TheJack the Ripper mystery throws up many interesting suspects. Some of these Jack the Ripper suspects are fanciful, while other Jack the Ripper suspects are more credible. The mystery of Jack the Ripper will likely never be solved now. Far too much time has passed. Too many contradictions. Unreliable witness testimonies (where often suspects can conflict with one another over an event.) A lack of any real physical evidence. And, the likelihood that we will never come across any new information about the Jack the Ripper case. And what it leads to is that the probability of us finding out who Jack the Ripper really was, is remote. Who Jack the Ripper was will always remain an unanswered question. Part of the reason why Jack the Ripper as captured the public's attention for over 100 years, is down to the horrific nature of Jack the Rippers murders. He did not just kill his victims, which was bad enough, he mutilated most of his victims. It is the horrific way in which Jack killed his victims which has struck a fear in people for decades. Another reason why Jack has been kept alive through books, TV, and films, is down to the mystery which surrounds Jack the Ripper. Who was Jack the Ripper? Why did he murder? What his motive? Was it a hatred of women? Prostitutes in particular? Did Jack the Ripper really only kill five women, or were more of the women killed around the same time also his victims? How did he begin? Was it just luck that he evaded the capture of police, or was he very aware of police patrols? Why did Jack the Ripper stop murdering - what happened to him to make him stop? The more that you read about Jack the Ripper, it often seems that there are more questions which surface, than questions which are answered. The many questions which arise from the Jack the Ripper case, often leads to many disagreements within the Ripperologist community. If you want to see this for yourself, go to the Casebook forum, were people debate the Jack the Ripper case. It is an interesting forum, which brings to your attention other people opinions on the case. It will open you up to some fascinating insights from Ripperologists. You will come across many suspects on the Casebook website. Some of them you would have heard of; others you wouldn't have heard of. Some of the suspects are convincing; while others seem unlikely. Although on the surface, there are many Jack the Ripper suspects, most of them seem unlikely. For different reasons: some were in a different country at the time, others were in jail, some are conspiratorial in nature rather than being based on reason and historical evidence, while others just don't provide enough evidence to be considered at a credible suspect. The Jack the Ripper suspects list becomes a process of elimination. Were we can eliminate many of the suspects, through reasons stated above. Even though this can appear to be encouraging for the Ripperologist, what is not encouraging is that even the best Jack the Ripper suspects fall short. They can often seem the best of a bad bunch. Either because a particular suspect doesn't completely add up, through contradictory evidence or lack of evidence. Or because a suspect has motive, or the characteristics to be Jack the Ripper, but the same suspect cannot be placed at the scene of the crimes (even though they were a Whitechapel resident), nor is there physical evidence to link a particular suspect to the crimes. A suspect having motive or personality characteristics which are violent or aggressive is important, but, it is not enough in the Jack the Ripper case. If we were to rely on motive and personality characteristics alone, then several of these suspects would be Jack the Ripper. And they cannot all be Jack the Ripper. Some of the Jack the Ripper suspects are more plausible than others. We are going to look at the most plausible Jack the Ripper suspects. These are men most likely to have been Jack the Ripper. Aaron Kosminski
|
|
It was at Fotheringhay Castle where Mary Queen of Scots was imprisoned in England and remained there for the duration of her life.
It was were Mary Queen of Scots wrote many of her letters. Including the letter which would be responsible for her downfall. To read more about the downfall of Mary Queen of Scots a fascinating monarch. |
The last letter of Mary Queen of Scots was written just six hours before her execution. It is a letter which is now 430 years old.
As the letter is very old, it is fragile and therefore is not on display all the time. It was on display from 10am until 7pm on Wednesday. The last time it was on display was in 2009.
The letter was written by Mary Queen of Scots on the 8th of February 1587 at 2am. The letter was addressed to King Henry II of France. In the letter, Mary Queen of Scots wrote:
''Sire, my brother-in-law, having by God's will, for my sins I think, thrown myself into the power of the Queen my cousin, at whose hands I have suffered much for almost twenty years, I have finally been condemned to death by her and her Estates. I have asked for my papers, which they have taken away, in order that I might make my will, but I have been unable to recover anything of use to me, or even get leave either to make my will freely or to have my body conveyed after my death, as I would wish, to your kingdom where I had the honour to be queen, your sister and old ally.
Tonight, after dinner, I have been advised of my sentence: I am to be executed like a criminal at eight in the morning. I have not had time to give you a full account of everything that has happened, but if you will listen to my doctor and my other unfortunate servants, you will learn the truth, and how, thanks be to God, I scorn death and vow that I meet it innocent of any crime, even if I were their subject. The Catholic faith and the assertion of my God-given right to the English crown are the two issues on which I am condemned, and yet I am not allowed to say that it is for the Catholic religion that I die, but for fear of interference with theirs.
The proof of this is that they have taken away my chaplain, and although he is in the building, I have not been able to get permission for him to come and hear my confession and give me the Last Sacrament, while they have been most insistent that I receive the consolation and instruction of their minister, brought here for that purpose.
The bearer of this letter and his companions, most of them your subjects, will testify to my conduct at my last hour. It remains for me to beg Your Most Christian Majesty, my brother-in-law and old ally, who have always protested your love for me, to give proof now of your goodness on all these points: firstly by charity, in paying my unfortunate servants the wages due them - this is a burden on my conscience that only you can relieve: further, by having prayers offered to God for a queen who has borne the title Most Christian, and who dies a Catholic, stripped of all her possessions.
As for my son, I commend him to you in so far as he deserves, for I cannot answer for him. I have taken the liberty of sending you two precious stones, talismans against illness, trusting that you will enjoy good health and a long and happy life.
Accept them from your loving sister-in-law, who, as she dies, bears witness of her warm feeling for you. Again I commend my servants to you. Give instructions, if it please you, that for my soul's sake part of what you owe me should be paid, and that for the sake of Jesus Christ, to whom I shall pray for you tomorrow as I die, I be left enough to found a memorial mass and give the customary alms.
This Wednesday, two hours after midnight.
Your very loving and most true sister, Mary R
To the most Christian king, my brother-in-law and old ally''
|
|
The letter tells us a few things about Mary Queen of Scots and her time imprisoned. She tells us that she was poorly treated in England, especially by Queen Elizabeth I. Mary Queen of Scots also believes (from this letter) that she was being executed for her Catholic religion. Her Catholic religion certainly played a part in her downfall, but more so while in Scotland than in England.
Interestingly Mary Queen of Scots writes that she is ''innocent of any crime'', even though there is physical evidence, a hand written letter by her to show that she plotted the downfall of Elizabeth I. In Mary's eyes, did she think that this was not a crime? Probably. More to the point, does it suggest that she lacked any self-awareness of her own behavior which became an instrumental reason for her execution, perhaps.
It's impossible to really know what Mary Queen of Scots was really thinking in the last hours of her life.
One last thing which is very interesting about this letter is in whom it is addressed to. It is partially addressed to her son. But interestingly her final address was not to Scotland, but to France. It gives us an indication of where her heart really lay. Not in Scotland, but in France.
There are several good reasons for this too. Mary Queen of Scots was more French, than Scottish. She grew up in France, not Scotland. She spent more of her time in France, than in Scotland. In fact, she barely lived in Scotland - she also spent more time living captive in England, than in Scotland.
Perhaps Mary became bitter about Scotland. The way that she was forced to flee her homeland and wasn't very welcome by the nobility of Scotland when she returned.
In the final hours of a persons life perhaps shows us what they truly hold dear to them. From Mary Queen of Scots final letter, what she seems to have held most dear was: her son, her religion and France.
http://digital.nls.uk/mqs/trans1.html
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-38907013
https://stv.tv/news/east-central/1380224-last-letter-of-mary-queen-of-scots-goes-on-display-in-edinburgh/
|
Mary Queen of Scots is one of history's most tragic monarchs. Partly through circumstances within Scotland at the time, partly through her claim to the English thrown and partly through her naivety.
Before we get to why Mary Queen of Scots was naive, and why it led to her downfall, we will first look at the question, 'Who was Mary Queen of Scots?' |
Who was Mary Queen of Scots?
Mary Queen of Scots was born inLinlithgow Palace. Linlithgow Palace is situated in West Lothian, near Edinburgh. The palace was commissioned to be built by Stewart kings, from the Royal House of Stewart.
The Royal House of Stewart began in 1307 and ruled until 1603 until the Act of Union, which brought England and Scotland together, through Scottish king James I.
James I became the United Kingdom's first monarch; Mary Queen of Scots was in some respects Scotland's last monarch.
Although Mary Queen of Scots was Scottish, and was Scotland's queen from 1542 to 1567, she spent most of her life in both England and France.
At five years old, Mary was sent to live in France because of the turbulent situation in Scotland. Both of a political and religious nature. Scotland wasn't safe for Mary, especially as queen.
Mary Queen of Scots became queen of Scotland at just six days old. When her father, James V died. Her French mother, Mary of Guise acted as Mary Queen of Scots regent.
While just five years old, Mary Queen of Scots became betrothed to England's king Henry VIII's son, Edward. However, Mary's guardians broke of the arrangement. When they did, Mary Queen of Scots was taken to Stirling castle.
The broken arrangement made an enemy of Scotland and Mary Queen of Scots, in Henry VIIIs eyes. Herny VIII is infamously known for his vengeance - those who crossed Henry VIII were brutally dealt with.
The broken engagement of Mary Queen of Scots and his son Edward was no different. The situation resulted in 'The Rough Wooing.' This was an act of military aggression towards Scotland by Henry VIII between 1544 and 1548, as a result of the broken engagement.
Who was Mary Queen of Scots during those early years, is not something we can decipher. As she was too young to make her mark in history.
But, we can answer who was Mary Queen of Scots more through her time living in France.
Mary Queen of Scots in France
Mary left Scotland on the 7th of August in 1548, at Dumbarton. She arrived in France about a week later, at Brittany.
It was while in France that Mary's character and personality developed. She was said to be popular at the royal court. And popular with the French royal family.
It is also said that Mary was intelligent and talented. Mary Queen of Scotland spoke six languages; her native Scots, French, Latin, Italian, Spanish and Greek. She was also a gifted writer in prose and poetry.
Her other talents included: falconry, horsemanship and needlework.
Mary married her first husband while in France, Francis. The two married in Notre Dame in Paris, in 1558. The marriage united the Scottish and French crowns. However, it did not last.
Just a year later, on the 5th of December 1560, Francis had died of an ear infection. Leaving Mary a widow.
Mary's return to Scotland
Just nine months after the death of Francis, Mary Queen of Scots choose to return to Scotland. She arrived in Leith on the 19th of August 1561.
It was a decision made by Mary which would be the first step in her downfall.
From the moment Mary stepped foot in Scotland, she put herself in a precarious position. The situation in Scotland was politically and religiously dangerous.
The Scottish nobility were prone to acts of violence and lawlessness.
What was most dangerous for Mary is that she was a Catholic queen in a protestant country. This led her to go to mass privately. A sign that it was dangerous to be a Catholic at the time.
Although in public Mary Queen of Scots projected that she did not want to interfere with the protestant faith, it was not was she was saying behind the scenes.
Even though this was the case, protestants were suspicious of Mary. Most of her noble council was protestant, only a handful were Catholics.
The danger to Mary was that she never really had the support of her councilors and the wealthy nobility of Scotland. This was mostly due to her Catholic religion.
Being a ruling monarch during the era of Mary Queen of Scots was difficult enough. What made it more difficult for Mary Queen of Scots was not having the support of her own country men.
Elizabeth I during the same time had the same problem, not having the (full) support of her councilors and nobles, due to religious disagreements. What it shows us is that Elizabeth (and Mary Tudor of England), managed to keep their heads and their crowns, even though they both faced similar religious antagonists. This shows us that Mary Queen of Scots was a weaker and less effective monarch.
It wasn't just circumstance which led Mary Queen of Scots to her downfall, it was partially down to her being a weak and naive monarch.
The downfall of Mary Queen of Scots
Having enemy's within her own country was bad enough, dangerous enough, but Mary Queen of Scots made matters worse for herself. She made an enemy of England. Which wasn't a wise move.
Mary Queen of Scots made an enemy of England by making a claim to the English throne, when she was back in Scotland. She may have had a legitimate claim to the English throne, but she was in no position to claim it. England was more powerful than Scotland. Elizabeth was more powerful than Mary. Mary had enemies of her own within Scotland. Her claim to the English throne meant that Mary had made enemies both sides of the boarder.
Perhaps the situation was outwith her control, a situation not created by her. But, making an enemy of England and Elizabeth perhaps could have been avoided - if she hadn't made a claim to the English throne.
The cousins, Elizabeth and Mary, already had a turbulent relationship. Elizabeth already had defeated Mary earlier over the Treaty of Edinburgh.
Mary further made an enemy of Elizabeth through her third marriage to Lord Darnley. Lord Darnley also had a strong claim to the English throne. This undone the diplomacy tried by the two women.
Mary Queen of Scots and Lord Darnley married on the 29th of July 1565, at Holyrood Palace. The marriage did not last long, in 1567, Lord Darnley was murdered.
Mary was forced to abdicate the throne later in the year, during the summer. Showing the precarious nature that Scotland was in at the time.
She was imprisoned in Loch Leven Castle in Kinthrosshire. Making way for her son, James, to be crowned the new king of Scotland.
On the 2nd of May 1568, Mary Queen of Scotland escaped her imprisonment of Loch Leven castle. On the 16th of May that same year, Mary fled Scotland by a fishing boat to England.
Mary naively hoped that her cousin would help her. By choosing to flee to England, Mary sealed her doomed fate.
She also put herself into a dangerous situation. Yes, Mary was already in a dangerous situation while in Scotland, but she made matters worse for herself by choosing to go to England. Not only was she a threat to England's queen Elizabeth, she also was a Catholic in another protestant country. Both things made Mary Queen of Scots a walking target.
Elizabeth had Mary imprisoned and under surveillance while in England. For 19 years.
What was to happen over the following two decades perhaps shows us another difference between the queens. It shows us that Mary Queen of Scots was ruthless and vengeful. Whereas, Elizabeth I seems to have had more compassion.
Throughout her time in prison, Mary Queen of Scots was at the center of plots to assassinate Elizabeth, and put Mary on the English throne.
Mary was not directly linked to any of these plots, and so Elizabeth did not want to assassinate her. Though, the English nobles at the time wanted the queen to act in this way.
In 1586, physical evidence of Mary plotting the downfall of Elizabeth did surface. She was found to correspond with Anthony Babington, to bring down the queen.
It was a naive and foolish mistake by Mary Queen of Scots. It gave the English nobels the evidence they both needed and wanted to get rid of Mary. In effect, Mary Queen of Scots signed her own death warrant. Mary provided evidence for Elizabeth that she was a danger to Elizabeth's life.
Ultimately, it ended in Mary Queen of Scots death. First there was a trial. And then in October 1586, Mary Queen of Scots was sentenced to death.
Mary was executed on the 8th of February 1587 at Fotheringay Castle.
Concluding thoughts
If Mary had never fled to England, she could have been executed in Scotland. Neither country was safe for her. Not Scotland. Not England.
Partly the reason for that was outwith her control, such as the religious reformation which was turning Catholicism on its head; replacing it with Protestantism in both Scotland and England.
For a Catholic monarch this was dangerous.
What was also dangerous for Mary was how she behaved as queen. Naturally any monarch during that time had enemies, alliances were built to avoid such enemies.
Although Mary did in some respects try to befriend and make an alliance with Elizabeth, her claim to the English throne was enough to make a permanent enemy of Elizabeth.
Naturally Elizabeth did not just fear for her crown, she also feared for her life, with Mary making a claim to the throne.
A combination of Mary's stake to the English throne, her lack of support from her nobles and her naivety, all played a part in Mary's downfall.
We can see her downfall not as one event, but a series of events which led to her demise.
In some respects Mary Queen of Scots was a tragic figure of political and religious circumstance. In other respects, she partially created her own downfall.
Her story may be tragic, but Mary Queen of Scots is one of the most fascinating figures in Scottish history.
Sources:
http://www.historyextra.com/article/premium/deadly-rivals-elizabeth-and-mary
http://www.historytoday.com/richard-cavendish/mary-queen-scots-leaves-france-scotland
http://www.bbc.co.uk/scotland/education/int/hist/mary/act1/wooing/
http://www.bbc.co.uk/scotland/history/articles/james_v/
http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/people/mary_queen_of_scots/
https://www.britannica.com/topic/House-of-Stuart
https://www.historicenvironment.scot/visit-a-place/places/linlithgow-palace/getting-there/
The construction ofTitanic began on the began in the early 20th century. The Titanic was laid down on the 31st of March 1909, at Harland & Wolff in Belfast, the UK.
The first part of the Titanic which was laid down for construction was its keel. The keel of the Titanic was the backbone of the ship.
The construction of the Titanic lasted for over two years. On the 31st of May 1911, the Titanic's hull was launched.
The welding and fabrication methods used to construct the Titanic were in there infancy, compared to today. Most of Titanic was constructed through hydraulic machines or were hammered by hand.
It has been suggested that one of the reasons for the Titanic's demise was down to the construction methods, and the types of materials used on the ship.
Recently there has been a theory put forth that the Titanic sank because of a fire on the ship. This weakened Titanic and put those on-board in danger.
Danger existed during the construction of the Titanic too. Three people were reported to have died. Two during the construction of the Titanic. One just before the launch of the Titanic, a piece of wood fell on him.
There were also numerous injuries. There were 28 reported injuries that were 'severe'. And a total of 246 injuries were reported during the construction.
The Launch of the Titanic
The launch of the Titanic took place on the 31st of May 1911, at 12.15PM. There were around 100,000 people who turned up. Among them were: J. Bruce Ismay and J P Morgan. It is thought that it is good luck to christen a ship with champagne, however, Titanic was never christened.
The construction of Titanic took longer than was expect. This was mainly down to Ismay wanting changes made to the ship.
The ship was also delayed in another way. Titanic was also meant to sail earlier than April 1912.
Titanic's sea trials
Eventually Titanic was ready to go. And on the Tuesday the 2nd of April 1912, at 6AM, Titanic began her sea trials.
Titanic began her sea trails when she left Belfast.
Her sea trails began just a week before her maiden voyage. The ships maiden voyage was at Southampton on the 11th of April 1912.
Maiden Voyage
Titanic began her maiden voyage on the 11th of April 1912. It would be a short life for the Titanic. She struck an iceberg several days later, on the 14th of April, at 11.40PM (the ships time).
The iceberg was spotted just a few seconds beforehand, by Fredrick Fleet.
When Fleet informed the crew on deck about the iceberg, it was too late. First Officer William Murdoch was in charge of the ship that night. The ships captain, Captain Smith, had went to bed several hours earlier.
Murdoch made the decision to reverse the ship, to avoid collision with the iceberg. It is a decision which seal the ships fate.
At 2.20AM on the morning of the 15th, Titanic was completely submerged by the Atlantic Ocean.
The beginning
For those who are new to the Jack the Ripper case, it is important to know that there are disagreements about the case. Some Ripperologists dispute the amount of women murdered.
All of Jack the Ripper's murders happened in the East End of London. In a district known as Whitechapel. Throughout 1888.
In this introductory article, we are going to first talk about the general consensus among Ripperologist. That general consensus is that most Ripperologists think that Jack the Ripper murdered five women.
These five murder victims are known as the Canonical Five. The Canonical Five are the five women who most Ripperologists agree were victims of Jack the Ripper. Those five women were; Mary Ann Nichols (also known as Polly Nichols), Annie Chapman, Elizabeth Stride, Catherine Eddowes and Mary Jane Kelly. That was the order of the killings.
Mary Ann Nichols was the first victim of Jack. She was murdered during the early hours of the morning on the 31st of August 1888.
Nichols was murdered sometime between 2.30am and 3.45am. We know this because Mary was last seen alive at 2.30am by a woman called Emily Holland. And one hour and fifteen minutes later, Mary Nichols body was found by two men, Charles Cross and Robert Paul.
Nichols was not dead for that long. We know this for two reasons. The first is the two men felt that she was warm and thought she was breathing. Secondly, the nearby physician Dr Llewellyn was called to the crime scene. She's dead, ''but a few minutes'', he said when he arrived.
Mary Ann Nichols was murdered on Bucks Row. She was buried on the 6th of September 1888.
Annie Chapman
Annie Chapman was the second victim murdered at the hands of Jack the Ripper.
Annie Chapman was murdered by Jack the Ripper on the 8th of September 1888. Probably around 5.30am that morning on 29 Hanbury Street. In the neighbouring garden, 27 Hanbury Street, Albert Cadosh heard voices from the garden of number 29. All he could make out was a woman (likely Annie), saying ''No.'' At that moment he heard a thud on the fence.
That was most likely the moment when Annie Chapman was murdered. Though, Albert Cadosh didn't think anything of the incident. Half-an-hour lter, at 6am, Annie Chapman's body was found by the occupier of number 29 Hanbury Street, John Davis.
Annie's death is surrounded in debate. This is because there are two witnesses who claimed to have seen Annie (or heard Annie) at 5.30am that morning. One of them was Albert Cadosh. The other was Elizabeth Long, an old women who claimed that she seen Chapman with a man talking.
This has caused debate about the nature of Annie Chapman's death. Both of these witnesses can't be right.
Annie Chapman was buried on the 14th of September 1888.
Elizabeth Stride was murdered on the night which is known as 'The Double Event'.
The Double Event was when Jack killed two of his victims, on the early hours of the morning of the 30th of September 1888. His first victim that night was Elizabeth Stride. His other victim was Catherine Eddowes. It is thought that Jack went on to kill Catherine Eddowes that night because, he wasn't satisfied with the way he killed Elizabeth Stride.
The ripper wasn't satisfied with Elizabeth Stride's murder because it is widely believed that he was disturbed that night. He was disturbed just after he killed Eddowes by a man named Louis Diemschutz.
Louis Diemschutz entered Dutfield's Yard, the place where Eddowe's body was found by Diemschutz, at 1am that morning. He was driving his cart and horse into the yard when the horse pulled back. Refusing to go into the yard. The horse likely sensed the rippers presence, but Diemschutz thought tht something was in the way. The yard was pitch black, he couldn't see anything. Having to light a match, he discovered the body of Catherine Eddows on the ground.
Louis Diemschutz himself thought that Jack the Ripper was still in the yard. This was the first of two instances were Jack escaped that night...
Catherine Eddowes
Later that morning, Jack went on to kill his second victim, Catherine Eddowes.
The murder of Catherine Eddowes probably could have been avoided. Why? On the evening of the 29th of September 1888, Catherine Eddowes was arrested for drunken and disorderly behaviour. She was taken under police custody and put in a cell until she sobered up. Eddowes was found to be sober at 12.55am and let out of jail.
Although the police wouldn't have known about the murder of Elizabeth Stride that morning, they did know that Jack the Ripper was about. They knew at least two women had been murdered in the early hours of the morning, yet they still let Eddowes go. Out in to danger, no police officer escorted her home.
That decision sealed her fate.
Eddowes was murdered shortly after. She was last seen at 1.35am by three men outside 17 Duke Street. Her dead body was found at 1.45am inside Mitre Square. This gives us an insight into how quick Jack killed and mutilated his victims. In pitch black too. Leading some to believe that Jack the Ripper must have had some anatomical knowledge - due to the mutilations and the removal of body organs.
Catherine Eddowes was buried on the 8th of October 1888. While Elizabeth Stride was buried on the 6th of October 1888.
Mary Jane Kelly
Mary Jane Kelly was the last Canonical Five victim to be murdered.
When we read about Jack's murders, it is apparent that his murders get more gruesome the more he kills. With the exception of Elizabeth Stride. Mary Jane Kelly was murdered in the most brutal and disturbing way.
She wasn't only mutilated like most of Jack's other victims, her body was completely destroyed. Her skin was removed from her limbs and face. Most of her face was removed, such as her nose.
It is thought by some that the murder of Mary Jane Kelly was Jack the Ripper's disturbing fantasy.
The murder of Mary Kelly was only one thing that made her stand apart from the rest Jack's victims. Most of Jack's victims were middle-aged, while Kelly was only 25 years old. All of Jack the Ripper's victims were murdered outside, meanwhile Kelly was murdered in doors.
It is thought that she was murdered sometime in the early hours of the 9th of November 1888. Though, it's not exactly clear at what time she was murdered. Her murder took place in her home at Miller's Court.
Kelly was buried on the 19th of November 1888.
Jack the Ripper
These are the five victims which most Ripperologists agree were at the hands of one man - Jack the Ripper.
Jack the Ripper was likely one man. Some have claimed that Jack could have been a woman. Therefore, those who think it was a woman say that it was Jill the Ripper. Some have argued that Jack the Ripper was part of a gang.
Early police reports indicated that the earliest theories by the police thought that the killings were gang related. However, the evidence suggests that it was the work of one man.
The question which has been on everyone's lips for over one hundreds years is, Who was Jack the Ripper?
There are hundreds of Jack the Ripper suspects. Most of these suspects can be ruled out. Why? Some of them were not in that part of the country, others were not even in the country at all, and some were in jail.
These are the suspects we can rule out with certainty.
There are only a tiny handful of Jack the Ripper suspects which can be taken seriously. Suspects which had motive. Suspects which lived in the Whitechapel area. Suspects which give us reason to suspect them.
There are not many Jack the Ripper suspects which fit into this category. Some of the likeliest Jack the Ripper Suspects are Aaron Kosminski and William Bury.
But, there could be one other suspect. A suspect which gets little to no attention. That suspect is unknown. A suspect which is not known to us. This would indicate why the other suspects have never been proven guilty of being Jack the Ripper.
Sources:
http://www.casebook.org/victims/mary_jane_kelly.html
http://www.casebook.org/victims/eddowes.html
http://www.casebook.org/victims/stride.html
http://www.casebook.org/victims/chapman.html
http://www.casebook.org/victims/polly.html
http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/historic_figures/ripper_jack_the.shtml
http://www.casebook.org/intro.html
Archives
April 2023
March 2023
February 2022
April 2021
March 2021
January 2021
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
April 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
July 2019
June 2019
April 2019
March 2019
November 2018
August 2018
July 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
November 2015
Categories
All
Borgias
British History
Captain Smith
Christmas
Claudius
Elizabeth I
European History
Folklore
French Revolution
Henry VIII
Italy
Jack The Ripper
Jack The Ripper Letters
Jack The Ripper Sources.
Jack The Ripper Supsects
Jack The Ripper Victims
James I (VI)
Magna Carta
Medevial History
Monarchs
Mythology
On This Day In History
Queen Victria
Quizzes
Robin Hood
Roman
Russia
Scottish History
Suffragettes
Thomas-cromwell
Titanic
Tudor-history
Tudors
Victorian-britain
Victorian-history
Votes-for-women
Winston-churchill
Witches
Women-of-history
Womens-history
Womens-suffragge
World-war-one
World-war-two