How easy was it to disappear?

[YankeeSergeant]

Get away

When I posted the question, I should have said escape or get away.
I really didn't mean to imply he was Houdini.

[Rosella]

I too think that Jack just walked off and blended in. It would have looked rather suspicious IMO, had he been seen by a passing policeman dodging up alleyways or hiding in doorways. A brisk walk in the darkness of those streets would have been the best way to evade notice. If Jack had bloodstained clothing and hands and been caught under the glare of a street lamp by a copper (especially carrying souvenirs) it would have been a different matter, but he never was.

[Wickerman]

Hi GUT.
The hiding places certainly existed, but H Division & Scotland Yard have dealt with criminals who hide in closets, drains, stables, down sewers, under rubbish, in empty barrels, in cellars and down dark alleys, I mean you name it, and someone has tried to hide there.
There likely isn't a place we can think of that the police haven't already considered.

[GUT]

The question posed in the thread may assume too much. I don't think he disappeared so much as just blended in, providing he bore no visible stains of blood.

At Bucks Row, once he turned the corner by the Board School, he was basically free and clear.
In Hanbury Street, once he exited the passage of No. 29, he was essentially free and clear.
Likewise in Dutfields Yard and Mitre Square, once he exited both he was as good a free and clear.
And in Dorset St., once out of the Millers Court passage he was once again free and clear.

In all cases he has no need to draw attention to himself by running, just a casual but determined walk in and out of the backstreet allies and passages to avoid the police is all that may have been required.

The only murder where we read that police immediately spread out and searched for people, stopping whoever they met, was the Eddowes murder, and even in that case we do not know beyond a handful of detectives, just how many searchers were involved.

That's true Jon, more likely to have simply walked off as just another joe than hid, but hiding spots were there if he needed them.

Even the blood stains may not have mattered too much, if they exsted.

[Wickerman]

I have always thought privies, out houses, dunnies, whatever we call them an ideal hiding place, and if it was an old thunderbox, worst comes to worst down in the soil even better.

The question posed in the thread may assume too much. I don't think he disappeared so much as just blended in, providing he bore no visible stains of blood.

At Bucks Row, once he turned the corner by the Board School, he was basically free and clear.
In Hanbury Street, once he exited the passage of No. 29, he was essentially free and clear.
Likewise in Dutfields Yard and Mitre Square, once he exited both he was as good a free and clear.
And in Dorset St., once out of the Millers Court passage he was once again free and clear.

In all cases he has no need to draw attention to himself by running, just a casual but determined walk in and out of the backstreet allies and passages to avoid the police is all that may have been required.

The only murder where we read that police immediately spread out and searched for people, stopping whoever they met, was the Eddowes murder, and even in that case we do not know beyond a handful of detectives, just how many searchers were involved.

[YankeeSergeant]

MOnty's book

Agreed! It quite simply was a fascinating read! Well done, Sir!

[GUT]

Monty, I just got your book and it looks fascinating!

Best police procedure book I've ever seen.

[YankeeSergeant]

Monty, I just got your book and it looks fascinating!

[GUT]

You know, we can't say anything for certain about the case, but damn it I never thought of privies (or out houses as we call them here in the States)! The idea is elegant in its simplicity. It would totally work and most people see a closed outhouse door they would knock first. All it takes to dissuade someone would be a grunt. Wait for the person to leave or enter the other privy and you can make your escape.

I have always thought privies, out houses, dunnies, whatever we call them an ideal hiding place, and if it was an old thunderbox, worst comes to worst down in the soil even better.

[Fleetwood Mac]

Although I've seen pictures of Whitechapel and Spitalfields, I have yet to visit. So, forgive me if this seems like a stupid question, but how easy was it to disappear in Whitechapel or Spitalfields? From the pictures I've seen, the accounts I've read in books, articles and here on the boards it seems to me it would be fairly easy. I'm in edits on a novel I'm writing about Jack the Ripper and Just want to be sure all my ducks are in a row. Thanks in advance.

Very easy.

Unless you were caught red handed you were just another bloke walking down the street.

I forget the exact times, but at the Eddowes murder it was something like 20 minutes before they conducted a search of the area. Imagine how far you can get with a 20 minute head start and the police searching every nook and cranny in the vicinity.

No chance of catching him unless they get a scent at the murder scene.

[YankeeSergeant]

Privies

You know, we can't say anything for certain about the case, but damn it I never thought of privies (or out houses as we call them here in the States)! The idea is elegant in its simplicity. It would totally work and most people see a closed outhouse door they would knock first. All it takes to dissuade someone would be a grunt. Wait for the person to leave or enter the other privy and you can make your escape.

[Ausgirl]

It remains true that if you want to remain hidden from the eyes of a crowd, up is where you want to go. Nobody looks up.

This is profoundly true. I have dozens of anecdotes to verify that yup, people just don't look up, even when it's a pretty logical thing to do in order to solve a problem/mystery.

Most of these come from 12 years of living in a 2nd story apartment and having a terrible sense of humour. Another comes from my wilder teenage years, and friend & I hiding from a policeman who was following us around the park 'clandestinely' by climbing a tree. It was pretty hilarious.. we had a lot of fun at his expense, while the policeman, Jacques Clouseau-like, kept looking around, over there, behind him, etc, snooping about all around the tree for these cheeky kids he could hear but not see. Anywhere but up!

And this thing about people never looking up became something of a running joke in my apartment, which had a small balcony and landing we'd sit on on hot evenings, and play head games with people passing by (oh youth, how silly it can be).

Whether JtR knew this too, I guess we'll never know. But he didn't "disappear" - he went somewhere. And if he went up - everything in my experience tells me it would not have been a stupid choice.

[Batman]

Dr Bagster Phillips -

"On the back wall of the house, between the steps and the palings, on the left side, about 18in from the ground, there were about six patches of blood, varying in size from a sixpenny piece to a small point, and on the wooden fence there were smears of blood, corresponding to where the head of the deceased laid, and immediately above the part where the blood had mainly flowed from the neck, which was well clotted."

Monty

Okay so I stand corrected. Looks like there was some small splashes on the wall in addition to the fence.

Still is consistent with forensic awareness of not getting blood on the murderer though do to the low trajectory away from him.

[Monty]

Dr Bagster Phillips -

"On the back wall of the house, between the steps and the palings, on the left side, about 18in from the ground, there were about six patches of blood, varying in size from a sixpenny piece to a small point, and on the wooden fence there were smears of blood, corresponding to where the head of the deceased laid, and immediately above the part where the blood had mainly flowed from the neck, which was well clotted."

Monty

[Batman]

There are a few murders where its implausible to imagine he kept himself clear of the blood...one case might be evident in the blood spurts on the wall in the Hanbury backyard, and there is little if any possibility that the person who left room 13 after the murder didn't have blood on him.

There where no blood spurts on any wall at Hanbury St.

There is blood 12" from the ground on the fence opposite the neck of Chapman's body. This means she had been killed while on the ground (hence why the suggestion the ripper killed from behind and while they both stood up to be wrong). It means JtR is also forensically aware and can exsanguinate draining blood from the body. Hence lack of blood during mutilations and lack of blood on himself.