Jack the Ripper
Jack the Ripper was one of the most infamous serial killer in 19th century. His identity was never found and there are many mysteries about his murders which have never been explained.
However the serial killer Jack the Ripper was never caught, evidences of his crimes were lost, and possible witnesses were never questioned. But why police had managed to conduct this investigation so badly? In this paper I would like give an answer to this question and explain why the police were unable to catch Jack the Ripper. Crime rate at this period time was high and was increasing even though police forces like the City police and Metropolitan police were established. Therefore it was more likely for them to catch Jack the Ripper because of the strong and powerful forces they had, but this was not the case, the murders of Jack the Ripper still lies a mystery. The main reason for this was instead both the forces working together; they were competitive towards one another.
Therefore there was a lack of communication and any evidence or information found to do with the Jack the Ripper were never shared or passed. As both of these forces wanted the glory and honor to themselves. Jack the Ripper was known for brutal and heartless attack, his serial murders shocked, captured and attract so much of the public attention, Jack the Ripper was described to be a demented being, which was skillful and was anomatical knowledge (Knight, p.17 ). His victims were poor prostitute who he would use as excuse to get in the corners and then attack them.
Jack the Ripper was very clever and aware of his surroundings; he carried out attack at specific time and places where he knew he would not be disturbed. This made the job of the police force even more impossible because there was never actual eyewitness to the killing. Therefore when the police did go out looking for the most possible suspect, it was difficult to pinpoint on one individual without not hard-core evidence. However, through the case dozens of theories on the Ripper’s identity have been formulated over the years and some have been weaker than others. The first such theory is that the killer was Thomas Cutbush. Cutbush was arrested in 1891 for stabbing two young women’s buttocks in public.
He was proclaimed Jack the Ripper by the Sun in a “spectacular article” (Begg, p. 68). This theory was quickly dismissed by Sir Melville Mcnaghten, Assistant Chief Constable at Scotland Yard and future head of the Criminal Investigation Department (CID), who claimed that there were at least another three men, “any one of whom would have been more likely than Cutbush to have committed this series of murders” (Knight, p.276). George Chapman was another popular suspect at the time. A Polish “barber-surgeon” (Begg, p.
72) who immigrated to england sometime in 1888, Chapman was later convicted of poisoning at least 3 of his wives and hanged in 1903. Chapman is considered a serious suspects because of his psychological profile was that of a killer, he possessed the needed anatomical knowledge, being a barber-surgeon and he was a resident of Whitechapel at the time of the murders. But, his known modus operandis is very different, and the switch from brutal mutilations to slow poisoning is the “most frequent objection” (Begg, p. 73) to him being the killer. But the strongest and most respected theory originates from Sir Melville Mcnaghten’s notes. After exonerating Cutbush as the killer, Mcnaghten lists three main suspects.
Michael Ostrog, who Mcnaghten describes as a “mad Russian doctor and… unquestionably a homicidal manic.” (Knight, 369) was a Russian Jew who had been recently dismissed from a Lunatic Asylum.
Being a doctor automatically proves that he had the anatomical knowledge and the surgical skill to commit the murders. But Ostrog never did anything remotely as violent as the Whitechapel murders, and there is no real strong motive to support the accusation other than his insanity. …