Why Was There No Money Found on Any of the Victims?

One curious fact of the Whitechapel Murders that has never been satisfactorily explained is the absence of any money on any of JTR's victims. After all, they were all of a profession that dealt strictly in cash, and one in which payment is made before services are rendered, not afterwards. So why was there never any money found on any of the victims?

[Howard Brown]

Would it be an aspect of ritualism/occultism to remove whatever was in their pockets ?

The reason that I ask is that it would seem more UNLIKELY that the Ripper would waste or expend valuable time in rifling through these women's pockets for their lifesavings,UNLESS it was for a ritualistic reason.

There are SO many possibilities, why the victims were absent any currency when they were discovered. One reason, might simply be the "hand to mouth", lifestyle these prostitutes existed under. As quickly as they received money, so they, in turn, spent it. Whether it have been on food, lodging, or alcohol. The fact that the amounts they took in were minimal, to say the least, would only serve to prove this all the more.

But all prostitutes demand payment in advance, except for regular customers that they can trust. This would hardly have been the case with these street women. They obviously could not have spent this money just received from the Ripper, if indeed there WAS any money exchanged. And I find it hard to believe that the Ripper would have risked the time searching his victims for the money - especially in the case of Chapman and Eddowes - as it would have been a purely nominal amount not worth the risk of his capture or identification. Unless maybe he WERE dirt poor himself. But still.......

I think there is more than meets the eye here, hence some of the more unusual choices on the poll. (you guys DID vote, didn't you?)

[Currerbell]

I dont think they had any on them anyway, they would have spent it on booze, or if they had any, might have gone to find a bed for the night...

[Howard Brown]

Disregard the 2nd post on this thread,since the times,they have a'changed.

I believe that these ladies were skint.... although it has been suggested that the approach of the Ripper towards the victims in one or more instances may have been attempts at robbing them..as in a move calculated to enable him to proceed in his butchery. By more or less suggesting to a victim that he was there for their cash and not looking for sex it might have facilitated his true aim....according to that theory. I have doubts that this is a viable theory although you can't immediately dismiss it outright.

After Chapman's murder...as a starting point, I for one would consider the possibility that women had begun arming themselves and that the killer,unless he was completely oblivious to the effect he was having in the area would have considered the possibility that the women had begun arming themselves and as a result probably ( in my view) not pursued any attempts at "hold ups", since the once completely vulnerable women might now be pistol packin' mamas...with an equally sharp knife on their person.

[Currerbell]

If they did carry some kind of weapon, was that allowed in those days????

[admin tim]

Originally Posted by Currerbell

If they did carry some kind of weapon, was that allowed in those days????

Yes, if you believe your Conan Doyle in the Sherlock Holmes canon. Britain used to be a lot like Texas in the LVP, and anyone who could afford a weapon could carry it. At least, Holmes, Watson, and numerous of the canon miscreants carried pistols, apparently legally. I dunno re knives and such; perhaps SPE or someone else in a position to know could help out here.

[SirRobertAnderson]

This isn't that complicated, is it ? Unless you believe these women would have had sex and then collected their money, Jack had to at the very least have taken back the coins he gave them.

Originally Posted by WTM

And I find it hard to believe that the Ripper would have risked the time searching his victims for the money

As he had already committed a deranged act, I don't think we can say anything along the lines of "He'd disembowel them on the streets but taking their coins - that was just too much of a risk."

I also think that said coins would have made a great trophy, especially for someone living with others. Neat, clean and compact...nothing to raise an eyebrow. He may even have used the same coins again and again.

[Howard Brown]

Bell:

When I mentioned "pistol packin' mamas", I didn't mean to suggest the prosses carried handguns. I meant knives or even scissors.