Tweet
Near the end of Hallie Rubenhold’s The Five is a short section entitled A Life in Objects. It lists, for each of the first four canonical Ripper victims, the clothing and possessions that were on their person when their bodies were removed from the crime scenes. It’s striking that none of these lists includes any money.
We know that Elisabeth Stride had 6 pence she’d earned that afternoon when she left the boarding house where she was staying for the last time. The other women were likely penniless when they took to the streets one final time. Mary Ann Nichols and Annie Chapman were outdoors because they didn’t have money to pay for a bed. Catharine Eddowes had probably spent any money she did have getting so drunk that she was held in a police cell for 4 hours before being released onto the streets.
If the Ripper had approached any of the women in the guise of a customer, the normal practice would be for payment to be made before any intimacy took place. After he’d finished with Mary Ann Nichols, Annie Chapman and Catharine Eddowes, the Ripper probably retrieved his payments from their bodies. We know the Ripper searched the pockets of Annie Chapman and Catharine Eddowes, because he laid out the contents beside their bodies. However, in the case of Elisabeth Stride, it’s unlikely he had the opportunity to reclaim his money, because he was interrupted before he’d finished with her.
Of course, any money still on the bodies after their removal from the crime scenes could have been appropriated by the staff at the mortuaries where they were taken. It’s apparent there was no attention paid to the chain of custody for the corpses.
However, there might be other reasons for no money being found on the bodies. These other reasons are highly speculative. They may well have been previously considered but dismissed. On the other hand, they may suggest some potential avenues for further research.
If the Ripper was a regular customer of each woman, it’s possible he would be trusted enough for them to forego advance payment. At first glance, the idea that one man would frequently consort with the same 5 women may seem extremely unlikely. It implies a strong libido and more-than-average-for-the-neighbourhood disposable income. But all the women walked the same small territory, drank more than was good for them and were always short of money. All were middle-aged except Mary Jane Kelly. All had volatile relationships with the men they sometimes lived with.
Another possibility is that the Ripper approached the women not as a customer but in some other guise. He could have worn an easily recognisable uniform that encouraged the women to drop their guard, such as a Metropolitan Police constable or a Salvation Army captain. Perhaps he extended an offer of financial assistance, purportedly without any strings attached.
The Ripper being a regular customer or a safe authority figure would also explain why, even at the height of the Ripper scare, the women were willing to go alone to a secluded area with their killer.
Are these possibilities too far out?
We know that Elisabeth Stride had 6 pence she’d earned that afternoon when she left the boarding house where she was staying for the last time. The other women were likely penniless when they took to the streets one final time. Mary Ann Nichols and Annie Chapman were outdoors because they didn’t have money to pay for a bed. Catharine Eddowes had probably spent any money she did have getting so drunk that she was held in a police cell for 4 hours before being released onto the streets.
If the Ripper had approached any of the women in the guise of a customer, the normal practice would be for payment to be made before any intimacy took place. After he’d finished with Mary Ann Nichols, Annie Chapman and Catharine Eddowes, the Ripper probably retrieved his payments from their bodies. We know the Ripper searched the pockets of Annie Chapman and Catharine Eddowes, because he laid out the contents beside their bodies. However, in the case of Elisabeth Stride, it’s unlikely he had the opportunity to reclaim his money, because he was interrupted before he’d finished with her.
Of course, any money still on the bodies after their removal from the crime scenes could have been appropriated by the staff at the mortuaries where they were taken. It’s apparent there was no attention paid to the chain of custody for the corpses.
However, there might be other reasons for no money being found on the bodies. These other reasons are highly speculative. They may well have been previously considered but dismissed. On the other hand, they may suggest some potential avenues for further research.
If the Ripper was a regular customer of each woman, it’s possible he would be trusted enough for them to forego advance payment. At first glance, the idea that one man would frequently consort with the same 5 women may seem extremely unlikely. It implies a strong libido and more-than-average-for-the-neighbourhood disposable income. But all the women walked the same small territory, drank more than was good for them and were always short of money. All were middle-aged except Mary Jane Kelly. All had volatile relationships with the men they sometimes lived with.
Another possibility is that the Ripper approached the women not as a customer but in some other guise. He could have worn an easily recognisable uniform that encouraged the women to drop their guard, such as a Metropolitan Police constable or a Salvation Army captain. Perhaps he extended an offer of financial assistance, purportedly without any strings attached.
The Ripper being a regular customer or a safe authority figure would also explain why, even at the height of the Ripper scare, the women were willing to go alone to a secluded area with their killer.
Are these possibilities too far out?
Comment