|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Kazy A.
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 06, 2004 - 4:22 am: |       |
Wotcha everyone,
Why did the police fail to catch Jack the Ripper and how does this show the weaknesses in the police force?
Were the police not trained enough to handle a serial killer?
Did they not know the proper procedure to handle evidence?
What does everyone think? Are there any books I can read to help me solve this little problem?
Thanks
Kazy. |
Andrew Spallek
Chief Inspector
Username: Aspallek
Post Number: 541
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, July 07, 2004 - 11:22 am: | |
First, if by chance you are doing research for a report you need to check at least second source materials. Talking to people on this forum is third source, reading books researched by others is second source, consulting original documents is first source. Check the menu under "Ripper Media" for book and journal reviews that will be helpful. I would suggest the Sugden book as a good beginning.
Now, to the point. I used to think that law enforcement had not come up against serial sexual crimes before the Whitechapel murders. Since reading about the London Monster crimes of 1790 (for which Rhynwick Williams was convicted), now I know that not to be the case. Although not murders, these were definitely sexual assaults and at least several of them were probably perpetrated by the same person. The police, as such, were not in force in 1790. But authorities seem to have a fairly accurate idea of the sort of person to suspect. Actually, Williams fits the bill rather well, by today's standards, of a sex criminal. So I can't say any more that the authorities were blissfully naive about the nature of violent sex criminals.
Andy S. |
Neil Cooper
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, July 07, 2004 - 8:28 am: | |
Hello Kazy
I am of the opinion that no, the police didn't know how to handle a serial killer. The Whitechapel murderer was the first killer of his kind on record; one that killed without a practical motive - e.g money - and without any connection to his victims such as marriage or work. So this meant that the (still relatively new in 1888) met. police detectives couldn't track the killer down in the standard interviewing-the-deceased's-friends-and-relatives fashion.
Also due to the locations and times of the murders - secluded courts, yards, etc. in the wee hours of the night and in a part of London inhabbited by "the lowest class of person, the semi-criminal", it's not suprising reliable witnesses number but a handful. That wipes out a second vital source of evidence.
While the police, I'm sure worked tirelessly to catch him, on one hand they were hampered by the press and all those "ripper letters" and a case so infamous that people on the other side of the Atlantic were talking about it.
On another hand, the metropolitan and city forces didn't try any new techniques to catch Him. Okay so forensic science was still in it's infancy, but the Victorians made huge break-throughs in so many fields- transport, time-keeping, engineering, social welfare, you'd think the police force could have pushed the boat out for their most famous and controversial case. It might be just me, but I've never heard of H Division rounding up the usual suspects for a line-up. No photo fits, no decent artist impressions, no finger printing, no entrapment operations. I'm generally of the opinion the police just didn't have the capacity to stop this kind of killer.
As for books, I think most decent non-suspect based ripperology will have something about this, (?)
Neil |
Kazy A.
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Thursday, July 08, 2004 - 6:35 am: | |
Andy,
Thanks for that. I should imagine that, in the Victorian times, people didn't expect people to be that vicious when it came to crime. Murders were expected to occur, but being evil enough to really hurt and humiliate someone and make them live with it afterwards must have been beyond the Police Force's thinking.
I'm doing a coursework on it at the moment. It's not due in until November so I've got plenty of time to research.
Thanks again.
Kazy.  |
Mephisto
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, July 07, 2004 - 12:14 am: | |
Hello Kazy,
I highly recommend: Jack the Myth, by A.P. Wolf. You can find it right here in the Casebook archives at- http://casebook.org/ripper_media/
book_reviews/non-fiction/jackmyth.html
It is a very well written, and well researched account of Thomas Cutbush, and his connection to the Whitechapel Murders through his uncle, Executive Superintendent Henry Cutbush of Scotland Yard.
It will give you a great deal of insight into the reasons behind, what only appears to be a bungled effort to apprehend the murderer, but instead, turns out to be......., well you'll just have to read it yourself.
Enjoy
Mephisto
|
Jon Smyth
Detective Sergeant
Username: Jon
Post Number: 107
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, July 11, 2004 - 9:46 pm: | |
Neil wrote:
"On another hand, the metropolitan and city forces didn't try any new techniques,.."
Well yes actually they did, not anything earthshaking by modern standards but they certainly made efforts away from conventional lines of enquiry.
They tried a new method for communication street-to-street for the beat constables and adapted rubber tire tread to their boots, etc.
(don't laugh, these were days when you literally had to be caught in the act to be accused of a crime)
"It might be just me, but I've never heard of H Division rounding up the usual suspects for a line-up."
Oh, there were plenty of citizens pulled in for a variety of reasons, but for a line-up you need eye-witnesses, correct?.
"No photo fits, no decent artist impressions,.."
No witnesses, and for the couple of instances where a description was published (Mitre Sq & Hanbury St.), they did what they could as far as reaching out to the public.
"no finger printing,.."
Correct, too early for that.
"no entrapment operations..."
Beat constables dressing up as prostitutes is what I would call 'attempted entrapment' wouldn't you say?.
"I'm generally of the opinion the police just didn't have the capacity to stop this kind of killer".
Agreed, but that doesn't mean they didn't try.
What they did may appear futile by our standards but even the very idea of a police force was still alien to many people of the times. They did not always get the help they needed, the people of the East End generally looked upon the police as outsiders & intruders.
Regards, Jon S. |
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 1179
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, July 12, 2004 - 4:44 pm: | |
Somehow I seem to have missed this.
Mephisto being nice I shouldn’t have missed.
Very Buddhist. Thanks.
There has always been a link - in my mind at least - between the crimes of Jack the Ripper and the Yorkshire Ripper, simply because of the investigating forces’ total ineptitude to solve the crimes.
In Jack’s case this was largely based on a crow's crock of a political and secular situation, where the forces of law and order who should have been working together were in fact striking red matches to light each others farts, and then blowing each other to kingdom come in great clouds of port-powered flatulence.
As far as the Yorkshire Ripper goes, it was bent coppers trying to be good coppers for some small change, and a right buggar’s muddle that turned into. In both cases completely innocent women lost their lives due to police in-fighting.
Additionally in Jack’s case the influence of uncle Charles Cutbush on the outcome of the Ripper investigation must be taken into account, for here was a senior police officer of the Metropolitan force - at one time actually in charge of the investigation - who had pots of gold sovereigns thrown at him by the powers that be, was lauded as the best cop that ever swung a truncheon or blew away a stray Catholic with his service revolver, was the force’s hero for increasing their pension and holiday rights, was constantly promoted despite his fondness for blasting away at all and sundry with his pistol; and then this ‘top-gun’ of the Yard sat down in his kitchen and blew his brains out in front of his three daughters after Sunday dinner.
Maybe the roast beef wasn’t to his liking, but somehow I think there was more to it than that.
I personally don’t think he liked the ‘Sun’ that morning.
|
Scott Nelson
Detective Sergeant
Username: Snelson
Post Number: 81
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, July 12, 2004 - 11:35 pm: | |
So AP, I'm absolutely fascinated with the identity of your gender. Are you a female writing under the name "Barbara Michaels?" Come on now. An answer please??? |
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 1180
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 13, 2004 - 2:32 pm: | |
Scott, your fascination makes me blush, but you'll have to wait for conference to see me in all my glorious flesh. |
Monty
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Monty
Post Number: 1251
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, July 14, 2004 - 4:16 am: | |
AP,
So the next conference has a naturist theme ?
Monty
....all good pals and jolly good company !! |
Jennifer D. Pegg
Chief Inspector
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 516
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, July 14, 2004 - 2:49 pm: | |
AP, Monty,
If it does I'm not coming, despite the possibility of knowing more about AP. I didn't know it was that kind of thing. What would my parents think!
Jenni
"Think things, not words." - O.W. Holmes jr |
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 2708
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, July 14, 2004 - 3:33 pm: | |
And I couldn't possibly leave my beloved anorak behind. Where would I keep my cigarettes and lighter?
Don't answer that.
Robert |
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 1183
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, July 14, 2004 - 5:21 pm: | |
There is a naturist beach along Brighton seaside for those who might require it.
I understand that a certain female MP of formidable proportion sports herself there, so if you are coming to conference on a bike at least you'll have somewhere to park it.
Personally I'm still undecided whether to come in my mini-skirt or combat fatigues, but I think it best I come in the canoe - otherwise I might drown, for there is a fair stretch of water between me and Brighton.
If there aren't too many bikes, my canoe will be safely parked with the naked MP on the beach.
|
NC
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Monday, July 12, 2004 - 11:30 pm: | |
Hi Kazy and others,
You may wish to look at a thread which discussed in some detail the reasons JtR escaped detection. The very fact that we are still wondering who he was a centrury later in itself provides some interesting speculation. That no one was brought to trial for these crimes is also one of the few absolute certainties of the case.
../4922/7463.html"#DEDDCE"> |
Matt
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Monday, July 12, 2004 - 7:28 am: | |
Both the Met and the City forces involved in the hunt for the ripper came under both a lot of pressure and a lot of criticism.
As has already been pointed out there was very little in the way of detection tools available to the police at that time. To the Police of today a scene of crime can yield many clues. Fibres, DNA, tissue and blood samples even fingerprints were clues almost totally unknown to Victorian detectives. Even today, if a killer is careful or if a body is disposed of in such a was as to remove these sorts of clues, then killers will still often remain undetected.
Reliance was places heavily on the local knowledge of the individual officers, (so much so that Abberline was brought back to “H” division from Scotland Yard because of his local knowledge) and eye witness testimony.
Take for example the killing of Polly Nichols. There were no witnesses found who had seen Polly in the company of anyone that evening, you have quite a long gap between her last being spotted alive by an acquaintance and her body being found by Cross and Paul.
So with no witnesses and no knowledge of forensic science what do the police have to go on? Almost nothing, a trawl through the history of Polly to find a likely motive or suspect? Useless in the case of serial sexual killers as they are almost invariably strangers to one another.
Therefore, in this case, short of bumping into the killer in the act of killing Polly the police had no chance of detecting him.
And this is true to a lesser or greater degree in all of the Ripper killings
Almost the only leads the police had to go on in the hunt for the Ripper came from witnesses.
Where you have women willing to go to lonely out of the way places with a stranger you have the perfect killing ground for this sort of killer.
Where there are witnesses their descriptions of the man seen with each victim vary for highly detailed to vague to the point of uselessness. Illustrating that eyewitness evidence is one of the most unreliable forms of evidence available.
Then (and strangely now) many people were obsessed with finding a motive for the killings, from syphilitic doctors to womb collectors all sorts of reasons were put forward to explain the killers rampage, find the motive and you find the killer. Unfortunately the motive, the only motive was the killing itself.
|
Mephisto
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, July 14, 2004 - 11:07 pm: | |
Mr. Wolf,
Regarding your location vis-à-vis your canoe...will you be paddling in from Peru?
);–)>
Mephisto
|
Mephisto
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Monday, July 12, 2004 - 11:54 pm: | |
"Mephisto being nice I shouldn’t have missed" (A.P. Wolf: 2004).
Detached and then rejoined,
Absent and then present:
Who understands their numinous?
(Huangdi sijing: c 2000 BC)
For every snarling angry face,
A smile waits to take its place.
(Mephisto: 2004)
|
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 1184
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, July 15, 2004 - 1:37 pm: | |
My dear Mephisto
I have yet to cast my dread shadow on Peruvian soil, which I really should, as the Vicuna is a fine and bold beast, the crack cocaine is of inestimable quality, the local Madre de Vino is enough to take the skin off one’s tonsils if one had them still, and to glimpse flamingos in the dizzy heights of the mountains is a rare privilege granted to very few.
My port is much closer to home than that.
A Crown Colony, one of the last, bless it, and blast it.
Guatama said:
‘Better eat steak with good heart than cabbage with bad heart.’
So our orientation and opinion are unimportant as long as we exchange them with good heart.
Poor old Merry Kelly had no choice.
|
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 1185
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, July 15, 2004 - 2:02 pm: | |
I don’t think I can go along with all this namby-pamby sympathy for a police force overwhelmed by the dastardly efforts of the Whitechapel murderer. We have to remember that the LVP was very much the time of ‘Little England’ where everything was organised and controlled on the Parish level. Despite the fact that there had been large scale immigration into the Whitechapel area, the police still dealt with the populace in a ‘hand’s on’ manner, where their local knowledge was superb and superbly used in the detection of crime - as many records do show, even from many of the officers involved in the Ripper case when investigating other lesser crimes - so I think it basically wrong to adopt the attitude that the local police were overwhelmed by the developing situation.
I believe that gives a false perspective.
It is just as well to remember that the local police of the time had specific units to monitor and police the numerous ‘common lodging houses’ - which they certainly do not have now - and this leads me to strongly suggest that the police of the LVP were far more in tune with the local populace than the police of today.
Of course the police of the LVP were immature when we talk of investigative and forensic techniques but if we talk of street knowledge and local ‘savvy’ then I would suggest that the police of the time were far more advanced than the police of today.
Oh and by the way, someone has been named in open court as ‘Jack the Ripper’ by both counsel for prosecution and defence but the admissions were thrown out by the judge who deemed it fit to bring the case to a swift conclusion and sentence the young man to be detained at Her Majesty’s Pleasure for the rest of his life.
What fun!
|
Kazy A.
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Monday, July 19, 2004 - 8:14 am: | |
Hi guys,
Thanks for your input once again.
I don't have the internet at home, so I have to use school resources.
A.P. Wolf: -
“the forces of law and order who should have been working together were in fact striking red matches to light each others farts, and then blowing each other to kingdom come in great clouds of port-powered flatulence.”
An extremely interesting analogy regarding the Met and City of London police forces. Even nowadays the two have a rivalry. Does anyone think that this rivalry hindered the operation at all. Surely, they would have talked together in order to solve a crime this huge.
Neale, thank you for the address. I sometime find it really hard to find relevant threads on this site. There are so many.
Thanks again.
Kazy.} |
|
Use of these
message boards implies agreement and consent to our Terms of Use.
The views expressed here in no way reflect the views of the owners and
operators of Casebook: Jack the Ripper.
Our old message board content (45,000+ messages) is no longer available online, but a complete archive
is available on the Casebook At Home Edition, for 19.99 (US) plus shipping.
The "At Home" Edition works just like the real web site, but with absolutely no advertisements.
You can browse it anywhere - in the car, on the plane, on your front porch - without ever needing to hook up to
an internet connection. Click here to buy the Casebook At Home Edition.
|
|
|
|
