Jack the Ripper: "The Whitechapel Murderer" pt. 2

Jack the Ripper’s reign of terror made people wonder if anybody caught a glimpse of this monster, and it would seem that people did.

When aggregating eyewitness testimonies of those who believed they saw the Ripper, a rough outline of the killer can be visualized. It can be assumed that he was between 25 to 35 years old, roughly 5’5 to 5’7, stocky, with a fair complexion, and a moustache. Allegedly, he was seen wearing a dark overcoat and a dark hat. The Scotland Yard’s Violent Crime Command team has said that Jack the Ripper, who one could call evil incarnated, could be described in appearance as “perfectly sane, frighteningly normal, and yet capable of extraordinary cruelty”. Sir Melville McNaughten, the Scotland Yard’s head of the criminal investigation department in 1903, had a general suspicion of who the killer was. He knew that the Ripper had basic knowledge of anatomy, possibly a doctor and in McNaughten’s notes he had narrowed his list of suspects down to three names. That being said, due to the overwhelming amount of compelling suspects and the fact that many feel the official three are not the Ripper, we’re going to examine eight names, starting with McNaughten’s three official suspects.

The first suspect was Montague Johnson Druitt, who was a barrister who may have had an uncle and cousin who were doctors. Around the time of his death, Druitt may have been around the age of 40 and supposedly had an interest in surgery. Montague possibly lived with his cousin who was practicing medicine close to where the Whitechapel murders occurred. It also appears that about a month before the first canonical murder, Montague’s mother went insane and Montague had written in a note that he feared he was also going insane. In his notes, McNaughten adds: “From private information, I have little doubt but that his own family suspected this man of being the Whitechapel murderer; it was alleged that he was sexually insane.” After the final murder, Montague disappeared only to be found dead within four weeks of the last murder. His body was found floating in the Thames River on December 3^rd, 1888.

The second suspect was Michael Ostrog, a Russian doctor and a criminal. Ostrog has been in asylum previously for homicidal tendencies McNaughten notes that Ostrog couldn’t provide a strong alibi for his whereabouts during the murders. Ultimately, he was not convicted because there wasn’t enough evidence linking him to the crime.

The third suspect was Aaron Kosminski, a Polish and Jewish resident of Whitechapel, who spent some time in an asylum in 1889 after the last murder. Kosminski would actually reside in asylums until his death in 1919.

Kosminski was known for his hatred towards women, particularly prostitutes. According to McNaughten, his appearance matched descriptions provided by the police of a man in Mitre Square, which, if you’ll recall, was the night of the double murder, the Ripper likely zig-zagged between the police. Kosminski might be a name familiar to the public due to the fact that recently his name made headlines due to his being featured in a book entitled “Naming Jack the Ripper”. In this book, Russell Edwards claims that a shawl purchased at an auction contains DNA evidence proving Kosminski is the killer. The shawl was bought under the impression that it reportedly was at the murder scene on the person of Catherine Eddowes, the fourth ripper victim. Edwards enlisted the help of molecular biologist Jeri Louhelainen of Liverpool John Moores University. Edwards and Louhelainen believed the blood-stained shawl is connected to Catherine Eddowes, is based off of comparison from one of Eddowes’ descendants. They also claim that the semen found on the scarf is linked to relatives of Kosminski; with this discovery, many felt that the case was closed, including Edwards. “I’ve got the only piece of forensic evidence in the whole history of the case. I’ve spent 14 years working on it and we have definitely solved the mystery of who Jack the Ripper was. Only non-believers that want to perpetuate the myth will doubt. This is it now. We have unmasked him.”  But much to the chagrin of Mr. Edwards, that may not be the case. It turns out that the scientist may have made a critical error of nomenclature. Summed up, Dr. Louhelainen identified a mutation in DNA on both the scarf and in Eddowes’ relative named Karen Miller. This mutation was believed to be named 314.1C, a mutation only found in 1 in 290.000 people, making it very likely it was a match. However, this identification was reportedly incorrect and was not 314.1C, but instead 315.1C, which is a mutation shared by more than 99% of people of European descent. Basically, this DNA could be anyone if true. Furthermore, Kosminski’s DNA was linked to the scarf, using mitochondrial DNA, using a subtype that is far from unique. Sir Alec Jeffreys, who’s regarded as the godfather of DNA fingerprinting, has said that this evidence “needs to be subjected to peer review. No actual evidence has yet been provided.” Further adding fuel to the fire of sceptics is the fact that Dr. Louhelainen has yet to publish this finding in a peer-reviewed scientific journal and has refused to answer questions to news outlets. Thus, making it impossible to verify his and Edwards’ claims and effectively doing quite the opposite.

The fourth suspect is the notion that Jack the Ripper was actually a female; a theory that ripperologists call Jill the Ripper. The idea that all of the police were on the hunt for a man when they should have been searching for a woman would also explain the Ripper being able to slip by without suspicion. Pointing out that a midwife would have sufficient anatomical knowledge and blood on her clothing would have raised no eyebrows. Even though it should be pointed out that all eyewitness testimony points to a man.

Article by Azzurra Furnari