One of the most common mysteries within the Victorian world happened in 1899 with Jack the Ripper. Jack the Ripper has fascinated people since the first mention of the name in the papers. What resonates with me about the whole crime spree is the fact that the perpetrator is still unknown. The suspects range from an artist, Sickert, to the royal physician Sir John Williams. Even today we can only put our biased thoughts to the man, or perhaps a woman? I know what you're thinking, why would I think of a woman as being the suspect? Why not? I'm not the only one who thought of this as well. A recent book just published earlier this year, Jack the Ripper: The Hand of a Woman by John Morris follows my thoughts. It all comes down to the last victim, Mary Kelly. A witness claimed she saw Mary several hours after she was killed and even had a conversation with her. The lead detective came to the conclusion it was the female killer escaping in Mary's clothing.
This interesting tidbit boggles the mind and brings a whole new thought process to the mystery of who Jack the Ripper was. Was she an abortionist or a midwife who would have known the female body and been able to perform such surgeries? Or was it really the woman they hung in 1890 for a crime so very similar? Or perhaps it was a man's jealous wife after some revenge? Was it really Lizzie Williams because she couldn't have children? We may never know one hundred percent who the real person behind the famous title was. One thing I know for sure is that there is a challenge to figuring it out. And fun creating stories to tell our theories.
In fact writing this post inspired me to create just such a novel. Who do you think Jack the Ripper really was? What about this mystery inspires and challenges you?
5 comments:
What a fascinating theory, Mae! And a great Halloween-month spooky post. :)
I have no idea who is guilty of being Jack the Ripper. What inspires me about this story is the realization that nowadays detectives have so many more tools to identify serial killers like him/her.
I'm going to add that to todays list of 5 Things I'm Grateful For!
Wow, Mae - I'd never heard the theory that a woman might have been Jack The Ripper. I'm most definitely behind the times when it comes to anything Thriller - regardless of time period.
And with modern tools of identification, people who are on death row or are in prison for decades are being set free because DNA evidence shows they did not commit the crime. And that is a good thing.
It is conceivable that a woman could be the killer thought back in that time period they didn't usually follow that line of thought. I agree with all the wonderful resources we have today it's hard for someone to get away with such an heinous act for long.
Like you it conjures up ideas...
The biggest problem with using our technologies to figure it out, is that police procedures weren't as tidy back then as they are now. so much of the evidence was contaiminated, just like the Lizzie Borden murders.
Although, I did recently see a show on History where they could match the axe head to the step-mother's shawl and found blood in the floor boards and a wash basin in the basement.
Very thought provoking post! And why not a female serial killer? Jack the Ripper could have been Jackie the Ripper, but we'll probably never know. Thus as you said, we can always write about it! :))
Post a Comment