E FIT appearance of the Ripper's face

[Billy Bulger]

Hi everyone, I'm sure a lot of you have seen this photo/digital image of the Ripper's 'face' before but I thought it worth posting for those of you who have not. Its apparently a digital composition based on the existing records of descriptions given by witnesses at the time of the murders.

http://uk.wrs.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0WTf2ngr19IT3QA8sZWBQx./SIG=11smu7sme/EXP=1214316896/**http%3A//doorfromhell.com/thelair%3Fp=2174

For me it seems that a heavy emphasis was placed on George Hutchinson's description of the Ripper in Miller's Court in this composite- a description which still entertains dispute among students of the Ripper crimes. And while I personally appreciate all new Ripper information gained, there seems inherent pitfalls in placing too high hopes in this one solitary photograph. For example the face of the man in this photo is obviously that of an apparent foreigner (i.e. dark skin, dark eyes etc) but the very definition of that word, I believe, was somewhat different in the late 19th Century.

What does anyone else think?

[Ben]

Hi Billy,

For me it seems that a heavy emphasis was placed on George Hutchinson's description of the Ripper in Miller's Court in this composite- a description which still entertains dispute among students of the Ripper crimes.

The inference from the following article by Richard Jones is that Hutchinson's description wasn't used in the E-fit:

http://www.jack-the-ripper-tour.com/face_of_jack.htm

[Sasha]

Hi everyone, I'm sure a lot of you have seen this photo/digital image of the Ripper's 'face' before but I thought it worth posting for those of you who have not. Its apparently a digital composition based on the existing records of descriptions given by witnesses at the time of the murders.

http://uk.wrs.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0WTf2ngr19IT3QA8sZWBQx./SIG=11smu7sme/EXP=1214316896/**http%3A//doorfromhell.com/thelair%3Fp=2174

For me it seems that a heavy emphasis was placed on George Hutchinson's description of the Ripper in Miller's Court in this composite- a description which still entertains dispute among students of the Ripper crimes. And while I personally appreciate all new Ripper information gained, there seems inherent pitfalls in placing too high hopes in this one solitary photograph. For example the face of the man in this photo is obviously that of an apparent foreigner (i.e. dark skin, dark eyes etc) but the very definition of that word, I believe, was somewhat different in the late 19th Century.

What does anyone else think?

Yeah, I don't buy it. To me, he doesn't look "frighteningly normal", he just looks "frightening". Even street girls would be wary of someone like that. But I agree with the profile ie that he looked normal or even harmless.

Sasha

[Billy Bulger]

Yeah this photo/composite is, for me too, a stretch. Having said as much, if that is what the Ripper looked like-even roughly accurate- then maybe Abberline (speculating in 1903) was spot on. This guy, for me, looks very much like George Chapman!

[Billy Bulger]

Hi Billy,



The inference from the following article by Richard Jones is that Hutchinson's description wasn't used in the E-fit:

http://www.jack-the-ripper-tour.com/face_of_jack.htm

Thats interesting Ben because I've read several times on this site that many students of the Ripper crimes are now somewhat dismissive of Hutchinson's description claiming it was too perfect and seemed every bit in keeping with the contemporary antisemitic view that the Ripper looked Jewish. But for me, this guy certainly looks possessed by semitic features-or at least foreign features. I must reiterate though that wasnt the term 'foreigner' used -in a Victorian sense- as being one not only belonging to another nation/race but also belonging to another district (in this case a district other than Whitechapel)? And maybe also belonging to a different class ie he was from a wealthier class?

[Dan Norder]

It's just something made to look good on television. It doesn't really have any basis in reality. The people behind it claimed that it was based upon the statements of 11 witnesses, but if you look at the Casebook witness page (or any good book on the topic) you'll note that there aren't that many people who even have a reasonable chance of having seen the killer, and their statements are almost universally unhelpful in trying to figure out what the killer would have looked like in any detail. E-FITs are supposed to be made by witnesses who had a good look in the first place and then watch an image of a face being put together and then saying that the nose was bigger or smaller and so forth through feedback and improvement, which obviously was not possible in this case. The image is no more likely to look like the Ripper than any random photo of a man taken in the East End in the late 19th century would. It's a bad joke.

[Ben]

Hi Billy,

Another problem is that even if the dubious E-fit was based on an amalgamation of eyewitness descriptions, there would be little or no justifaction for giving him a foreign or Jewish appearance, since the only "witnesses" who described a foreign-looking suspect were either discredited (for whatever reason), or had only acquired a rear view.

Best regards,
Ben

[Flagg]

I think Michael Caine's line in Jack the Ripper sums it up best.

"They don't know who they're describing."

[joelhall]

you mean an appearance made up of people giving differing descriptions and splicing them together?

wasnt this on that dopey channel 5 show? how did that turn out by the way, did the 'genius' with the wealth of experience turn anything up?

[CraigInTwinCities]

Strikes me as about as reliable as that A&E Special from 3-4 years ago where they "reavealed the true face of Jesus (Yeshua)."

How bogus. All they really did was offer an idea of what a typical Meditteranean Jew from the first century might have looked like... it certainly wasn't the face of Jesus/Yeshua.

Same thing applies here. Call it modern police tech all you want, it's still not much different than a best-guess that any sketch artist could whip out for you in five minutes at a county fair for $5.00.