Why was Jack Never Caught?

[admin tim]

Okay, he killed 5 women (maybe) in only 10 weeks, but it's not as if he and his victims were in the isolated countryside - they were in the heart of the then-Capital of the World, a city that never slept.

So why was Jack the Ripper never caught?

You may vote more than once on this poll.

[Dave James]

JtR was one of the 'invisible' people, those who have a legitimate reason to be about, such as policemen, cabdrivers, doctors etc, who are there but not seen.

[Joan Tortorello]

JtR was one of the 'invisible' people, those who have a legitimate reason to be about, such as policemen, cabdrivers, doctors etc, who are there but not seen.

Agreed

[Karen Sweet]

I just find it completely amazing that nobody was caught in the act of any of these murders, given the amount of people around at the times of them. They were all pretty busy, conspicuous places.

[String]

I would have thought given that most think he was a workman that big top hat and black bag was a giveaway

[Andrew Komyati]

The police were incompetent and the witnesses were drunkards

[Anna Morris]

Luck always has to be part of it. No matter how incompetent authorities may have been, without a lot of luck he could have been caught in the act. Mary Kelly could have had a boyfriend waiting outside her door when Jack left, for example.

I also think he was so normal nobody thought he was Jack. Surely he had interactions with women he didn't kill. Possibly he was even inappropriate with a few women but for some reason people thought he was OK, or at any rate that he wasn't Jack.

[Lynn Cates]

No esse.

Hello All. He never existed.

Cheers.
LC

[Curryong]

Well, IF Jack existed then Jack had (a) bags of luck (b) he was the sort of man who could blend in anywhere. (One of the reasons I don't think he was a soldier. A red jacket or uniform would have been too conspicuous.) (c) I do think he was a local, and while he might not have had detailed knowledge of all localities he knew enough not to get caught.

[Cajun May]

Luck always has to be part of it. No matter how incompetent authorities may have been, without a lot of luck he could have been caught in the act. Mary Kelly could have had a boyfriend waiting outside her door when Jack left, for example.

I also think he was so normal nobody thought he was Jack. Surely he had interactions with women he didn't kill. Possibly he was even inappropriate with a few women but for some reason people thought he was OK, or at any rate that he wasn't Jack.

Some luck perhaps but, I think he knew the area in which he operated inside out and the times and movements of the people within it. He felt comfortable there, invincible there. It was his turf and he saw himself as master of it. Jack was also something of an "organized" killer. One who plans his movements in advance and brings his own weapons with him instead of relying on what he might find.

I don't believe the police were incompetent. I think they were outmanoeuvered. Jack may have been average looking as you say. I don't think he had anything approaching a normal relationship with a woman though. The mutilation and organ removal indicate otherwise from a psychological standpoint.

[Andrew Komyati]

I think we could agree that the 11 Whitechapel Murders are not the same killer. At least some of them are not Jack The Ripper. The police are incompetent and could not solve any of them.

Every Police Official has a different suspect or suspects.

[Rob House]

The most likely reason the Ripper was not caught is not an option on the list.

The reason is simply that serial killers cases are extremely difficult to solve, even in the modern era. And given that the police in 1888 had far fewer resources in forensic detection methods, it is not at all surprising that the case was not solved.

RH

[Anna Morris]

I agree with you Cajun May, pretty much. I don't know how much planning he did. Part of it I think was opportunity.

For the luck part, he usually worked on a short time frame so there wasn't really any reason why someone, anyone didn't blunder onto him killing and ripping. We know that after awhile the people in Whitechapel were ready to tear apart or lynch Jack, so the risks increased plus there were rewards in an area where people were very poor.

For interactions with women, I didn't mean real relationships. I mean most serial killers have some interactions that don't lead to murder. Sometimes they can't do the job where they are. Sometimes they don't want to do it to certain women. Like, what if Jack who seemed to prefer middle aged women, accosted a ragged, staggering woman late at night and she turned out to be 16 years old. Would he have killed her anyway? (I personally think Mary Kelly was over 30 and some said at the time she looked older than 24. He also may not have known her much.) Maybe he talked to the women before he decided to kill. Did he ask odd questions? Did he say strange things?

[Jennifur Roberts]

I voted other: clearly he was lucky but not luckiest ****** ever, the police were not especially incompetent AFAIK but clearly policing and its associated sciences were still primitive.

[Chris G.]

The most likely reason the Ripper was not caught is not an option on the list.

The reason is simply that serial killers cases are extremely difficult to solve, even in the modern era. And given that the police in 1888 had far fewer resources in forensic detection methods, it is not at all surprising that the case was not solved.

RH

Well said, Rob. As has been noted before, serial killers get away with it in our day even with all the forensic techniques available now.

Chris