A general consensus as to what the Ripper may have looked like?

[RipperNoob]

Based on all the eyewitness accounts, can we narrow down factors in common with all of the men the witnesses saw?

For example, an average height, average build, an average hair color, an average skin tone, etc--A composite of all traits common in most or all of the men the witnesses' face?

No matter WHO he was, it'd help to know what he generally looked like, a composite from various witness sightings.

[Sister Hyde]

Hi Mister Noob,

I think the only physical detail given from witnesses we can generally accept is his height, given as being around 5'7".

[Ben]

Hi RipperNoob,

It would be rather difficult to base the ripper's likely appearance on all the eyewitness accounts, as this would encompass a great many, including some that were patently bogus and others that clearly weren't of the real killer. If we narrow the accounts down to those that continued to be taken seriously by the police and involved a sighting with a victim, there does appear to be some degree of correlation amongst them. The age of 30, or thereabouts, crops up rather frequently, while an average or slightly below average height and a thickset/stout build appear more than once. As to complexion and dress, there is marginally more variance, but I'm persuaded most by the evidence of Joseph Lawende who saw a couple believed to be Eddowes and her killer just ten minutes before the former's body was discovered. He referred to a "rough and shabby" appearance and a fair complexion. It seems the police took his evidence particularly seriously. Most, if not all, eyewitnesses attest to the presence of a moustache.

A lot of it depends on which victims you attribute to the ripper. I'm particularly struck, for instance, by the superficial physical similarity between Ada Wilson's attacker and later descriptions of the supposed "canonical five" murderer.

All the best,
Ben

[Sister Hyde]

A lot of it depends on which victims you attribute to the ripper. I'm particularly struck, for instance, by the superficial physical similarity between Ada Wilson's attacker and later descriptions of the supposed "canonical five" murderer.

Yes, that caught my attention too. So anyway should we try to narrow down physical aspects, it still would be very vague, 5'7", in his thirties, with a mustache... I guess that's as good as it gets, and such an entry in a database would surely give thousands of matches.

[Errata]

I'm not entirely convinced that any witness actually saw Jack the Ripper. It is entirely possible that either the witnesses did not actually see the victims, or saw men with the victims too early for it to make sense for them to be the murderer.

[Fleetwood Mac]

Based on all the eyewitness accounts, can we narrow down factors in common with all of the men the witnesses saw?

For example, an average height, average build, an average hair color, an average skin tone, etc--A composite of all traits common in most or all of the men the witnesses' face?

No matter WHO he was, it'd help to know what he generally looked like, a composite from various witness sightings.

I'll go with Lawende's description.

10 minutes before the body was found, and a fella doing no more than making his way home.

I think it's a good bet that Lawende saw the ripper and gave a straight up description.

[Phil H]

I would agree with Errata - are there any RELIABLE witness descriptions?

Mrs Long may have been mistaken - especially if Chapman was killed earlier - in line with the timing of the Nichols killing.

How much did Lawende see, even if the man was "Jack"?

I do not think we have anything to go in in terms of facial features or height, build, or attire, so it would be a waste of time (probably impossible) to reach a concensus.

Phil

[Sister Hyde]

How much did Lawende see, even if the man was "Jack"?

I do not think we have anything to go in in terms of facial features or height, build, or attire, so it would be a waste of time (probably impossible) to reach a concensus.

Phil

Well considering the time of Lawende's sight, it is still pretty likely to have been the Ripper. But you're right, we could never reach a concensus on that field, especially that there are different schools on "genuine" witnesses, and since all witnesses gave different description (even those who were together and saw the same thing), it would turn in another endless and sterile argument.

[Phil H]

Well considering the time of Lawende's sight, it is still pretty likely to have been the Ripper.

But only if the woman were Eddowes, surely?

Unless you are suggesting that "Jack" was the only man out with a girl in the East End that night?

I have a feeling that the police were desperate for Lawende (anyone?) to have glimpsed the killer, so were eager to believe that they had a description of JtR, but I see no guarantee that that was the case.

I don't rule it out, one of the three Jewish gentleman seemed (according to the press at the time) to be holding something back, so it is possible they saw Kosminski and that the latter or his family was known to them (or some of them.

On the other hand, did Lawende definitely see Eddowes? or ddi she have her back to him? If it was NOT Eddowes then the timing point means that it is unlikely the man with her was "Jack", however good a look at him Lawende got.

Phil

[Sister Hyde]

Well considering the time of Lawende's sight, it is still pretty likely to have been the Ripper.

But only if the woman were Eddowes, surely?

Unless you are suggesting that "Jack" was the only man out with a girl in the East End that night?

I have a feeling that the police were desperate for Lawende (anyone?) to have glimpsed the killer, so were eager to believe that they had a description of JtR, but I see no guarantee that that was the case.

I don't rule it out, one of the three Jewish gentleman seemed (according to the press at the time) to be holding something back, so it is possible they saw Kosminski and that the latter or his family was known to them (or some of them.

On the other hand, did Lawende definitely see Eddowes? or ddi she have her back to him? If it was NOT Eddowes then the timing point means that it is unlikely the man with her was "Jack", however good a look at him Lawende got.

Phil

Yes of course Phil, that's the sine qua none condition for the man seen by the jewish men to be the Ripper, WAS it Eddowes or just another street walker. When asked to identify the corpse as the one of the woman at the morgue, he seemed pretty sure it was the same woman.

[Phil H]

...he seemed pretty sure it was the same woman.

Living, he may never have seen her face.

Dead, on the table in the morgue, her face cut and probably swollen, could he have recognised her even had he seen her living?

I have notebooks from years ago with many tables i drew up trying to compare alleged sightings and tease out clues. I now work on the assumption that there is not ONE witness description that cannot (and should not) be challenged.

Thus we can have no idea what "Jack" looked like. Attempts by some to argue we do, often it seems to me, correlate to a desire to point the finger at and find "evidence" against a named individual, especially if we have a living photograph of that "suspect" (i.e. Druitt, Le Grand).

Phil

Phil

[Sister Hyde]

...he seemed pretty sure it was the same woman.

Living, he may never have seen her face.

Dead, on the table in the morgue, her face cut and probably swollen, could he have recognised her even had he seen her living?

I have notebooks from years ago with many tables i drew up trying to compare alleged sightings and tease out clues. I now work on the assumption that there is not ONE witness description that cannot (and should not) be challenged.

Thus we can have no idea what "Jack" looked like. Attempts by some to argue we do, often it seems to me, correlate to a desire to point the finger at and find "evidence" against a named individual, especially if we have a living photograph of that "suspect" (i.e. Druitt, Le Grand).

Phil

Phil

I thought he recognized her not only at the face of the woman but at the clothing.
All the descriptions can be challenged of course, especially taking into account the darkness, the degree of attention of the witness, the distance, the absence of eye-care,... I think that's why it's such a tricky question.
In my case I can't be sure that anyone saw the Ripper, or managed to have a sufficient view to give a reliable description, but for my "favorite" suspects, there are no pictures existing so even with a faithfull description it would be rather hard to point the finger at anyone.

Cam

[Phil H]

Cam

I see that there is another current thread in which the description of Lawende and his companions are discussed and contrasted. It brings out that even betwen the three of them there were differences, especially of height - and asks the question, how was a concensus arrived at when one description said 5'3" and another 5'7"?? How do you chose?

Highly pertinent questions, I think, to what is being discussed here.

Phil

[Heinrich]

Eye witness accounts are notoriously unreliable. So many innocent people have gone to their execution based of dubious identifications. This holds especially true for strangers seen or imagined only once and fleetingly. Today, a prosecution witness who claimed to have seen a man that looked like a "Jew" or someone with a "blotchy" face, would be laughed out of court. A positive identification of someone already known to a witness, as in the case of Joseph Barnett being seen with Mary Kelly by Maria Harvey, would hold some credibility.

[Sister Hyde]

Cam

I see that there is another current thread in which the description of Lawende and his companions are discussed and contrasted. It brings out that even betwen the three of them there were differences, especially of height - and asks the question, how was a concensus arrived at when one description said 5'3" and another 5'7"?? How do you chose?

Highly pertinent questions, I think, to what is being discussed here.

Phil

Phil,

Yes I know, I never miss a thread on the "3 Juwes" (even when I don't write), the height being given 5'3" by Levy and 5'7" by Lawende (and the mysterious other witness who said that will remain a "??" since Harris claimed he had not seen anything). But it all join to the point that reaching a concensus is not possible (and trying to narrow down to the most recurrent detail for every aspect would be a complete disastre considering all the boggus witnesses influenced by the gossips). However I do love the maze all these questions on the Mitre Square murder are creating, it keeps my mind busy in a good and healthy (?) way

Cam