvement in the Jack the Ripper serial killer case; the newspapers also released letters supposedly from ‘Jack the Ripper’ which caused a lot of interest from the public.
Another factor which may not have been the polices fault, was that when they stopped the reward there was an advantage as they could have had hoax witnesses coming forward who just wanted the reward. It was also not the polices fault that they were not trained for dealing with such serious cases as serial killers, although the police were made of middle class people with not the highest of intelligence, but then again they had no idea of what a serial killer was.
So overall I do believe that the police were partially to blame for not capturing Jack the Ripper with the factors such as, not following or investigating more into possible leads such as not listening to witnesses and following professionals straight away. Also not interviewing informants even though they may have been unreliable there may have been some truth in the information. Another factor was not using new methods to best abilities.
Although not all of it may have been the police’s fault as of the non sufficient training they received and the out of proportion media that stemmed from this serial killer.