Jack the Ripper Sources Questions

Question 1

From source A, we can learn that the murders of Martha Tabram and Polly Nicholls occurred within the same month in the city of London. A, we can learn that the murders of Martha Tabram and Polly Nicholls occurred within the same month in the city of London. The motive of the killer in each case is questionable, as no theft has occurred with the murder. We can tell that these murders are unusual and especially shocking as they are described as ‘startling’. It is strongly indicated that the two murders are linked as the one article describes them together, and the victims are both poor women, killed in London in the same month. We can guess that the killer has not been found the killings are described as ‘the work of a demented being’ but fails to mention the name of the killer or any suspects. From this description of the killer and the terms ‘excess of effort’ and ‘extraordinary violence’ when referring to the killings, we can learn that the murders are brutal and violent and most probably premeditated as ‘the excess of effort’ would be applied in a planned and calculated murder. As the East End Observer is intended for public reading, and the articles are made as interesting as possible, we must bare in mind that the descriptions of the killings may have been exaggerated.

Question 2

Source C supports sources A and B in saying that there was blood on Elisabeth Stride’s chest, as sources A and B both describe brutal and bloody murders. Source A states that there was no apparent motive to the murder in the shape of plunder. Source c both supports this in saying that there was no money on the body and therefore no indication that a theft had occurred, but also challenges source A as the lack of money found on the body could have been the result of plunder taking place. Source C’s description of the incision in the victim’s neck supports source A’s statement that the murders are violent and the work of a demented being. It also supports source B’s statement that the killer had anatomical skill and knowledge in its description of the incision being a precise cut dividing the windpipe. Such an accurate incision supports source A’s statement that the ‘excess of effort’ is apparent in each case. It also supports sources A and B’s inference that the murders were premeditated. I.e. ‘There were no meaningless cuts’

Question 3

Source D is quite useful in helping us understand why the Ripper was never caught, as the evidence provided by the witness is unhelpful to the police investigation for the following reasons:

This is a preview of the whole essay

Question 3

Source D is quite useful in helping us understand why the Ripper was never caught, as the evidence provided by the witness is unhelpful to the police investigation for the following reasons:

Elisabeth Long was a first hand witness to what appears to have been a conversation between the victim and the Ripper. However her lack of confidence in her evidence, demonstrated through her continuous qualifiers, i.e. “but I cannot be sure” and “I think” makes it less dependable evidence thus increasing our understanding as to why he was never caught. Her statement “as well as I could make out” implies that visibility was low. Her descriptions of the killer are therefore too vague to convict a suspect on the basis of visual identification. Elisabeth describes the man as “shabby genteel”. This is a subjective opinion, which doesn’t signify whether he was a shabby looking upper class man or a well-dressed working class man. Whitechapel at that time was an area settled by many immigrants. Elisabeth Long’s description of the man as foreign looking could apply to any one of the many foreign born residents. Elisabeth would have come into contact with many men each night, which suggests that she may have confused the killer with any other of the clients in her description.

However, source D is also unhelpful to our understanding why the Ripper was never caught, as the evidence provided by the witness, although hesitant, provides the police with a concrete description of the killer. Her frequent use of qualifiers may well have been a function of her nervousness towards the police. The description was none the less a full one, which narrows down their search to a man “over forty” who wore “a deer stalker hat and could be described as “shabby genteel” and “foreign looking”.

Source E is quite useful in helping us understand why the Ripper was able to avoid capture, as it points out that the thoroughfares of Whitechapel were connected by dark and narrow side streets and alleyways which provided an ideal setting for murders. The Ripper could commit his murders in the dead of night without fear of being seen, as nobody would choose to remain outside in that place at night.

The newspaper article seems to elaborate its information on the subject and implies that its ‘informant’ had some prior knowledge about the murders that were to take place by saying that he ‘warned’ the police. It also states that murders followed his warnings and infers that the murders were a result of police not paying heed to those warnings. I think this inference was published for publicity and sales showing that the press also hindered the police investigation making it even harder to catch Jack the Ripper by following genuine leads.

If the description of the infamy that occurred on the streets of Whitechapel at night was accurate, source E is unhelpful to our understanding why the Ripper was never caught, as the police had relevant information about the area at night, and knew why the murders could occur. After the ‘informant’s’ warning was borne out by later events, they should then have been heeded by the police, and acted upon.

Question 4

From source F we can learn that in an attempt to catch the Ripper, the police posted a notice to houses asking for information on the killings. After the third murder, on the 30th September, it became clear that the police were dealing with a serial killer and the notices were posted that very day. The notice expresses desperation and “earnestly” requested people with information to come forward.

From my own knowledge, I know that inquiries were made at abattoirs and slaughterhouses, because the way that Polly Nichols and Annie Chapman were cut up suggested that someone with experience of dissecting bodies may have been involved. Inspector Frederick Abberline was in charge of the investigation. He had served for 25 years in the Metropolitan Police Force and had spent most of that time in Whitechapel. His experience was crucial to the investigation. The police took notice of evidence suggesting that the murderer had medical knowledge and consequently 76 butchers and slaughterers were questioned despite their having been dismissed as possible suspects. This demonstrates the thoroughness of the investigation. The police increased the number of patrols in Whitechapel and PC’s on the beat were criss-crossing Whitechapel at regular intervals. After the two murders on the 30th September, the number of police patrols increased even more. Several policemen dressed up as prostitutes in an attempt to trap the killer. The police visited most of the lodging houses in Whitechapel and interviewed more than 2000 lodgers. Sailors on Thames’ river boats were also questioned. Bloodhounds were used to try and follow the scent of the killer. The notice was sent to 80,000 houses. The police also attempted to jog the public memory by publishing the ‘Dear Boss’ letters.

However, the police investigation failed in a number of respects. The idea of offering a reward for the capture of Jack the Ripper was declined by the Home Secretary as he then had no idea of the seriousness of the situation. He thought that a reward would result in spurious claims and an excess of unhelpful public involvement – “more harm than good” – 17th September, 1888.

Inspector Chandler ignored some of Elizabeth Long’s evidence at it conflicted with that of Dr. Phillips, who was an experienced and highly regarded police surgeon. In fact, at the inquest, Dr. Phillips did suggest that his estimate of the time of Annie Chapman’s death may have been inaccurate. The police again discounted this.

Inspector Abberline took a description given by William Hutchinson very seriously and had it circulated to all police stations. The description was incredibly detailed for a siting that had taken place at night, suggesting that the witness may himself have been avoiding suspicion. However, the police did not investigate him at all.

The desperation of the police was shown in the handbill posted (source F). There were three startling points about the handbill. Firstly, the police were unable or unwilling to give any description of the killer. Secondly, they still apparently believed that the killer lived in Whitechapel, despite evidence that he lived elsewhere, as all the killings had taken place at weekends. Thirdly, they were still appealing for information regarding suspicious characters. The last point shows that the police were still using the standard method of detective work, even after the great mass of evidence that had been collected about the Ripper and his victims. In fact, after the third and fourth murders, there was evidence that the Ripper lived outside Whitechapel as the killings took place at weekends.

Question 5