Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Please Help!

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Please Help!

    Hi, I'm new here and I'm a Grade 12 History student.

    I need to know: are the five women listed in this forum the only confirmed victims? Or are there other confirmed ones?

    I am writing a rather large essay on Jack the Ripper and I came across this site. I am very confused by the books and such I have come across and I was hoping to find experitise on this subject.

    Can anyone help?

  • #2
    Hi rdg,

    Confirmed? I would say those five are generally agreed on. There has been a lot of discussion as to just which ones, but for your purposes of writing a clear essay and getting an A I would stick with those 5.

    Roy
    Sink the Bismark

    Comment


    • #3
      Thank you, Roy. This helps greatly.

      Comment


      • #4
        Its a hotly debated subject but I would agree with Roy simply to avoid confusion.

        Those five were investigated at the time as victims.




        Author of Capturing Jack the Ripper.

        http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/aw/d/1445621622

        Comment


        • #5
          RDG, it's all a bit difficult and confusing...

          There are the Whitechapel Murders (from April 1888 - February 1891) and then there's the Jack the Ripper Murders (from August 1888 - November 1888).

          Different sources at the time were linking one murder to another and, of course, because no one was ever brought to trial we'll never know how many were killed by our man.

          The five you are probably best suited to focussing on are indeed generally regarded by most people as being the victims of Jack the Ripper. That doesn't mean that they ARE, and, in fact, some people these days think that only three of them (Polly Nichols, Annie Chapman and Catherine Eddowes) can definitely be said to be the work of the same killer.

          The reason that most people name five is because that was the opinion of Sir Melville Macnaghten in the 1890s and his suggestion has stuck, presumably because of the weight of his authority.

          You'll find there's a lot of us who think there were actually six victims (this would include Martha Tabram on August 7th 1888) and then there's also the possibility that he attacked others who survived (such as Annie Millwood and Susan Ward).

          Because there's no confession, no evidence and no proof it will always be guesswork as to how many he killed. Five is the 'normal' view and I think it is what will be expected of you.

          However, I wouldn't let that limit you. Think outside the box. Refer to the five and look into reasons why that complacency might not be appropriate.

          PHILIP
          Tour guides do it loudly in front of a crowd.

          Comment


          • #6
            Hi Rainydaygirl! Stick to the 5! Going further than that will lead you into some very murky alleyways that you might not want to venture into. Talking of which, be prepared that on this site there are some truly horrible photographs of the victims. The Ripper liked his knife and used it a lot. A lot of the threads with pix will say 'graphic' but some of them don't. So be careful, as you might be confronted with something you really, really don't want to see. And you can still write the essay without knowing exactly what those poor women looked like after he'd finished with them.

            Comment


            • #7
              rainyday girl i would disagree with the other posters.

              As has been stated there were other murders of a similar nature both in The Uk and other countries most of which occurred after the alleged final victim of JTR in 1888.

              Most of these remain undetected so to totally disregard them as being the work of JTR would be foolish. Dont be fooled by posters on here who will say "But persons were arrested" the fact is that they all remain still undetected.

              Comment


              • #8
                Rainy Day Girl,

                Understand, as well, that Mr. Marriott has two books he is trying to flog based on a theory at variance with most other Ripperologists. For youir purposes, all his "undetected" murders are superfluous.

                Chava's was probably the best advice. You are doing a Grade 12 assignment, not a doctoral thesis, so concentrating solely on the Five will provide you with more than enough material for a great paper I am sure.

                Good luck!

                Don.
                "To expose [the Senator] is rather like performing acts of charity among the deserving poor; it needs to be done and it makes one feel good, but it does nothing to end the problem."

                Comment


                • #9
                  Erm, I think Rainy is long gone from this thread. However, Don and Chava are right. Best you try walking before running Trevor, you dont want to trip and fall now.




                  Author of Capturing Jack the Ripper.

                  http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/aw/d/1445621622

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Hi Rainydaygirl,

                    If you really want to impress the teacher make sure you are careful to note that not a single alledged Ripper victim has ever been linked to a known man as her killer. The truth is therefore that the Jack the Ripper murders are believed to have been committed by one man...but belief and evidence are not one and the same.

                    That way you can introduce some suspects at the time, which you would be wise to include Severin Klosowski (George Chapman), Francis Tumblety, Michael Ostrog and Montague J Druitt among,... even though Mr Klosowski (Chapman) wasnt a named suspect at that time, Mr Ostrog has been discovered to have been incarcerated at the time, and Mr Druitt was suggested by sources within the department, with his suicide in late November as evidence of his guilt, and Dr Tumblety may have been in jail for Mary Kelly's murder..the last victim attributed to The Ripper.

                    Hope that helps a bit, cheers.
                    Last edited by perrymason; 12-08-2008, 10:48 PM.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Just Say Nobody Knows

                      I would explain that since Jack was never caught, different scholars have differing opinions on which Whitechapel murders were actually done by Jack.

                      Then say that based on what Sir Melville McNaughten said there are five who are generally agreed upon as being Jack's victims. You might include a direct quote of McNaughten here and then be sure to do an appropriate footnote.

                      Then go into the canonical five in depth.

                      Finish up with a statement that there are others which various scholars have proposed, but are not generally agreed upon. You might write just one sentence listing five or six names separated by commas.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        more chance of you falling than me i am not blind to the facts which speak for themselves

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post
                          more chance of you falling than me i am not blind to the facts which speak for themselves
                          Hi Trevor,

                          I think stating the word 'facts' is going a little too far to be honest. What you presented on Feigenbaum in your book was interesting, intriguing and thought provoking but to state things as fact is wrong mate. Your evidence is, at best, speculative but not fact. You cannot prove at all that Feigenbaum was in London at the time of the murders nor can you link him to the other murders from around the world. The only murder that can be 100% proven to be committed by him is the Hoffman killing. If you choose to link any other murders to Feigenbaum, especially the JTR murders, then you gotta have some solid evidence to show that he was 100% in Whitechapel and even if you could prove this, that wouldn't prove he was guilty of killing the Ripper's victims. Don't get me wrong Trevor, I loved your book and have a lot of respect for you as a writer and for your theory but to state your findings as 'fact' is not possible. Sorry.

                          Adam
                          Best regards,
                          Adam


                          "They assumed Kelly was the last... they assumed wrong" - Me

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post
                            more chance of you falling than me i am not blind to the facts which speak for themselves
                            Thats not like you Trevor. letting the facts speak for themselves.

                            I have no suspect to push, no theory on apron usage or ripping of, all I deal in is facts Sir.

                            And whilst I may glance around as I walk along such a path, my feet stay firmly on this cold, factual tarmac.

                            Monty




                            Author of Capturing Jack the Ripper.

                            http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/aw/d/1445621622

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Just how many times have these cases been "closed" by authors?

                              That would be a good area of study.

                              Cheers...."and the band played on"....

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X