Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Still Waters

'We know where Jack the Ripper lived'-experts

31 posts in this topic

It is a mystery that has eluded detectives for more than a century, but criminologists now believe they know where Jack the Ripper lived.

By using the latest geographical profiling techniques based on the locations of the Ripper's five victims, experts believe the Victorian serial killer lived in Flower and Dean Street in London's notorious East End.

http://www.telegraph...ed-experts.html

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is a mystery that has eluded detectives for more than a century, but criminologists now believe they know where Jack the Ripper lived.

By using the latest geographical profiling techniques based on the locations of the Ripper's five victims, experts believe the Victorian serial killer lived in Flower and Dean Street in London's notorious East End.

http://www.telegraph...ed-experts.html

The police put crime maps up on the internet and you can easily use them to determine where criminals live. Suppose someone likes breaking into cars to steal dvd players and does 10 of them over a few months.

People dont steal from their own doorstep they travel a few streets away to do it. By plotting each car break in on a map you can determine the centre point where they are traveling out from. The more crimes the more accurate it becomes and its possible to narrow it down to just a few houses on a street with enough thefts.

Murderers either travel away to kill (so Police attention isnt drawn to where they live) or they kill where they live then travel away to dump the body (again so Police attention isnt drawn to where they live). Serial killers are caught by plotting each crime on a map and again determining the centre point that the criminal is traveling out from.

If Jack the Ripper didn't know about criminology I suspect he was traveling into London to commit each killing. This is because he wasnt dumping bodies he was leaving them where they were killed. That means he felt confident Police attention wouldn't be drawn to where he lived so he took no counter measures.

He most likely had a relevative or friend he was visiting each time. By plotting each killing on a map, where that friend or relative lives can be determined to within a few streets as the centre point he was traveling out from. Exceptions might be a doctor who travels to his surgery in London, a lecturer, official, commuter, etc.

He would have had an obsessive disorder and obsessed over a traumatic experience to do with prostitutes. His mother would most likely have been one and the source of his traumatic experience. He would have obsessed over it until it consumed him resulting in his elimination of women of ill repute. His obsession would have also mean't he was most likely an alcoholic or abusing drugs as a way to self medicate his obession away (temporarily). A family history of criminal activity will also be present as obsessive disorders are genetic.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe there is more than one person behind the mystery, meaning there could be a chance there was copycats or he was working with someone else.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe there is more than one person behind the mystery, meaning there could be a chance there was copycats or he was working with someone else.

Agreed,I am not convinced all 5 murders are by the same man

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's just now been a geographic profile used in this case? :unsure2:

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now this is interesting. So... do any of the known suspects reside there or near there?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

There's just now been a geographic profile used in this case? :unsure2:

With the interest from criminologists a geographical and personal profile will have been done countless times over the decades. You can't really take newspaper stories, or even television programs, as accurate.

They'll know where he traveled out from to commit murder, they'll know his age, his level of education, the trigger that made him start killing, his mental disorders, traumatic experiences in his life and the nature of his relationship with his mother.

Edited by RabidMongoose

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With the interest from criminologists a geographical and personal profile will have been done countless times over the decades.

Oh, indeed! Actually, it sounds like it's what the original investigators did at the time because- according to that article- they believed he lived in that same location identified by the current experts and I'm not aware of any other evidence on which they'd have based that conclusion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed,I am not convinced all 5 murders are by the same man

Which one(s) are you struggling with?

Liz Stride appears to be the most contentious. Apart from the slashed throat, she doesn't have any of the other tell-tale marks of the Ripper. Although it's arguable that he was disturbed before he could finish the job. That's one of the most problematic things about Ripperology. When we're not even sure how many victims he claimed to begin with, it's difficult to build a case.

I wouldn't necessarily rule out Martha Tabram, either. Her attack was definitely a more frenzied one, as she was stabbed almost 40 times, but might it have been a trial-run from the Ripper?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Funny you should mention Tabram as I think it is a real contender for a ripper murder.I'm not convinced by Stride,would it have been considered a ripper killing if he hadn't struck again?l think once they got the letter mentioning the double event the 2 cases were forever intertwined

The other one I am not sure of is Mary Kelly,I know some people think of it as Jacks twisted masterpiece but I wonder if the outrageous mutilation was the work of either another maniac or somebody who mutilated the corpse in an effort to make it look like one of the rippers victims.I don't pretend to be an expert I've read a few books but something doesn't sit right with the canonical 5 murders for me

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Funny you should mention Tabram as I think it is a real contender for a ripper murder.I'm not convinced by Stride,would it have been considered a ripper killing if he hadn't struck again?l think once they got the letter mentioning the double event the 2 cases were forever intertwined

The other one I am not sure of is Mary Kelly,I know some people think of it as Jacks twisted masterpiece but I wonder if the outrageous mutilation was the work of either another maniac or somebody who mutilated the corpse in an effort to make it look like one of the rippers victims.I don't pretend to be an expert I've read a few books but something doesn't sit right with the canonical 5 murders for me

Hello dr no,

Yeah, I'm not so sure on Tabram. Whoever murdered Tabram was a stabby fellow indeed, whereas the next murders were all slasher jobs. It doesn't seem like 'Jack' honing his skills so much as drastically changing his MO. I think there's a sound possibility that Tabram was butchered by the same (or similar) gang to the one that killed Emma Smith. Who knows, perhaps 'Jack' was part of said gang and decided to fly solo?

You raise a valid point about Mary Kelly. A lot of people have attributed the nature of her mutilation to the fact that she was killed indoors, and therefore 'Jack' had the opportunity had to fully explore his depraved fantasies. And that's a reasonable hypothesis. On the other hand, given she was completely destroyed, and the bedsheet was pulled over her head, (implying that her killer couldn't bare to look at her as he committed the act) and the fact her heart was literally stolen, suggests to me that this could've been a crime of passion. There's a good chance that Mary Kelly knew her murderer in more than just a biblical sense.

Edited by H. Drake
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello dr no,

Yeah, I'm not so sure on Tabram. Whoever murdered Tabram was a stabby fellow indeed, whereas the next murders were all slasher jobs. It doesn't seem like 'Jack' honing his skills so much as drastically changing his MO. I think there's a sound possibility that Tabram was butchered by the same (or similar) gang to the one that killed Emma Smith. Who knows, perhaps 'Jack' was part of said gang and decided to fly solo?

You raise a valid point about Mary Kelly. A lot of people have attributed the nature of her mutilation to the fact that she was killed indoors, and therefore 'Jack' had the opportunity had to fully explore his depraved fantasies. And that's a reasonable hypothesis. On the other hand, given she was completely destroyed, and the bedsheet was pulled over her head, (implying that her killer couldn't bare to look at her as he committed the act) and the fact her heart was literally stolen, suggests to me that this could've been a crime of passion. There's a good chance that Mary Kelly knew her murderer in more than just a biblical sense.

Hello Sir

What's your position on Stride?

I think Tabram was possibly a prototype Ripper murder but now you mention Emma Smith and a possible solo member of the gang who branched out it is a pretty decent theory to me.

Yes the more I read about Mary Kelly the more I felt it wasn't Jack.There seems something personal to that killing,,it seems like the killer was possibly trying to mimic a Jack murder, based on local gossip about the injuries inflicted, to cover his tracks.I agree whoever killed her totally obliterated her.

Have you got a favourite suspect for Jack by the way?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

What's your position on Stride?

I don't think Stride can be ruled in or out definitively. However, I do think it's too much of a coincidence that a Ripper 'copycat' murder happens less than hour before a real one takes place. For that reason I'm inclined to believe she was an unfinished Ripper victim. This could also explain why the attack on Eddowes was particularly brutal, because Jack was taking it out on her.

Have you got a favourite suspect for Jack by the way?

I'm going to be terribly boring and state that 'Jack' in all likelihood, wasn't ANY of the suspects we have listed. He was just another face in the crowd who didn't arouse suspicion and was inconspicuous enough to slip around Whitechapel. He probably lived a relatively normal life by day, and it wasn't until he was alone with his victims that his dark side revealed itself. Doesn't have the allure of Masonic conspiracy, evil doctors or famous painters, I know. Someone like Tumblety, for example, has never appealed to me. Taking into consideration his height and that handlebar mustache, a man of his bearing would've stood out like a sore thumb in the East End of London.

But if you're pushing me for a name, then I'd say Jacob Levy is a better suspect than most.

Yourself?

Edited by H. Drake
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Levy is one of the better suspects,knowledge of anatomy,roaming late at night/early hours,obviously going mad through the syphilis.One argument against him is he never came to Police attention as far as we can tell in connection with the murders but I don't think that should preclude him from being a suspect.

Rather like yourself and Donald Rumbelow (excuse me if it's another ripper author) I think he was an unknown.I think he definitely lived in the area,knew the streets well and wasn't somebody who came slumming it into the East End from one of the upper class areas of London.I don't go for some of the ridiculous theories about him,the first book I read was the Stephen Knight one when I was about 16 & thought it was tripe,I think the theory he was Vincent Van Gogh is one of the most ridiculous theories put forward yet,I must admit I do like to read about different theories even if I don't believe them

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello dr no,

Yeah, I'm not so sure on Tabram. Whoever murdered Tabram was a stabby fellow indeed, whereas the next murders were all slasher jobs. It doesn't seem like 'Jack' honing his skills so much as drastically changing his MO. I think there's a sound possibility that Tabram was butchered by the same (or similar) gang to the one that killed Emma Smith. Who knows, perhaps 'Jack' was part of said gang and decided to fly solo?

You raise a valid point about Mary Kelly. A lot of people have attributed the nature of her mutilation to the fact that she was killed indoors, and therefore 'Jack' had the opportunity had to fully explore his depraved fantasies. And that's a reasonable hypothesis. On the other hand, given she was completely destroyed, and the bedsheet was pulled over her head, (implying that her killer couldn't bare to look at her as he committed the act) and the fact her heart was literally stolen, suggests to me that this could've been a crime of passion. There's a good chance that Mary Kelly knew her murderer in more than just a biblical sense.

Fascinating insight!!

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Levy is one of the better suspects,knowledge of anatomy,roaming late at night/early hours,obviously going mad through the syphilis.One argument against him is he never came to Police attention as far as we can tell in connection with the murders but I don't think that should preclude him from being a suspect.

Unless, of course, the 'low class Jew' that Robert Anderson was referring to wasn't Kosminski (as most thought) but Levy? After all, the reasonably harmless Kosminski doesn't seem to fit his profile of the killer at all.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is a good point about the much maligned Kosminski,who I don't believe was the killer.Of course we have Swanson to blame for identifying Kosminski as Andersons suspect despite the fact he may not have been

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is a good point about the much maligned Kosminski,who I don't believe was the killer.Of course we have Swanson to blame for identifying Kosminski as Andersons suspect despite the fact he may not have been

Another point in Jacob Levy's favour is that one of the witnesses who (possibly) saw Catherine Eddowes with a man shortly before her murder was none other than Joseph Hyam Levy. Joseph Hyam Levy was also a Jewish butcher living in Whitechapel and apparently wasn't a very cooperative witness, described as "refusing to give the slightest information" and that "he leaves one to infer that he knows something, but that he is afraid to be called on the inquest".

I have reason to believe the two Levys were in fact cousins. This would explain why Joseph Hyam Levy was being so evasive, because the man he saw with Eddowes was his own relation, Jacob Levy, and he wasn't prepared to rat him out to the police for fear of the persecution the Jews in the area might face.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another point in Jacob Levy's favour is that one of the witnesses who (possibly) saw Catherine Eddowes with a man shortly before her murder was none other than Joseph Hyam Levy. Joseph Hyam Levy was also a Jewish butcher living in Whitechapel and apparently wasn't a very cooperative witness, described as "refusing to give the slightest information" and that "he leaves one to infer that he knows something, but that he is afraid to be called on the inquest".

I have reason to believe the two Levys were in fact cousins. This would explain why Joseph Hyam Levy was being so evasive, because the man he saw with Eddowes was his own relation, Jacob Levy, and he wasn't prepared to rat him out to the police for fear of the persecution the Jews in the area might face.

I can't swear to it but I am sure somebody on one of the ripper forums dug up records that proved they were cousins or at the very least related.The behaviour of Joseph at the inquest was certainly suspicious.

Its interesting that geo-profiles done of the murder, place his residence right in the hot spot and I believe his mother died just before the murders started in 1888.

.I haven't read much on Jack for a while you have got me interested again Sir!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you're missing something important about the Jewish witnesses. Many of them had escaped to London from the pogroms in Eastern Europe and they were basically terrified of having anything to do with police or authority. It hadn't worked well for them where they came from so they're hardly likely to have embraced the Jack the Ripper hunt with open arms, especially after the scare about Leather Apron. Tie in the fact that many of them couldn't speak English and that mistrust is not going to be broken down in 1 or 2 police interviews. I find Levy's reluctance to co-operate to be expected, not suspected.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There seems to be a Jack the Ripper revelation emerging every year, each one different from the last. So many that I've quit paying attention to them. :whistle:

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I think you're missing something important about the Jewish witnesses. Many of them had escaped to London from the pogroms in Eastern Europe and they were basically terrified of having anything to do with police or authority. It hadn't worked well for them where they came from so they're hardly likely to have embraced the Jack the Ripper hunt with open arms, especially after the scare about Leather Apron. Tie in the fact that many of them couldn't speak English and that mistrust is not going to be broken down in 1 or 2 police interviews. I find Levy's reluctance to co-operate to be expected, not suspected.

Hello Antilles,

I don't see why it can't be both? Some of the the highest ranking police officers in charge of the investigation believed that Jack was a Jew. Which isn't surprising, since Whitechapel at the time was an area with a dense population of Jewish immigrants. And since Jack arguably had to be a local to be so familiar with Whitechapel's labyrinthine streets and backalleys, it's just a statistical probability that Jack the Ripper was indeed Jewish. It was argued that Jack had to have either been living alone in order to avoid suspicion or he was being protected by the Jewish community. Now, as you yourself state, the Jewish community were recalcitrant with the authorities, and while they certainly wouldn't have condoned Jack's behaviour, they would've feared the repercussions if Jack had been exposed as one of them.

I think a lot of Ripperologists are just too afraid to point the finger at a Jewish suspect for the usual fear of being tarred with the antisemitic brush. Jack wasn't a cold-blooded killer because he was Jewish, but that doesn't mean he wasn't Jewish nonetheless.

Edited by H. Drake
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're correct. There's nothing to say that Jack couldn't have been Jewish, nothing at all. But I find it a tenuous link to tie Levy or Lawender or both to knowing Jack's name and address or then to actually being relatives of Jack. I don't know if you've been to Spitalfields. Even now it's a warren of small streets and lanes. Add on the huge population that lived there in 1888 and to me, the odds are well against anyone who actually knew Jack running into him.

But let's say for arguments sake that Levy or Lawender personally knew the man they saw with Cathy Eddowes. So he was seen with her before she died. Does that prove he was Jack? No, of course not. It would make him mighty suspicious but it doesn't prove anything. In a world where human blood couldn't be differentiated from animal blood until a decade later and fingerprints didn't really start to be used until 2 decades later, he would have remained a suspect and nothing more.

I absolutely believe Jack lived within walking distance of all of the murders. And that's not really a big area. Particularly if you knew the alleyways and back streets the way Jack obviously did. The route he took from Mitre Square to where he dropped the piece of Eddowes' apron showed, to me at least, that he was heading home and more than that, he knew the fastest way to get there.

But that does not disprove, at all, that Jack was Jewish. I don't agree that you can use Levy and Lawender's reluctance to point the finger as a peg to hang "Jack was Jewish' on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Maybe there is more than one person behind the mystery, meaning there could be a chance there was copycats or he was working with someone else.

Embarrassing but I think it's true. According to the reports and police data, some of them believe that this case may not be the doing of one "murderer".

Edited by jandersen233

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The powers that be have known who he is for years i suspect, but the Jack the Ripper mystery brings so much money into london by way of tourists that i don't expect they will ever release his name.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.