Jack the Ripper: Unmasking the Ripper
Jack the Ripper is a pseudonym given to an unidentified serial killer active in the largely impoverished districts in and around Whitechapel, London, in late 1888. The name originated in a letter by someone claiming to be the murderer that was disseminated in the media. The letter is widely considered to be a hoax, and may have been written by a journalist in a deliberate attempt to heighten interest in the story.
The seemingly unsolvable 1888 crimes of Jack the Ripper continue to fascinate. Even today, over a dozen new books on the subject are published each year. One such book makes the case for Walter Sickert, an artist with a dark side, being the actual Whitechapel killer.
Even though many experts dismiss Sickert, claiming he was in France at the time of the murders, those claims are put to the test using handwriting analysis and modern DNA analysis. Strip down the most provocative scientific questions of our time and explore them under a tightly focused lens. Animation, CGI, and special effects lead us through the search for answers as the investigations unfold.
“ also why would he wait 45 minutes for Mary kellys costumer to come out?”
😂, u seriously trying to act like that’s hard to believe. We can debate whether he was telling truth or not, but I’m sry, it is a total believable story. A guy who doesn’t have a lot of money, hoping a girl will take pity on him & hook him up with some free loving. Oh yeah, that would never happen. Actually it would. It happens all the time now. Maybe he is Jack, but I’m sry, the case for him isnt any stronger than HH Holmes, Charles Cross, James Kelly, Tumbledee , Kominsky Etc. The ones I named all having pretty compelling theories & all plausible. If Hutinchson was so obvious, a lot more people would have him at top of the list instead of not even on the list. Actually I think most people have Hutchinson somewhere between Prince Albert & Lewis Carroll & just ahead of the Elephant Man. I wouldn’t rule out Hutchinson myself, but I’d put him right there with Joseph Barnett. As in possible, but evidence very weak. You have a statement as only evidence & his actions that night. Hutchinson went to the police to tell them he was with her. Not the other way around. No1 told the police about him being with her like your insinuating and therefore he had to admit it. He told the police on his own. It’s not like last call was at midnight in 1888 London. So I’m sorry, I don’t see a drunk being out late at night who knew Mary Kelly and prob enjoyed her services on multiple occasions, as weird. It makes more sense that he was out waiting when you consider he did know her. It’d be much more incriminating if he didn’t know her and waited. I do wish more documentaries included his story, cuz it is a big part of the story-at least Mary Kelly part-but the reason why they clearly don’t is because hardly anyone finds his story unbelievable enough to where the fee inclined to include him as a suspect.
Charles Cross is discounted way too much. A guy walks up on him standing by a body. That guy sees no blood & though it is dark went up close to body to cover her up. He saw no blood. Then later, Constable sees Polly in pool of blood. So couldn’t have been dark enough to where Robert Paul couldn’t have noticed the blood let alone a cut across her throat unless her chin was covering it which I admit is entirely possible. Regardless, there’s multiple reason why suspicion falls upon people who find the body. Plenty of times those people are indeed innocent, but plenty is not always. Sneakers werent for invented and guys wore boots back then on cobblestone roads. You can literally-not foguratively-hear someone coming from a mile away. Yet nobody else was heard or seen & the coroner believed she was murdered around the time the men found the body. This doesn’t even include Charles Crosses actions & shadiness. Back then, it was a crime not to give your full legal name. Someone with nothing to hide wouldn’t feel need to give stepfathers last name. He used Lechemere with everything else. Jack the Ripper could be a person nobody has even heard of yet, but in terms of who we do know. Lechmere/Cross is better than anybody. How many people can we put at scene of murder. You can Hutchinson we can, but there’s a little difference between being over a dead body, and being on a side street around the corner from a popular bar that the man is known to frequent.
HH Holmes movements can almost all be tracked, aside from his time in NY and also, the autumn of 1888. I don’t know where the person who said he was overseeing construction that whole time got that info. But it’s not entirely factual. I’m not saying he was in London, but I am saying he was likely to have been and we know he had been there before. The whole changing of MO, isn’t that odd as some try to make it. If you’re in a foreign country, you don’t really have the means or time to set up a murder castle on vacation. His hotel wasn’t finished til after the Ripper Murders. It’s not far fetched to assume he graduated and got smarter & decided to do it for profit & pleasure. I don’t think it was Holmes but I can’t dismiss as easy as some act like they can.
Tumbledee is a great suspect. Guy was clearly nuts. Its not even a debate. He hated women and was in the area at time of Murders then left just as they stopped.
James Kelly escaped lunatic asylum. Ripper Murders start. Then he leaves to America & they stop. Ripper like Murders happen in USA. Then all the sudden guy goes back to Asylum on his own accord & literally says that he’s been on the warpath. Maybe he isn’t the Ripper, but I think he killed people and he is good as suspect as any. Kominsky seems too easy. He had mental issues and was a Jew. Not hard to see why London police would suspect him, but there’s really very little evidence against him as one would think considering so many consider him so good for the job.
Could’ve been a gang doing it, but outside of Stride, all the witnesses tend to put victims with 1 man right before their murders. Liz Stride on other hand, a witness saw 2 men, and 1 gave chase. That could’ve been before the murder and then soon after Jack came along, or maybe Stride was a gang & not actually Jack. Also strange how, the Jewish man who saw her struggling with a man as another man looked on, was later to have said to have identified the man. Which some think was Kosminski. But supposedly the men yelled a Jewish slur at the witness before the other man gave chase. Be weird for that to Kosminski. And then who was Kosminski with. That whole situation seems off, and the truth is prob lost to history with some of that story being true but somehow Kosminski got mixed into it.
Seem to be best suspects out of the all information we have today.
Jospeph Barnett hated the Mary Kelly was a Hooker & therefore prob wasn’t found of profession. But to say he hated prostitutes enough to where he’d kill his lover and a handful of other prostitutes isn’t impossible but there’s little evidence outside of somebody’s gut. Which who knows, maybe their gut is right for once in their lives. Buzzfeed unsolved seemed to buy theory but I don’t & think majority have their doubts too.
Maybe Jack is just some nobody lost to history. That’s as likely as any other theory. I’m not saying the 3 I listed are Jack or that I know who Jack is. I wouldn’t have listed my fav 3 if I knew who Jack was. I just think they have the most going for em or against em actually. Peeps can disagree all they want. I don’t claim to be omniscient. I just find it funny when another person calls out others for their opinions or thought and says things like, “do you’re homework”. Then act like they know everything & list things that they find weird that aren’t actually at all that weird.
Which documentary was it that had a journalist who had studied the man and his murders for 30 years? I was convinced beyond doubt that he was right.
HH Holmes i reckon was jack the ripper specially after watching the docu series the american ripper
I am searching jack the Ripper show on india history channel , but not finding
H.H. Holmes was in the US in August 1886, working to obtain the funds to purchase what would later become his hotel (his "Castle"). He was in Minnesota in Jan. 1887 getting married to Myrta Belknap.
He purchased the property on West 63rd Street in the summer of 1888 and was overseeing construction of his hotel from that point until its completion, which included the frequent hiring and firing of contractors/builders in an effort to conceal the true nature of his hotel. He didn't travel to London, commit the five murders attributed to Jack, then travel back to the US during the months of Aug., Sept., Oct. and Nov. 1888 . He spent from late August to the middle of November 1888 overseeing construction.
The five Ripper murders began on Aug. 31 and stopped on Nov. 9, then you have to account for the 6-10 days travel time to get from the US to England and another 6-10 to get back to the US. A conservative estimate would be August 25 to November 14 for Holmes to travel and kill the five Ripper victims.
HH Holmes as the Ripper is an interesting theory, but it really doesn't fit with the type of killer Holmes was and his activities during the latter half of 1888.
"Sickert the Ripper" is ludicrous, he was in fact in France. Although some choose to ignore it, there's more than enough evidence to attest to the fact he was in France at the time of the murders.
I have studied this case for 25 years,half my lifetime,the more I research it,I beleive there was no jack the ripper! What?whitechapel was rife with murder dailey,a reporter on a London paper wrote the letter signed jack""""""",thus creating the single person image in the minds of the people and police.since1888 we are looking for 1 suspect based on this letter,see?it was problem 3/5 different people,copycating the brute type of murders.sorry to bust the bubble,not a popular theory but the only one that fits,with no holes in it.
All you people are wrong,you did not do your homework before you made your comment,first this was a sex crime but jack never had sex with his victim so unless he cut himself there will be no DNA found.now just because somebody says they know who jack was don't mean there right.if you do homework on this you will see jack lived right in the middle of these killings and he saw these girls all the time and they saw him so they would not be afraid to see him at night also jack knew two of these girls and that is why two of the girls had there faces cut up,now there is one man who fits in all ways he lived there,he knew two of the girls he lived alone,he put himself in the case not because he wanted to but because he had been seen and had to,that man is GEORGE HUTCHINSON! the only reason most over look him is because the cops talked to him and believed his story yet let me remind you of something the police talked to the yorkshire ripper nine times before he was caught!and this has happened in a lot of cases.the story he gave is weak but back then the police were not looking for a normal man,jack was normal on the outside,read his statement and ask yourself what he was doing out that late standing around on a cold raining night?also why would he wait 45 minutes for Mary kellys costumer to come out?why did he not come forward and tell the police he talked to mary on the day they had her inquest?George knew that area well it would be easy for him to disappear after a kill,he fits in all ways to being Jack and when he moved away from London in late 1890 or early 1891 the murders stopped!now this is just a little of my homework and if you do as i did along with researching what kind of killer Jack was the only person who fits is GEORGE HUTCHINSON!
I think that he was a tool used by social reformers of the east end. They wanted to get the attention of the queen and this was the only way to do that. How could this person murder this way with the police and citizen vigilantes swarming the streets of the east end? He had to have had look outs, covering all entrances and exits to and from the crime scene. I think that it suddenly stopped because not only did these persons get the attention of the queen, they got the attention of the world. Thus their job was done. Whether they deported the Ripper or killed him off I don't know.
well i read most of the comments but the main question to me is why did he stop after the fifth murder it appears that he is an ego maniac who like attention and challenge it clearly appears so in the his letters that was sent to the police why did stop its either 3 things he died or he acheived what he want by feeding his ego but its clear and proved he is smarter than the police or something happened to him that changed his thinking totally
Maybe it was HH Holmes. He was known to have sold female organs in the U.S., namely the uterus ...was seen walking 2 big dogs, Greyhounds I think....and was known to travel abroad, at the time of the Ripper killings..he was a doctor as well...further more he was a known serial killer in the U.S. at the very same time as the ripper in England...it is unknown just how many people Holmes killed...he was caught shortly after the Ripper killings and executed in the U.S....any thoughts? Watch the H.H. Holmes movie found on this site...see what you think.
it could have been a jealous enraged wife who discovered her husband had been frequenting the whores
well it could have been a woman, like you men keep saying women are less likely to kill like that, men got more education back then were higher up and so on but it doesn't mean women have never done these kinds of things or weren't capable of learning things by watching back then just because men thought they couldn't and the fact that women were thought of in such a way would have ruled them all out as suspects so the police weren't looking for a woman and it would explain why nobody saw anything or heard anything because the victims would have trusted another woman
i don't think it was a woman because back then men got the most education than women.. because men we're the highest
I believe the murders were done by more than one person and not necessarily known to each other. Certainly the last one Mary Kelly - who was killed in her home instead of on the streets like the others. Newly formed newspapers wanting to attract a share of the market sensationalised the murders even more with drawings, speculations, innaccuracies and rumour.The Dear Boss letter was discovered to have been written by a journalist. This wild publicity would have been an ideal opportunity for other murderers to do their thing with a ceratin amount of impunity - as their crime in the mind of the public, would be lumped together with those of the 'serial killer' - Jack the Ripper. He probably stopped because other murders (not by him) put him in even more danger of being caught.
I think it was a woman. but who knows?
It was without any doubt someone high up in the English establishment, thats how he or she could stay 1 step ahead.
And maybe even so high that if caught, would have been kept secret from the general public because of the nature of the crimes. If this person was of nobel birth it could have caused riots, maybe even revolution! I belive the the suspect was caught secretly tried, and either hanged or put in an institution till he?she died. And why do i think this? Because serial killers do not stop! until either caught or killed, the sudden stop of the killings leads me to belive that he/she was secretly caught!
all i know is if they had just the letters, then that would be enough to convict you in court today.
it was colonel mustard in the library with the knife
Does anybody know who narrated this documentary ?? if you do please let me know, as i really need to know.
and joe i agree with you it is very likely that it was part of their alibi
I think shes on the right path,some one that smart is usually right under your nose,also in simular killings by other who are attracted to inner organs are evil posessed,in one case,in florida a husband stab to death his wife and mutilated his neice,dissected and removed her organs,then learnnig he brag to friends how he had the hots for her for years,also the police believe he maybe responsable for simular killings in his town as well as a trip he made out of town,they wait in ambush,he killed himself the same night but learn he had a poster accross his bed of a medical anatomy of a dissected person,he was fix sated on the inner organs why they lust the organs i dont understand ,but what is know at nine or ten years old he shot his mother and father,and try to stab his sister,his mother died his father lived he was put in a mental hospital until his release as a young man ,the hospital said he was normal and intelegent and wrote it off as a one time incedentmat,at the time his sister remembers his eyes changed jet black and his faced change to a evil entity,even though his father forgave him his sister was always afraid of him and felt evil still layed under the surfacembut didnt show itself until many years later when he killed his niece and wife and may be link to some seril killings in his town,i also notice with psycopath,theres usually seams to be two groups ones that think the world of them and ones that are there victims ,like ted bundy,its part of there mask they pick out up front who they they want to give a possitive image too a who will be there victums good cop bad cop in the same person dr jeckle mr hide its part of there cover if they ever, get caught,not because they have a good side to them,its planned from the begining,for others to cast a different image,part of there aliby
Anyone who thinks a woman commited these crimes is taking a simplistic view. There is nothing, not a single piece of supporting evidence that indicates a woman is responsible.
"Anyhow, I think the person who did these murders had a calling for butchery and human anatomy in practice, was a thoughtful person, capable of suppressing one’s negative feelings that come when you’ve done something against common moral rules. A mentally strong, unhesitating person capable of planning. For not having get caught, he must’ve lived at least somewhat normal life too, that’s what indicates metal strengths."
I think your summation is a little naive. The perpetrator didn't suppress his negative feelings, he expressed them. He obviously had no such feeling of guilt, shame, or remorse. In fact, the evidence suggests he was quite proud of his work. He had no regard for the sanctity of human life and used women as a canvas on which to pour his psychosis. Far from being mentally strong this man shows all the characteristics of mental fragility: easily damaged by some childhood trauma and unable to process such events (unlike most people) he externalized his rage and lust. Just because he wasn't discovered isn't a credit to his mental prowess, it is a simple reflection of the environment he was living in.
I find comments like "he did it for sexual pleasure" shortsighted, especially when you don't consider other alternatives. Black magic is one, but it's just one. Willing to play around with the law because you were bored or didn't have anything else to do, is one. Many people these days are forum addicts. What better way to use a sort of forums to express your self in 1880's than by writing anonymously? You wouldn't probably get caught just by that, and would get a sort of response from the mass media and the police.
You gotta understand too how a criminal mind can work. Notice, can work, not "always works". One who breaks law may often at first be stressed and sort of paranoid for the consequences and for the moment of getting caught. But, time passes and even a more sensitive person with more troubles to adapt with those feelings, can grow to be able to bear them, and still carry on a normal life with normal social relations. It is not easy by any means, it asks one to not fall mentally, but to stand through the turmoil. Once you go through it, the kind of stress and paranoia won't reach you in the same negative way as it did. If the killer did his first mutilating murders around the same time, all five in less than four month period total, it is likely that he or she has been doing crimes or been in jail or as an accused of something, etc etc, before those murders. Considering how detailed and similiar the murders are, he has likely given them some thought or had had a clear intuitive image about doing it for some time.
Also, one can use the theory of killer having planned the murder locations in advance, despite of what one guy in the document said. You can mark the exact locations of where the victims were left lying down, or the exact locations where they were killed. Isn't it a bit unlikely that the murder would move the bodies around, if the bodies are left wide open in that shape as they were?
Anyhow, I think the person who did these murders had a calling for butchery and human anatomy in practice, was a thoughtful person, capable of suppressing one's negative feelings that come when you've done something against common moral rules. A mentally strong, unhesitating person capable of planning. For not having get caught, he must've lived at least somewhat normal life too, that's what indicates metal strengths.
As for the document, I hated how it was so entertairning-made and suggestive, not letting the viewer form one's own image clearly. Mysteries are best when looked with a bit of scepticism, yet not denial.
I fail to see the sexism in that guy's statement. Typically speaking, female MO is poisoning, right? The frenzy shown in the Ripper killings would suggest male, given what we know about the differences in genders. Obviously he meant it's about how that evil is manifested, not that a woman CAN'T do it. So, ya know, lighten up some.
Excuse me, but women are perfectly capable of blood lust. We, too, have testosterone in our systems. And you have estrogen in yours. Every one of us, male or female, is capable of terrible crimes such as the ones in this case.
Take your sexism somewhere else.
it has a huge probability that walter is the killer.. he has all the MO of a guy who will evicirate his victim..
its not a girl! only testosterone can give such a bloodlush that you will disembower your victim.. so its not a girl who hate prostitute. if its a girl she'll only stab him up to ten times. the only reason he choose prostitute cause their the most easy to target.. they will talk to unknown persons, their secretive and dont like to talk to the police in the first place..
such a sad thing for justice for such a person to escape punishment.. i hope he burn in hell
I'm with Aline.
It was Walter.
I don't believe Walter Sickert was Jack the Ripper
bearing in mind that most of the victims were killed from behind which would be the most common position for a man to take a prostitute, the whole female thing doesn't actually work, and that is before we take into account the fact that long liz was considerably bigger built than the generality of the time and known to be extremely feisty.
This would be asking me to take on the idea that a big strong woman, known to fight others would meaninglessly allow herself to be attacked from behind and then mutilated because she had a sudden fancy for a little lesbian loving?.
I believe Jack the Ripper was a woman.
Did anyone ever considered the probability that it was a woman who commited the White Chaper murders?
A woman would show this intense rage at a woman who would be chosen over her by her mate or lover.
I think Jack the ripper is a woman.