| Author |
Message |
    
Cinderella29
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Sunday, March 07, 2004 - 6:38 am: | 
|
Hi evry1 i was wondering if you could help me with a project i've got. i need some relevant reasons why the murders received so much attention. I've got a few, but not enough. Any help would be great, thanks! |
Leanne Perry
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Leanne
Post Number: 1234
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, March 13, 2004 - 4:58 am: |
|
G'day Cinderella,
Before the Whitechapel murders of 1888, murders were easier for Scotland Yard to solve because the motive behind the crime was clear, (ie: inheritance, revenge, jealousy). But these crimes provided a challenge to Scotland Yard, because a motive wasn't clear, the victims seemed to be randomly chosen from a particular class of women, and every 'down-on-her-luck' female in The East End of London was a potential victim.
Because prostitution was so common in the East End of London, many women were scared, the media saw the potential to sell papers, (in England and overseas), many sick-minded people hoaxed letters to the press and the police, and so 'Jack the Ripper' became the name on everyone mind and appeared in everyones night-mares!
That's the best way I can describe it. Can anyone expand on that or correct it?
LEANNE |
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 2214
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, March 13, 2004 - 7:06 pm: |
|
Hi Cinderella
Just to add to what Leanne has said, there was also the apparent daring/recklessness of the killer - he made no attempt to hide the bodies, he killed and mutilated in situations that were risky from the point of view of his being apprehended (except perhaps in the case of Kelly), and he was believed to have killed twice within the space of an hour (on September 30th).
Robert |
Paul Jackson
Sergeant
Username: Paulj
Post Number: 41
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, March 13, 2004 - 8:54 pm: |
|
Hi All,
Another reason for the overall popularity of the Ripper is that he was never caught. If Jack The Ripper had ever been caught then we wouldnt have any message boards to trade info and opinions with....And that would Suck. Seriously though..If the Ripper had been apprehended, the case would have been long forgotten.
All the Best,
Paul |
Neale Carter
Sergeant
Username: Ncarter
Post Number: 50
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, March 14, 2004 - 9:42 pm: |
|
Cinders,
Also consider the fact that the murders were hideously gruesome - disenbowelment and near decpitation were unheard of in those times.
Regards
Neale |
Jeffrey Bloomfied
Inspector
Username: Mayerling
Post Number: 314
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, March 15, 2004 - 9:50 pm: |
|
I think I should add that the year of the Ripper
(1888) is not a real historical banner year. The biggest events were the famous North American
"Blizzard of '88", the deaths of two German Emperors within three months (Wilhelm I and his son Friedrich III), and the Presidential election between incumbent Grover Cleveland and Senator
Benjamin Harrison (Harrison won only because of a fluke in the electoral college - Cleveland won the popular vote). Hardly a banner year of historical importance. The Ripper's unique crime spree became all the more impressive by the dullness around it.
Jeff |
Sarah Long
Chief Inspector
Username: Sarah
Post Number: 897
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 16, 2004 - 5:51 am: |
|
Also, murder wasn't a common occurance in that area as in 1887 there were no recorded murders at all.
Sarah |
Monty
Chief Inspector
Username: Monty
Post Number: 886
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 16, 2004 - 11:28 am: |
|
Cinders,
All the posts above are very good and answer quite a bit.
Like LEANNE I would like to add that I feel tabloidism was the main catalyst. The way these crimes were sensationalised and even dramatised in the papers drew interest from all over the world.
Even one of the victims was drawn in. Read to me Joe.
Monty
 |
Caroline Anne Morris
Chief Inspector
Username: Caz
Post Number: 876
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 17, 2004 - 10:06 am: |
|
Hi Cinders,
The unsolved torso murders that happened around the same time didn't get anything like the amount of attention that Saucy Jacky's work achieved.
Personally, I blame the stupid s.o.b who wrote the 'Dear Boss' letter and gave the murdering s.o.b a name he could really go to work with.
IMHO, the result was MJK - the nobody who slaughtered her had been made into a somebody after the double event, and was just living up to the expectations of a public who now knew him as Jack the Ripper.
Love,
Caz
|
Dustin Gould
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 23, 2004 - 5:45 pm: |
|
I believe there were an abundance of variables that came together, to give the Ripper case the exposure it received in its day. Firstly, there mere nature of the crimes committed were seemingly a public first. Secondly, the printed word (of which there were many at the time), capitalized thoroughly on the grotesque details of the case, as well as the fear the general public felt as well. Third, the "Dear Boss" letter series perpetuated the fear, and kept the killing spree in the spotlight, even during "dry spells" in between killings. |
JT
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Thursday, April 08, 2004 - 6:00 pm: |
|
Greetings! I am new to posting on these message boards. But, concerning why the murders were so famous I agree with Neale. The murders were so gruesome and they were mutilated terribly. Like Mary Kelly she was so gruesomely murdered that her face wasn't even recognizable. Anyway, I hope that I post this right. } |
neil
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Sunday, July 04, 2004 - 3:15 pm: |
|
i got the same assignment  but i dnt no wtf the leather apron was if u can help |
becky
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Sunday, July 11, 2004 - 2:48 pm: |
|
i am doing a project and although i have some ideas i was wondering if you could help: why was the murderer never caught. |
cw
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 15, 2004 - 1:57 pm: |
|
I am doing a project on jack the ripper. Can anyone give me help on "Why were the Police unable to catch the ripper?" thanks! |
Rachael Peckham
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Monday, December 06, 2004 - 2:17 pm: |
|
Why did the murders of 'Jack the Ripper' attract so much attention in 1888?
thats what i would like to know???
Rachael |
Andrew Spallek
Chief Inspector
Username: Aspallek
Post Number: 656
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Monday, December 06, 2004 - 7:57 pm: |
|
Rachael,
Three reasons:
1. Then, as now, people love sensationalism. The murders were sensational (in the worst sense).
2. The murders touched on ongoing controversies: conditions in the East End, conduct of police, etc.
3. Competition among the many London newspapers kept the murders in front of the public eye.
Andy S.
(Message edited by Aspallek on December 06, 2004) |
Diana
Inspector
Username: Diana
Post Number: 379
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, December 06, 2004 - 8:20 pm: |
|
I suspect serial murder had been a fact of life for many centuries but at the end of the 19th century, the press really came into its own. Things were noticed that hadnt been noticed before. It seemed like a new and horrible abberation. In light of what has subsequently come out, (Bundy, Dahmer, et. al.) it probably wasnt new at all, but the Victorians didnt know that. |
Phil Hill
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 07, 2004 - 7:21 am: |
|
My reasons for the notoreity of the killings would be:
a) first real "serial murders" as a product of the urban/industrial age - as more murders happened, the tension rose;
b) press interest - this was an age of the first "tabloid" journalism with sensationalisation of events designed to catch the public attention;
c) the murderer was given a NAME: Leather Apron, then JtR which caught the public imagination;
d) people were genuinely scared, in the East End and elsewhere and remembered it;
e) the murders were seen as directly relevant to the resignation of a Chief Commissioner of the met (Warren);
f) the murders gained a political dimension as social reformers used them as a weapon and for propaganda purposes.
It should be recalled, however, that from the 1890s to c1929 (Matters' book) there was little interest in the JtR killings.
From 1930ish to 1950s again there was public knowledge but little real interest.
The 60s with the growth of the popular paperback saw renewed interest and several books (McCormack; Cullen; Farson)
I would put the real re-emerence of interest down to Knight's book in the mid-70s following the
BBC series, which cashed in on post-Watergate conspiracy theories and the "royals" to make impact.
Ibought my first Ripper book in the early 60s (McCormack) but when I started to deepen my studies in 1972, there were few books around (apart from the ones I have mentioned I recall reading Stewart at that time). But post 74 there were books regularly being produced and promoting theories.
Until the files were released the "game" seemed to be - "guess the name on the file that the police could not prove". Thereafter, there are various motives, but the interest reflects social changes too.
In the early period it was Doctors.
In the 70s - conspiracy/royals/masons (reflecting Watergate and popular interests of the time)
Then we had the era of the common man - Kosminski et al, perhaps an indication of modern egalitarian trends.
My point, that the JtR case is readily renewable to attract the attention of a new generation/period.
Does this help?
Phil
|
Phil Hill
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 07, 2004 - 1:06 pm: |
|
Oh - one other reason that I forgot before:
g) the murders were never solved, so an enigma remains. I am sure that if a murderer had been caught, sentenced and punished, these crimes would be little more notorious than (perhaps) Crippen; and might be mentioned only as the first (major?) urban serial killings. |
laura]
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Thursday, January 13, 2005 - 8:46 am: |
|
hello everyonre i just wondered if u cud help me say why the police were unable to catch jack the ripper?
|
rosie driscoll
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Sunday, January 23, 2005 - 5:19 am: |
|
the police were unable to catch jack the ripper for many reasons due to the area, police weaknesses, police mistakes, the nature of the crimes and the press interfearence. |
Lil
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 06, 2005 - 11:18 am: |
|
Why were the upper classes interested in the murders? |
Phil Hill
Inspector
Username: Phil
Post Number: 322
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Thursday, April 07, 2005 - 1:56 am: |
|
Novelty, fear (who knew in 1888 that Jack might not strike in the WEST End next)...
But what evidence is there that, other than reading reports in papers, the "upper classes" were interested?
What do you mean by the upper classes - I am sure the views and interests of the 1880s aristocracy, landed gentry, upwardly mobile middle class, wealthy Jews or industrial magnates (to give some groups) might have been varied and contradictory.
Phil |
hannah marie1989
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Thursday, April 21, 2005 - 8:47 am: |
|
hi everyone im doin some work for history and have to explain why the whitechapel murders attracted so much attention. i was wondering if anyone could help me? i also have to say why the polic wre unable to catch the ripper |
Phil Hill
Inspector
Username: Phil
Post Number: 350
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Thursday, April 21, 2005 - 2:39 pm: |
|
hannah marie - why post this, when the thread above answers your question?
I seem to recall a specific recent thread answering your second question also. Why not explore a bit.
Phil |
hannah marie2005
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Friday, April 22, 2005 - 9:54 am: |
|
i was only askin a quessie phil so chill out . |
Phil Hill
Inspector
Username: Phil
Post Number: 356
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, April 23, 2005 - 2:59 am: |
|
hannah - why ask when it's been answered? Why expect us to repeat ourselves? And as you want us to do your work for you, I'd have thought the onus was on you?
Heaven knows I try to be helpful, but you appear to be laziness and discourtesy personified. |
Ally
Chief Inspector
Username: Ally
Post Number: 887
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, April 23, 2005 - 6:42 am: |
|
Well Phil, if you will notice this thread was started by another daft, lazy student who didn't want to do any real research and look at how helpful people were in replying to them! They'll keep coming as long as they know there are idiots willing to do their work for them.
|
Phil Hill
Inspector
Username: Phil
Post Number: 359
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, April 23, 2005 - 9:54 am: |
|
I'm more than happy to help if I feel the requester is making an effort themselves. hannah, doesn't even seem to have looked around her.
Phil |
Andrew Spallek
Chief Inspector
Username: Aspallek
Post Number: 782
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, April 23, 2005 - 12:05 pm: |
|
Hannah Marie,
A good researcher will turn to experts for direction when initially investigating a case, so coming here and asking questions is a good start. However, as Phil pointed out, it is only courteous to look around this website, and especially the message boards, to see if you questions have already been addressed. There is a search feature that you can use (or simply go to google and restrict your search to the casebook.org domain).
Remember also that you teacher is going to expect some published sources if this is a research paper. It is unlikely that quoting from message boards will satisfy him or her.
Good hunting! You can contact me if you need any help -- but don't expect me to give you the answers!
Andy S.
|
Donald Souden
Chief Inspector
Username: Supe
Post Number: 524
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, April 23, 2005 - 12:25 pm: |
|
Andy,
You are a nice guy.
Don.
"He was so bad at foreign languages he needed subtitles to watch Marcel Marceau."
|
hidie
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Saturday, May 07, 2005 - 12:40 pm: |
|
I dont understand why there was such a great surprise that the poor population of whitechapel were attacked? I thought that it would be the opposite, because the poor were the most vunerable in society and i wouldnt expect there to be a surprise because of this, can someone point me in the right direction please! |
Phil Hill
Inspector
Username: Phil
Post Number: 499
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 10, 2005 - 8:53 am: |
|
hidie - only just found your post.
The surprise arose, in my opinion, because this was really the first major serial killer to be identified as such. There was brutality, and violence aplenty in the East End and murder (though I believe not as much as is sometimes thought).
But no one before had ever murdered women in this sudden, anonymous, callous and savage way. This could not be related to domestic squabbles, or theft - it was murder for murder's sake: and it shook people.
It was also something taken up by the emerging popular press, which, for the first time (as the media can today) made this a cause celebre and drew attention to it.
But there were voices who said that people didn't care enough, BECAUSE this was the East End. These commentators argued that had Jack struck in the WEST End (ie the posh part of London) more resources and effort would have been put into catching the murderer.
Just my thoughts,
Phil |
Carolyn
Detective Sergeant
Username: Carolyn
Post Number: 75
Registered: 2-2005
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 10, 2005 - 11:08 pm: |
|
hidie,
I agree with Phil on this. I have always believed because they were prostitutes and lived on the East End, that people DID NOT care enough, and for this very reason I feel the police were lax because of it. There have been many threads about the failure or the success of the police at this time.Opinions vary about the police actions.
The newspapers took up the story and embellished it and people all over the world became aware of the conditions on the East Side. The whole thing was horrible, the murders, the living conditions, etc. The whole world was shocked by the whole mess.
There was also the element of surprise in the fact the killer was never caught.
My opinions only, 
Carolyn |
Phil Hill
Chief Inspector
Username: Phil
Post Number: 517
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 11, 2005 - 1:45 pm: |
|
Actually Carolyn, I don't think we DO agree.
If you re-read my post you'll find I say, "But there were voices who said that people didn't care enough..."
I am not, to be honest, one of those voices. I think the police eventually threw their whole weight into the investigation. There MIGHT have been more pressure brought to bear had the victims been wealthy, to raise the temp of the investigation more quickly, but I suspect the result would have been the same. But as it didn't happen we'll never know.
Of course there were those in 1888 who wanted to make political capital, or class-war points out of the murders, but similar things happen today - if only we had put more resources into hunting down paedophiles BEFORE they killed etc.
20/20 hindsight is a wonderful thing.
But I didn't want you to be tarnished by my elitist and outdated perceptions. 
Phil |
Carolyn
Detective Sergeant
Username: Carolyn
Post Number: 78
Registered: 2-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 11, 2005 - 6:25 pm: |
|
Phil,
I needed to be more specific in my comment. I guess what I should have said, is I agree with what Phil has posted, I did not know how you felt personally. I did not know if you were one of those voices or not, but the statement you made re. the voices, I agree.
I feel that it was too little too late. And yes, I agree with your statement "that there might have been more pressure to bear had the victims been wealthy". I feel it took the police too long to get going on this case. I feel in a way it was the press that got them into action, not the victims themselves.
Sorry that I made an assumption on the way that you felt personally, I will watch my word usage in the future. I guess I get an "F", on my post. Terrible after all the discussion on how to post properly. Oh well, at least I do know how to spell and divide paragraphs. Ha!
And no,I am not tarnished,
Carolyn 
|
Phil Hill
Chief Inspector
Username: Phil
Post Number: 520
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Thursday, May 12, 2005 - 1:30 am: |
|
I was only joking, Carolyn, hence the emoticons at the end of my post!!
As to the late start, it really depends on the stage at which one thinks the police grasped that they were dealing with something extraordinary. Hence my comment about hindsight.
But I do understand why others take a contrary view to mine.
Phil
|
Carolyn
Detective Sergeant
Username: Carolyn
Post Number: 79
Registered: 2-2005
| | Posted on Thursday, May 12, 2005 - 1:56 am: |
|
Phil,
I think we need to watch our dry wit. Sometimes it doesn't come across too well on the boards. My reply was tongue in cheek back at you.
With as much griping as there has been on the boards re. posting I was having a little fun with it. That is why I gave myself an "F".
LOL (I know you hate computer talk),
Carolyn  |
ex PFC Wintergreen
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Sunday, May 22, 2005 - 1:33 am: |
|
Dead bodies left sliced in the street, it'd certainly attract my attention. |
little miss Faye
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Sunday, June 12, 2005 - 10:04 am: |
|
Hi,
I had a piece of History coursework and I was really stuck! I am so glad I found this website because it has helped me loads especially Phil’s comments! Just wanted to say thank you and keep it up!
Faye  |
m_sawtell
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Monday, June 13, 2005 - 3:22 pm: |
|
i'm doin this cw at the mo and this site has really helped so thankz guys! I thought i'd add something as well I don't no whether its been said cause I haven't finished readin it all but JACK THE RIPPER would have struck fear into the people of London plus its easy to remember and pretty self explanatory to what he did to his victims hope it helps
Emily = ) |
J$!M
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 29, 2005 - 12:19 pm: |
|
yea, wat em said, this is really good, not for copying but for ideas for writing our coursework.
big it up to our history teech who told us all this when we wern't listening
jsim |
poTTEr
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 29, 2005 - 11:19 am: |
|
basically posting to say the same as the previous two posts. btw, emily....i'll see you tomorrow in history :P
Jamie |
ex PFC Wintergreen
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Sunday, July 03, 2005 - 2:06 am: |
|
Yeah, emily and what did you think of susie's boyfriend tod the other day wasn't he just poo? Oh ashley could I borrow that pink top of yours that you know I love, when's the next slumber party? God Mr Philip's gave us so much homework today, doesn't he know it's the prom next week, I still have no one to go with, I'm so alone. I'm going to sit down and eat an entire tub of ice cream and watch sex and the city on DVD. |
lizzy
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Friday, October 14, 2005 - 4:52 pm: |
|
fanx guys. was tearing hair out 4 more reasons for jrs notiority  |
Iqra
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Tuesday, October 25, 2005 - 12:24 pm: |
|
hiya ppl..ma namez iqra...see im doing that old jack the ripper thing again.....lolz and i really want to geta good grade...the question i am stuck on is why were the police unable to catch jack the ripper...i hav a few ideas but there not good enough...plzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz...cn u help this damsel in distress ..thnk uuuu....xxxxmwahxxx |
