Police officers at first were equipped with a truncheon or were given a cutlass if they were patrolling a dangerous area but realised that they were an ineffective protection and were only useful for riots. The police however carried out a baton charge in an election demonstration and ‘disobeyed instructions as to the use of truncheons…’ this brought public mistrust especially among the lower class although in 1850, Inspectors began to carry revolvers. Overall, 109 police officers in total were killed in the line of work between 1829 and 1900.
The police began to show statistics showing crime rates falling yearly in an attempt to boost the public’s opinion of the police. This reduction in crime showed only reported crime, not unreported and several crimes could have been misinterpreted as petty crime or deviance and not actual crime in a method to favour the results. A policy of containment was initiated in which a number of areas became excessively dangerous for the police to undertake and crimes committed within these areas were not investigated.
As there was no prison, transportation was another option where criminals were transported to Australia to start a new life abroad. A prison-building programme began to deal with the rapid increase in prisoner numbers caused by the ending of capital punishment for crimes and a steady reduction in the use of transportation.
In prison, prisoners were not allowed to communicate and had a daily routine which included wearing black hats over their face and walking around in a circle, using a treadmill which would power a wheel and had to be turned 10000 times a day and smashing rocks. Rich people could buy higher places to live for rent which included the chancellors house, and could even pay for someone else to do there sentence for them.
Criminals dispersed out of London which showed that they either respected or feared the Metropolitan Police Force in the 19th Century although there could clear way of determining success. In April 1848, thousands of soldiers and special constables were brought in to defend London against the Chartist protests, which transpired to be a success for the police force.
The CID was a primary law and order force in society with functions for both the prevention and detection of crime in the late 19th century. Forensic methods were being developed and researched leading to more advanced methods for detecting crime by the early 20th century.
From past to present, in relation to this question, crime statistics have lowered and there has been a regeneration of most buildings making Whitechapel a successful town in which new businesses and accommodation are appearing frequently. Whitechapel has left its shadows of the terrible poverty and crime and is now a growing town. This major difference occurred during the Second World War in which large parts of the town were destroyed by the blitz, however, because of the great change to the layout and a building of Whitechapel, there is a great loss to the feel of the Whitechapel murders as it was the closest detail that can be sensed of 1888.
Question 2: Why did the Whitechapel Murders attract so much attention in 1888? (15 marks)
There is a great deal of speculation for each murder during the Whitechapel Murders therefore I will be referring to the generally accepted five murders with the distinct signatures of Jack the Ripper but he may have murdered more.
The first murder of Mary Ann Nichols in Bucks Row on the 31st August 1888 had been found with her throat deeply slashed, her abdomen cut open with the intestines exposed and two small stab wounds to her groin area.
On the 8th September, Annie Chapman was found murdered at 29 Hanbury Street with her throat deeply slashed, her abdomen disembowelled and her intestines thrown over her right shoulder. The killer had degraded the sex by taking her uterus and a portion of flesh surrounding her naval.
During the 30th of September, there were two more murders. Elizabeth Stride’s dead body was found in Berner Street at around 1.00am with her throat savagely cut. It not known whether she was a victim of the Whitechapel Murderer who might have been interrupted or if it was a coincidental murderer. In Mitre Square, a different area of London, at 1.45am, Catherine Eddowes body was also found. Her throat had been slashed, her abdomen had been completely disembowelled with her intestines thrown over her right shoulder, she had been depersonalised by facial mutilations and the killer as a trophy had taken her uterus and left kidney.
On November the 9th, at Miller’s Court, the dreadfully mutilated body of Mary Kelly was discovered on her bed in her room. Her throat had been slashed, her face severely mutilated, her chest and abdomen disembowelled and many of her internal organs had been found scattered around the murder scene along with the flesh carved from her limbs. Her heart was never found – it may be a taken as a trophy or burnt in the fireplace.
To commit the murder in the time taken requires practice and skill. The ripper’s modus operandi was to grab the victim by their throat and strangle them until unconscious or dead. He would lower the victim to the ground and would cut the throat savagely, left to right. He would move their head to the left, to stop blood going on the killer. After, he would terribly mutilate the body; face and certain organs removed from her abdomen and possibly take them as a trophy. By each murder, the ferocity increased and he ripper is thought to have some medical knowledge as he used his knife swiftly and carried out dissections, but other doctors disagree.
Jack the Ripper was the first serial killer in a large city and the first serial killer to receive a large amount of publicity. The public became hooked on the story. The direct detail of the ripper’s victims with a deceived rumour to add shock at the same time both fascinated and horrified the public. While the murders increased in violence, the press published more ghastly reports; sometimes investigations with findings were published, which often lead to the public mobs attacking innocent suspects and interviewees.
Whitechapel the most anonymous and dangerous area in greater London, was the perfect place for the opportunist murderer. Full of crime and prostitution, murdered prostitutes transpired almost everyday and like the first victim, were not fully investigated. Throughout each murder, it is clear Jack the Ripper increased in confidence despite the higher risks; this obviously came from the sensatimalism from the press and a feeling of not being caught and seeing how much he can get away with. He felt invincible, but left each prostitute massacre later and later showing he was an opportunist.
At first, the police gave the first murdered prostitute a low priority as it was common for prostitutes to be murdered and they did not know about the mutilations under her clothing. The police officers working on the case were changed regularly making it difficult for the stability of the investigation. Police evidence was often interfered such as the graffiti written in chalk, “The Juwes are the men That Will not be blamed for nothing”, found after the fourth murder of Catherine Eddowes. It is regularly debated whether it was written by the ripper. If the ripper wrote the graffiti, it would show that the ripper was more conscious than first thought and would show that he contemplated over religion and communities. Conversely, this also led to many different theories of the identity of the ripper.
The graffiti caused much controversy between the two forces. The City Police officers considered it necessary to wait until dawn and photograph the message as it was a valuable sample of handwriting evidence and as photos could only be taken in light but the Commissioner for the Metropolitan Police Force, Sir Charles Warren, alleged that “if the writing had been left, there would have been an onslaught upon the Jews, property would have been wrecked and lives would probably have been lost”. The writing was washed off by order of Warren before it could be photographed.
The nature of the murders brought much attention to the town of Whitechapel, which in effect was bad for social, economic and political affairs in and around Whitechapel. To overcome this impediment, businesses such as Walter & Son offered a reward in which anyone that provided enough information to the capture and arrest of the murderer would be given the remuneration. However, the Conservative Home Secretary, Henry Matthews, turned this down on the 4th September as they contemplated that people who wanted to claim the reward would give misleading or incorrect information.
Nevertheless, the nature of the murders captured the attention of Samuel Montagu, a local MP, who on the 10th September 1888 offered a £100 reward as he feared the murders would damage their reputation to be seen doing not enough to help catch the murderer. Hundreds of people gathered in groups to find the ripper red-handed and claim the fame and reward however, in most cases they would just threaten immigrants and people who looked like they did not fit in.
George Lusk, a local businessman helped form a Vigilance Committee where he was the Chairman and thus Members of the committee patrolled the streets of Whitechapel at night in an attempt also to catch the murderer red-handed and to calm the scared and angry mobs of people. Amongst the growing crowds, a Vigilance Committee, and two determined police forces, it is astonishing that the ripper managed to commit these horrific acts and get away with the types of crimes perpetrated.
Social reformers used the Whitechapel murders to their advantage and argued the need to improve living conditions of poor people. In 1875, social reformers had helped to pass a piece of legislation, which allowed the government to clear London’s slums. Property owners were charging for double beds, single beds and the “lean-to”, a way one could sleep by hanging their arms over a rope strung across a room. The Artisans Dwelling Act of 1875 meant London authorities were allowed to buy slum property and demolish it before building new accommodation for the working classes; however, property owners were compensated for the loss of their properties using the rent they were getting before their property was bought from them. Since the public of Whitechapel who needed accommodation was poverty-stricken, they could only afford low rents, so in effect; this policy caused overcrowding in the slums. This was for the reason that property owners squeezed plenty of people into each property to claim maximum compensation while their properties were compulsorily purchased from them.
There was political unrest occurring in which the Liberals and the Irish Home Rule Party used the ripper and newspapers to their full advantage. Queen Victoria also wrote to the Prime Minister urging him to take action to catch the ripper.
Whitechapel in 1888 was not a typical London suburb. Infested in crime and poverty, an estimate of 1500 prostitutes served in Whitechapel from a Metropolitan Police survey. Charles Booth’s analysis of Whitechapel found that 2% of the East End was homeless; 4% were street urchins and the very poor; 12% were poverty stricken, and a disturbing 55% of children died before the age of five. There were also foreigners such as Jews who had fled the Pogroms in Russia and Poles expelled from Prussia.
Tabloid Newspapers such as The Star (London) and the Illustrated London News were created and the education act of 1870 extended basic education for children up to the age of 11, which created a literate generation ready for this tabloid, Ripper influx. These new tabloid papers took no inhibition in conceding the horrific, violent, sexual frisson murders the ripper committed, knowing that the more perceptible the front page looks, and the more chance the public will buy it.
The press believed at the time that the first two murders before the first ripper murder were also ripper murders and thus labelled him a serial killer when he in likelihood killed only one prostitute. This gave the public the impression that the Ripper had killed more people.
As each brutal murder was separated by a longer duration and in order to keep the story going, the public and press, usually tabloid, sensatimilised (exaggerated) many rumours, scandals and theories to their advantage to help sell confuse and excite the captivated people, which created the ripper phenomenon. On the 3rd October 1988, a letter was received by the Central News Agency from someone claiming to be Jack the Ripper; this was at first retained from public view for any clues and leads but was later declared a hoax on the 10th October by Sir Charles Warren. A tabloid journalist most likely writ and sent the letter as the context it contained inside generally advised of terrible actions and teasing the police where theoretically it would have been sent to any police department. Having been sent to the Central News Agency shows that it was sent to shock the public, baffle the police and help boost the sales of newspapers.
The Whitechapel Murders did not only have a negative in Whitechapel. The government realised the critical state of Whitechapel and offered to help, the police increased security in Whitechapel, and as the panic reached its height, the case went international, appearing in newspapers from Europe to the Americas and helping out with any suspects fleeing to other countries.
Whitechapel to the other countries seemed like another world. The dark alleyways and smog made Whitechapel at night appear like a horror story. The scary scenes and events of the murders added to the excitement and fear the people endured at the time and made the story even more fascinating to the people following it everywhere else.
However, as the Whitechapel murders changed into a social craze, some people confessed to the murders to get attention and publicity. John Fitzgerald was one of those people; he confessed on the 26th September to the murder of Annie Chapman and was released 3 days later. During those 3 days, was on most tabloid front-page headlines until he was released.
The Whitechapel Murders attracted the attention all over the world mainly because of the nature and brutality of the victims and the sensatimalism of the press. However, the Whitechapel Murders also occurred at the perfect time, when crime and poverty was at the peak, when a new generation had learnt the skills to read a newspaper, and when social, economic and political matters were involved with working class societies.
Question 3: Why were the police unable to catch Jack the Ripper? (20 marks)
During the time of the ripper murders, there was a great rivalry between the police forces as both wanted fame and to excel the other force. Each police force had their area to supervise and could not investigate or solve any crime anywhere else. There was often little or no sharing of information or evidence between the police forces investigating the crimes across their borders and there were conflicts between the methods to undertake solving the crime which meant a loss of evidence. During the second murder, the head of the CID, James Monro, resigned because of disagreements with Sir Charles Warren, Commissioner for the Metropolitan Police Force, regarding the method to solve the Whitechapel Murders Investigation. Warren was a military officer and colonial administrator for the British Empire in Africa and therefore was not right to be Metropolitan Police Commissioner. He also interfered greatly with the C.I.D by placing unrealistic demands that were time-consuming.
James Monro also intended a reward for the murderer but the Conservative Home Secretary, Henry Matthews, refused this as people who wanted to claim the reward would give misleading or incorrect information. At present, police forces share information and form groups from other forces to help tackle a crime.
The graffiti written in chalk, “The Juwes are the men That Will not be blamed for nothing”, found after the fourth murder of Catherine Eddowes is regularly debated whether the ripper wrote it. If the ripper wrote the graffiti, it would show that the ripper was more conscious than thought and would show that he contemplated over religion and communities. Conversely, this also led to many different theories of the identity of the ripper.
The graffiti caused much controversy between the two forces. The City Police officers considered it necessary to wait until dawn and photograph the message as it was a valuable sample of handwriting evidence and as photos could only be taken in light but the Commissioner for the Metropolitan Police Force, Sir Charles Warren, alleged that “if the writing had been left, there would have been an onslaught upon the Jews, property would have been wrecked and lives would probably have been lost”. The writing was washed off by order of Warren before it could be photographed.
Though the graffiti was found near a piece of Eddowes apron, which the Ripper used to clean the blood of his knife, there is a possibility that it might not have been left by the murderer. Someone who hated the Jews or immigrants could have written the graffiti before the slaughter took place. Nevertheless, the apron could have been left purposely by the ripper to mock the police, as he could have known that they would not catch him with the blood stained clothing.
Though the Criminal Investigation Department (CID) had been just established during the Whitechapel murders, the role of the police was to catch the criminal red-handed or to extract a confession.
The police, not knowing if it was real or hoax at the time, had to deal with thousands of hoax letters, a rise in petty crime and people confessing to the murders to get attention and publicity. John Fitzgerald was one of those people; he confessed on the 26th September to the murder of Annie Chapman and was released 3 days later. During those 3 days, was on most tabloid front-page headlines until he was released.
On the 27th September, a letter beginning with “Dear Boss” and signed “Jack the Ripper” was given to the Central Agency in London. It boasted about not being caught and was not released to the press.
After the double murders of Elizabeth Stride and Catherine Eddowes, a postcard was received at the Central News Agency in which the press published the letters; the postcard became known as the “Saucy Jacky” postcard because he talks with impudence. The handwriting was thought to be the same as that in the ‘Dear Boss’ letter and the writer, boasting about the double murder he allegedly had committed, could have been sent by a policeman on the case who would have known about the details reported in the letter or someone who could have read about the murders in a newspaper the before posting it the same day. Alternatively, the letter might truly have originated from the killer himself. To this day, there is still debate as to the identity of the sender of the letter.
At around 5.00 pm on the 16th October, a package containing half a kidney and a postcard beginning with “From hell” and signed “Catch me when you can” was delivered to George Akin Lusk’s home. The sender claimed it to be one of the victims while the police at the time established that it was a left human adult kidney however McWilliam with Chief Inspector Donald Swanson of the Met concluded, “…similar kidneys might + could be obtained from any dead person upon whom a post mortem had been made from any cause by students or dissecting room porter.” The basic facts surrounding the kidney are well known, but in the following discussion, they allow a concise recapitulation.
At the time, the technology available to the police force was not as modern as of today, but it was advancing because of the ripper case. New technologies such as fingerprinting, cameras being used in crime scenes, and documentation, (sketches, preliminary interviews with witnesses, photos, physical evidence, etc.), were being accessible but in spite of this; the police hardly used any of the technology available to contribute to the ripper case.
Instead the detectives and police used basic interviews and witness accounts, which if recorded, would of helped catch the killer as it is believed the ripper must have been interviewed and seen several times with a good enough excuse to let him go. Additionally, if the police at the time added up all the witness identities, most of them would cancel each other out showing that a large amount of suspects were not needed for investigation. The information kept was not stored and analysed, reducing the chance of catching the ripper. There were hardly any photographs taken which would have been very useful as of today while at the time, they could only be done when the scene was kept secure for bloodhounds. Furthermore, vital evidence, such as footwear impressions or blood flow patterns could be destroyed, as the crime scenes were not preserved.
The apron covered in blood illustrates the lack of technology at the time, as the police could not use it as evidence. They also could not verify if it was human blood or the blood of an animal, as they did not have forensic science, which if they did, would have almost certainly lead to the killer.
The areas were full of immigrants and poor people who would usually stay for a job and move somewhere else; there were no records of the people living in and around Whitechapel. This made it harder for the police to pursue or trace movements of any suspect or criminal at the time while nowadays, there are databases of residents living in any given region.
Not only did the public have to be vigilant, with a larger amount of police on the beat, criminals had to also be careful. Among the growing rise in crime every year throughout the 1880s, the only major fall occurred in 1888 given that the there was an increase in police in Whitechapel because of the ripper case. Whitechapel was the most dangerous place in London; the whole area was filled poverty and crime. A metropolitan police survey in 1888 estimated that there were 1,500 prostitutes in Whitechapel and so it was the perfect place to increase police, irony in that the ripper made crime but also helped reduce it. Overall crime in Whitechapel fell by 6% as a result of more police in and around the area, however, the boost in the amount of police in Whitechapel meant a reduce of police in the other areas of London. Criminals used this to their full advantage; in the north west of London, petty crime raised to more that 21%, nevertheless, overall, all murder in London fell by 2%, showing that murder had become a much more serious matter.
The police had to deal with immigrants unable to speak English and illiterate working class people who distrusted the police. The police recruiting system was a not a success either as police officers with problems with literacy could easily learn the answers to the exams off by heart. Police officers had to be 35 or less and at least 5’ 7” with the skills to read and write however, these were loosened and some police officers, as were not under supervision, got drunk on the job. The general attitude was that “the police were incompetent” and most police were not feared by the public and were usually beaten up by gangs while being on the beat in Whitechapel.
There were many distinct features of the Whitechapel murders; a typical murdered prostitute was a very common crime to be committed in Whitechapel. Before the ripper began his activity, police officers would usually not investigate a typical murdered prostitute and while they did not find the signatures of the ripper until the second victim, it overall delayed the start of the investigation for the Whitechapel murderer. There were also many copycat murders and deviant attacks by the public and journalists such as graffiti and hoax letters that were intended to look like the work of the Ripper.
There is much comment to be made on the identity of the ripper, it is clear that he had a profession or job as he murdered during Friday, Saturday and Sunday night. It is also clear that he had a knowledge in the anatomy of the body such as cutting the kidney at the back and in the short time he took, most probably had it in a profession so was probably a surgeon, doctor or butcher. He was defiantly a white single male, as had a clear psychological reference of sexual frustration to the female reproductive system, in which he took as a trophy on some victims and had to lure prostitutes to serve him. Several witnesses also saw him as a “tall, dark, man” that looked rich or middle class with a moustache. He also knew how and where to kill and blended in with the public so had to live in Whitechapel, as he knew the area in detail. He also probably knew the police beat time in each area given that he killed before the police entered the scene and was never caught red-handed.
He would have been between the ages of 20-40, right-handed and would not have dressed as a labourer or homeless person. He would have been of an average height or possibly below and may have been a foreigner.
There are many theories of the ripper and who he was in the present day but are now made just for the money, some believe that it could be a member of the royal family and others believe that he might have been a mason, falampalist, by making people see the poverty of Whitechapel and help, or aristocrat. While the most common theory is a wealthy man with medical training, the truth of the ripper is still a mystery and cannot be solved by theories.
The most common theories at the time for the murders were; a gang of thieves, a gang extorting money from prostitutes penalised the three women for failing to pay, or a maniac was on the loose.
The police did not investigate middle classes and they instead persisted in investigating immigrants and the working class. On the 1st September, Leather Apron, a chief suspect, was held in custody and interviewed. On the 14th September, a cyclist was arrested for looking suspicious and on the 18th September, Alexander Freinberg, a Jew, was arrested on suspicion of committing the murders. The public mobs attacked the Jewish community and immigrants in response to the immigrants and Jews being suspects
The Whitechapel Murders was a completely new type of investigation involving explicit murders of a serial nature and was completely different to the typical domestic murders police officers had to deal with. From these murders, there was no connection, other than the nature of the victims being prostitutes, all being around 40 and the murders being committed at night in Whitechapel on a Friday, Saturday or Sunday. The murderer had no motive other than to brutally kill and degrade the sex of the prostitutes and to show the victim in such a state to shock and distress the observer. The murder was quick and careful and made sure the satisfaction was received from the murders. The serial nature of the crime meant that the technology available could not the catch the criminal, as the method was prevention and not detection.
The prostitutes continued to work despite the risks as a typical prostitute had to work at least once a day to get somewhere to sleep for the night and an alcoholic drink.
After the fifth murder the killer stopped, probably from being killed, realising the danger of being caught or fleeing to another country. On November 10th, the Cabinet allowed a pardon to any accomplice of the killer who would turn him in, hoping that if there were a group, they would confess to the murders and the members of their group.
The investigations were published and interfered with by the press. On 13th September, The East London Observer made a statement in that Catherine Eddowes knew the identity of Jack the ripper and was intending to claim the reward. On the 27th September, the ripper in concept that his identity would be exposed brutally murdered Catherine Eddowes that even the toughest police found difficulty entering the crime scene.
In 1888, the police were oblivious to sexual psychopaths and were not prepared for the ripper’s serial attacks. Currently, they have the technology such as elaborate profiling techniques and have amassed a database of information with which forensic psychologists and psychiatrists can determine the kind of individual perpetrating the crime. Overall, the police did not catch the ripper but they did make stop the serial murders and made every effort to free London of the terror.
As the identity of the ripper had not been solved, it has helped create books films and documentaries and educate the future generations about this investigation even though it which happened more than a century ago.
