Lesson 8: Jack the Ripper: A Comparison to Contemporary Serial Killers and Course Wrapup
Who was Jack the Ripper? Course Wrapup
The Instructor's Own Personal Theory
First of all, I think we'll never know for certain who Jack the Ripper was because too much valuable evidence has been lost through the years. Based on the facts we do have, there are suspects I definitely believe weren't the Ripper.
I personally do not think Walter Sickert, James Maybrick, or Montage Druitt were guilty. These three dandies would have stuck out like a sore thumb on the East End. Sickert and Maybrick were not even suspects at the time of the murders. I believe Sickert was more likely to be a temperamental and rather weird artist than a murderer and I think there's adequate evidence to prove the Maybrick Diary was a hoax. As for Druitt, I think he killed himself for personal reasons unrelated to the Ripper case.
Whoever the Ripper was, he was likely to have either been insane or a man with a serious grudge against prostitutes. Like Macnaghten, I had it narrowed down to three main suspects. Mine were Chapman, Tumblety and Barnett. At first I was convinced Tumblety had done the deeds, but was swayed in favor of his innocence by the idea that he might have been in jail when Mary Kelly was murdered. And Chapman was certainly mad enough, but he seemed too young to match the general description witnesses had given. So I decided that if I had to make a guess, Joseph Barnett would be my prime suspect.
I based my hunch (and that's all it is--a hunch) on the fact that most killers have motive and opportunity. I thought Barnett had motive--a reason to hate prostitutes because he didn't want his lover working in that trade. The loss of his job made her go back to a lifestyle he despised. Maybe he felt worthless and blamed himself because he couldn't support her. He may have murdered the other women to scare her off prostitution.
He also had opportunity. He could have slipped around unnoticed because he lived in the area and people were used to seeing him. He could be nondescript and keep a low profile where someone like Sickert would have been noticed.
Barnett was also the only suspect who had a strong connection to any of the women. And he may have had a key to Mary Kelly's lodgings. I think that bit of evidence is important. The crimes escalated and he may have been killing Mary Kelly in effigy all along. The most brutal murder of all he saved for the woman he both loved and hated, the one who broke his heart. Anyway, it makes as good a story as any.
So the question still remains unanswered--who was Jack the Ripper? Was he mad doctor Michael Ostrog, or a local resident such as Joseph Barnett, or was Pat Cornwell right about him being a gentleman gone slumming, namely artist Walter Sickert? Did the Ripper actually exist or was his gruesome image part of a cover-up or conspiracy? Now that you have reviewed all of the basic facts, what is your opinion?
If you go to the website Casebook.org and click on "suspects", you can also place your vote on the suspect you believe most likely to have been Jack the Ripper.
