Would Modern Detection Methods Have Caught Jack The Ripper?
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 30 ก.ย. 2024
- In this video author Adam Wood and Richard Jones discuss whether modern policing methods have led to the apprehension of Jack the Ripper.
We look at the crime scenes where the murders occurred and ponder what evidence that might prove useful to a Crime Scene Investigation today would have been present at the scenes of the murders in 1888.
Beginning with a look at what trace evidence would have been present on the bodies or in the immediate vicinity, we then explore whether or not CCTV footage might have proved useful in the hunt for the perpetrator of the Whitechapel murders.
We then explore the idea that fingerprints taken at the scenes of the atrocities might have led the police to the murderer. Having pondered how much the detectives involved in the investigation would have known about and understood the value of fingerprints, we then take a look at where at the crime scenes impressions of the killer's fingerprints might have been found.
Having discussed the possibility that DNA evidence might have proved useful in solving the mystery of whether the portion kidney sent to Mr George Lusk in October 1888 was, as the author claimed in the accompanying letter, part of the kidney that had been removed from Jack the Ripper victim Catherine Eddowes, we end by exploring the impact that the newly emerging detective fiction, such as the Sherlock Holmes stories, had on the police investigation into the crimes.
I think so. At the very least, modern methods of evidence collection and information gathering would help tremendously. Plus, keep in mind that even the Ripper himself would probably be using technology, which means he would be likely leaving behind a digital footprint.
Then again, even with our technology, some cases still go unsolved, so who knows.
Forensic scientists have indeed extracted fingerprints from bodies here in the U.S. using a plastic canopy around the body and heating a tray of super glue inside. The glue was vaporized and reacted with the fingerprint proteins on the skin and actually became visible enough where the fingerprints could be recorded.
It's also important to understand palm prints can also be traced back to perpetrators.
One thing todays forensic experts have at their disposal that the police probably didn't have back in 1888 is behavioral science advances (why people act the way they do) and behavioral profiling.
Serial killers typically share one behavior with each other and that is they feel the need to relive the crime, often times revisiting the crimes scenes over and over. Reliving the crime gives them a psychological return and or a sexual return of the crime that they crave. There is a very good chance that Jack The Ripper himself was in the crowds that formed around the crime scenes and he used that to relive the crime and enjoy all the excitement and interest he had just caused. He probably also returned to the scene of the crimes several times to relive them.
Than you for all the info. Really fascinating.
Thank you for the info!
Fascinating information.
Yes, you have jogged my memory. I remember hearing about the superglue thing a while ago.
Makes you wonder doesn't it.
The one caveat to this is that the skin can deform a print on it.
I suspect though that, in the Whitechapel case, they would not have found fingerprints. It takes some significant time to choke someone out-on the order of 5-6 minutes-and if your grip slips and the victim gets a breath or two, it goes on past that.
I suspect that the killer used a choke hold-like the sleeper hold in wrestling-to quickly subdue the victim. When I say quickly, I mean on average nine seconds.
There are a variety of different chokeholds, but one thing that they all have in common is that they won’t leave fingerprints, because you are using your forearm (and/or fist) to cut off blood flow through the carotid arteries.
Even with DNA, the fact that the women would be in contact with numerous people due to their profession, DNA evidence alone wouldn't be all together that helpful to investigators. Although, DNA might have helped narrow down possible persons of interest.
As far as cctv evidence, there's modern cases with video evidence, and the perpetrator STILL hasn't been caught i.e the Delphi murders recently.
It's the lie you tell to bolster another lie that catches you out. So the suspect who claims never to have met the victim is then confronted with the fact that his DNA was found on the victims clothing. But overall I agree. These women had a "varied social circle" and with nobody ever detained at the scene context is hard to prove.
Rats, bats, the Delphi murders baffle me why they just can't solve it, with not only video evidence, but audio as well. It's hard to believe no one has identified the man on camera, or his voice. Just beyond belief. What do the police want?
DNA evidence, as with all other, is all well and good provided that there is a suitable comparison on file. In other words, one may be in possession of a complete and fresh profile or ballistics report, but unless an offender has their corresponding sample on file, or a likely firearm is available, then it is for all intents and purposes useless.
good point
I’m so glad the Delphi case has a perpetrator in jail. Granted there are still people questioning if he’s the right person, but from the tabs I’ve kept on this case because of how much I hated what happened to those poor little girls… I think he’s the guy.
JTR was elusive, but the police have far advanced in the 133 years since the Autumn of Terror, it would have been nearly impossible for him to avoid making a mistake that would’ve landed him in prison. For example, we can now tell the difference between animal blood and human blood. There would be no explaining away residue on his jacket. DNA would’ve been helpful, but only if it were fresh and not corrupted. The police would’ve had to secure the murder scene and make sure nobody but the protected (suited up) forensics and detectives were allowed. JTR suspects would’ve had been tracked by ID or their driver’s license or computer records or receipts if such things had existed back in 1888 (where did he purchase the knife?). Security cameras in front of public buildings near the murder scenes may have caught surveillance footage of the murderer either in the act or shortly before or after. JTR was fortunate that CSI was non-existent in his time.
You can't track people by "ID", we don't have it as in a card. You can't track people by their driving licence either lol. Anyway, they didn't have cars. Cctv so often has terrible quality images. Jackie would have been aware enough to avoid things like that in my humble opinion. He was savvy enough to not get caught back then, so perhaps thought things out in advance.
Are you sure of that ,it was copper on the beat caught yr
Yes without a doubt . He’d have been lucky to evade capture long enough for two murders .
Blackhill, without a doubt!!! He was 'lucky'.
I don’t think we can be sure of that. There’s serial killers now that haven’t been caught.
Many serial killers have killed many more than JTR...so why would he have been caught?
We have modern methods and the Zodiac wasn't caught. Zodiac may still be alive even. I don't think it's as easy as all that
No. You're wrong
Thinking how the detectives back in the day were quite intelligent and capable. As the examples in this program show--they lacked the tools for this type of case. Just by interviews, I think one of the very top suspects was indeed the Ripper and they knew this but again, lacked the physical evidence from DNA or very likely the fingerprints. Telling is how much police pressed for newer scientific tools after such a case for future.
True, but there would have been nothing stopping them from putting him under surveillance if they were that sure it was him.
@@billjones3720 well according to Anderson's memoirs, that is exactly what happened
If Jack was organised but chose victims at random, if the forensics was available to police, Jack may also have been forensically aware and still able to avoid police.
It’s almost impossible to avoid leaving something behind that can’t be found by competent investigators today. The only way people get away with it these days is if the body and precise crime scene are never found.
Today burglars, car thieves etc wear throw away forensic suits and a face cover. However I doubt any prostitute would go with someone looking as obvious as that lol.
DNA is not as final a tool as many believe though and only relies upon a number of points of similarity. Plus hygiene was not as good as it is today and blood or semen evidence could be constipated perhaps.
@@MadCapMag Also kidnap killings, i.e. in the case of Bundy, Green River Killer etc. (although that was in the 70s and 80s, before DNA). When Bundy was loose and active in Washington State, they only had the name "Ted", a sketch of the suspect, and a VW Bug to go with, based on witness testimonies. This applied to thousands of people in the Seattle area at that time, leaving investigators with a near impossible task. He also had no criminal record and a near chameleon like way to fit in, both physically and socially, to any environment. He was basically only caught because he was a terrible driver, and an officer stopped him and found burglary tools (plus some highly suspicious things like masks, weapons and pantyhose) which connected him with the kidnapping of Carol DeRonch - who in turn pointed him out in a police lineup. He escaped from jail twice and continued killing in Florida just two weeks after escaping. Again, he was stopped on a traffic violation, arrested, and eventually given two death sentences. That being said, that was the 70's. Today, you can't get away with being a serial killer of 40+ victims. Cell phones, cars with GPS chips, credit card records etc, not to mention the forensic evidence make it almost impossible, thank God. FBI took a swab of Gary Ridgway's (the Green River Killer) saliva in 1987 (!), correctly anticipating the advent of DNA, and he was finally caught in 2001 on DNA evidence from semen found on one of the victims, and promptly confessed to 48 murders. He would later confess to a further 23, taking his confessed tally to 71, and he is a suspect in dozens of other cases.
I think the era of these high tally serial killers is all but over in developed countries. Can't imagine what it's like in some countries in Africa, Asia, and the Middle East.
For those interested, Bundy almost certainly killed 36 women, but he told his lawyer John Henry Browne that he killed over 100 people. When the FBI asked him "is 30 victims a good approximate?", Bundy answered "add one digit to that".
Assuming they had a dna profile to work with, yes. Jack unquestionably had committed prior crimes and potentially did time for them.
You can't say "unquestionably" most (not all) serial killers were not known criminals. Especially the serial killers who had wives, children, etc.
“The absence of evidence should not be taken as evidence of absence.”
Luminol would've been useful, it would be impossible for him to clean his clothes properly & the main suspects if tested and if the blood matched the victims? He'd have been nicked. Cloth fibres & hair samples could've been tested & matched up. This only applies to the people the Police actually brought in for questioning as I'm not going as far as saying the Victorian police would have a data base. ☺ Imagine if they had video of his last victims crime scene? Yuk.
I have always thought that Jack saw the already written message the day before, and used it as a convenient misdirection by bringing the apron piece and placing it strategically beside it after leaving Mitre Square. There is no doubt that Jack was crafty and this did in fact draw the attention of the police. It is one theory that fits with him taking the cloth, and he wiped blood on it to remove any doubt of where it came from.
That's an interesting point,if the message was already there a day before then it blows warrens claim of riots out of the water.none of the Jewish people living in that building rubbed away the message.
I’ve never heard of this theory of the graffiti being already there and Jack using it..Makes sense though…👍
Isn’t that a little ridiculous? Surely it would be just as easy for him to write the message as a form of misdirection? We can’t prove or disprove a handwriting match because it was never photographed.
Well he saw Israel Schwartz earlier who was Jewish and could have written it because of this. The fact he could have just cleaned his knife on her dress without cutting a puce of the cloth off. But an argument against that is why did he bring chalk out earlier with him as he didn't know he was going to be seen by Israel then. Perhaps he used chalk in his work somehow!
It's an interesting "What If?" But if the murders were done now Jack would wise to stuff like DNA and CCTV and therefore would of worn some sort of mask and killed in more remote areas. Also Kosminski could of been a punter and that's how his DNA got there
My father was in London in the early 1950`s and he told me although they were cleaning the buildings and streets as people turned to gas and electric, The trains turning to diesel, And the dust from repair of war damage cleared, In the colder months there was still pea Souper`s where you could hardly see a few metre`s in front of you, So the time of year and the weather would be a issue with security camera`s , Ideally you would use one from recent years as only they have good quality images, And in particular night vision as all the murders was at night, But even so, With all the wood and coal fires, The shadows cast from buildings the chances of good images are far from certain, He also probably wore a hat and coat, What you would have is the exact time of the murder and direction, His height, Maybe if he was perhaps left handed, In terms of DNA, If they found the knife or knives used, Or clothing with the victims blood, The owner would be a prime suspect, We know from the Police officers statement at Mitre Square that he heard no footsteps running, Yet he must of been very close as the victim was killed within minutes of his foot patrol, So I suspect he had some form of quiet soft shoes and could run quickly, So he was probably not overweight and under forty five years old, As to the quality of staff in the Police force today, I would say the current rank and file and up is probably far from the best in the history of the Police force, Driving in their patrol cars and reliant on technology has dulled their wits, I reckon old Jack ` would have them confounded today, Not to get caught, He was no dummy
They could use Drones with infra red cameras there can't have been that many people about so they would have managed to follow someone in the area's going to & leaving the crime scene. Just a thought. ☺
Thinking about pea soupers and remembering my bronchitis riddled childhood in the 60s before clean air became a thing and black soot covered buildings all over the country got sandblasted. The sooty air, that was even worse in the colder weather, would have perhaps mucked up some dna? Dunno. Just thinking and that is a bad idea hahahahahahahaha
To dispel one myth, according to police reports at the time, there was never any fog present at the times of the murders, it’s made up for TV. Yes there was terrible fog/pollution, but not at the time of the killings.
The Victorian scene is a strange time if you were to mention Count Dracula, Sherlock Homes Sir Richard Francis Burton, Jack The Ripper, Dr Jekyll and My Hyde, and The Elephant Man to people completely ignorant of them and then describe who they were without revealing whether they were real people or not, would anyone new to these names be able to accurately guess who was real and who was in fact fictitious?
I don't think that dna evidence would even be needed to catch him in 2022. There is more cctv per square foot in the UK than any other country in the world and nowhere is that more concentrated than in London. It would take next to no effort (by modern policing standards) to review the footage of the area surrounding the murders in order to identify the killer and pick up his movements. Since he very likely lived in East London, it would also be easy to trace him to his residence. However, if the scenario was instead that a team of modern met police officers armed with modern equipment were to be sent back to Victorian London to try to resolve the case as events unfolded then I think the odds would shift very dramatically in favour of the killer. I personally believe it was Whitechapel itself that allowed the killer to evade capture rather than his cunning.
I feel that if the scientific methods we have today and cameras were available then, I agree with Adam Wood, it is easy to jump to the conclusion that the Ripper would've been caught. But if the Ripper knew the area as well as he seemed to then he (or she) would know the location of cameras and how to avoid them. He may even be aware of techniques the police use, including fingerprints etc and would take care to leave no evidence. So I don't believe it would make it certain the killer would be caught.
Excellent discussion Richard. Really interesting. It makes you wonder what was in the police case report and the fact that it has been misplaced. Would have been an interesting read I'm sure. There definately would have been some form of DNA at the scenes of the victims but wouldn't have been of much use I'm sure. The procedures that are in place now regarding a crime scene and if only had they had the use of our modern techniques at their disposal then things would have been very different but then there would not have been such a fascination that we all have for Jack The Ripper. Great video again Richard. Keep up with the great work and I look forward to your next update. Best wishes.
The quality of modern CCTV even today is pretty poor. It's main use is to give context and provide an overall picture. What were the movements of the victim (for instance) and who and what is in the background. When they have people on camera who they know the identities for these are then used to try and identify other people and other background activity such as vehicles. It's painstaking and requires patience and skill. I think it's main use would have been to definitively establish when some of the murders were committed and the approximate route taken by the murderer as he left the scene. It may also have been possible to get a good idea of height and build but I'm not convinced CCTV on it's own would have helped very much. Where it might have been very useful is in a number of circumstances where people either flat out lied or gave a version of events designed to mislead. That's probably not going to lead directly to the Ripper but could have enabled the police to better focus their efforts.
The biggest one would be cameras. There's no way you'd of been able to commit all 5 of these murders and not be caught on camera at any time
The best bet would be touch DNA I think. And possibly bodily fluids. No doubt you would pick up many profiles, however if one profile shows up at two or more crime scenes. Even if you have 30 at Nichols and 25 at Chapman, but there is only one that shows up at both? And maybe the same profile shows up again at a third? That would be pretty conclusive. The killer might not be in any DNA database but neither was the Golden State Killer. A family member was.
Given it can still be very hard to catch serial killers it's not a given by any means but it's the best chance. Especially under the same circumstances, i.e. the bodies were all discovered very quickly.
One could do the same with the letters. Though I doubt any were written by the killer. Shades of 'Wearside Jack'
Theoretically (lab conditions) it's possible to lift fingerprints of skin, in practice not really.
Coins, objects arranged near the feet of Annie Chapman would have killers dna, fingerprints…
If the killers dna and fingerprints were not in the system he could easily emigrate or move away without being caught. Plus he would not have left clues if he was aware of fingerprints or dna
Yes and all the metal objects removed from Catherine eddowes and left by her side.
the graffito could have been compared to the letters for once...
it could have been compared to the writing of any suspects the police caught down the line.
goulston street was a jewish neighborhood with up to 90 percent of the population being jewish so the risk of a pogrom against jews was non exixtant. also the graffito , if written by Jack The Ripper, clearly indicated that the murderer was non jewish, and was not philosemite so there was no reason for a pogrom.
and it was extremely easy to block the entry of the alleyway with some drape and hyde the graffito from the street so that noone outside the Police would know about it before it would be photographed within a few hours, so yes, this is a monumental error to have erased it.
ive read quite a few books on the subject. Jack the Riper, a New Investigation, raised a lot of interesting points on who it probably wasn't. But it still comes down to evidence, and so far, we dont have much.
Thoroughly enjoyed this conversation! Thanks Adam and Richard.
I believe that the Victorian detectives came close to getting JTR. Today we’d have probably got him, not because the police are any better but they certainly have far more tools at their disposal. CCTV, DNA etc. I’m inclined to think in early days they would have been relying on their wits and the psychological angles. However,I say all this while being even less than an armchair detective!
Wonderful content as ever, thanks again for all your efforts with this channel. I love it!
Good points, Omar.
@@JackTheRipperTours Thank you 😊
Remember back then they thought all killers were hideous deformed freaks. Or that you could tell how evil 😈 a person was by the shape of their head and all kinds of strange superstitions and lack of knowledge. I read a couple of books recently about H.H Holmes and the Gorilla man and they were serial killers active around the time of JTR or just after and the psychologists and police of the time claimed under close examination they could see the suspects head growing bigger and lumps like horns growing on his head and it was tell tale signs of some demon inside him transforming him before their eyes into a beast. It was unreal the weird things they believed so they could be blinded by their own lack of education
@@JackTheRipperTours They'd have used Policewomen in multiple pairs dressed as Prostitutes probably armed with whatever, Tasers at a minimum & in continuous visual & radio contact with Rapid Response teams.
We don't always catch them today.🇺🇸
If Sherlock Holmes was real & had investigated the murders he would have worked out who was doing the killings.As for the shawl there is no record of Kate Eddowes having a shawl as the police did a listing of what she was wearing.there is no doubt that Jack would have been caught had CSI been used at Millers Court.Thank you to both of you foravery entertaining 45 minutes more please.
Depends on how long it would take to get a sample of dna or if his fingerprints and dna would have even been in the system. He still may have completed his murders but I’ve no doubt he’d have been caught eventually
I think you are mistaken about the finger print aspect Adam. The methodology of extracting prints from anything other than a person had not yet been devised and you would be relying on the murderer to leave a bloody print. You would then have the problem of how to record ie photograph it. In addition the classification system for cataloguing finger prints did not yet exist either. I would say it's main use at the time was as a station based tool to identify people who were pretending to be someone else. Not surprising then that officers didn't think of it in terms of catching someone but more in terms of catching someone out.
Of course JTR would've been caught with all the tools they have today
He could still have got away with it but I highly doubt it these days
Why? Numerous serial killers today have killed many more than JTR.
Camera can be fooled, hats, umbrellas,, and knowledge of placement and where to walk to avoid being caught on cctv.
Perhaps checking the fingernails of the victim, if they fought back and had his skin cells under their nails from scratching/fighting for their lives. That could provide DNA, right?
I think if they would have had blood typing, it may have made a huge difference. Mary Kelly's room, was it all her blood?
But now let’s swap the question. Would the police nowadays be able to catch a serial killer using only the methods that were available in 1888? I don’t think so.
Good video very interesting,yes cctv would have been great in catching the murderer,it's a great shame though,that after the murders of Martha tabhram and Polly Nichols that extra police weren't put on the streets,this didn't happen until November 4 unfortunately.the kidney lusk received was more than likely taken from c eddowes and we have a decent description of the tall slim man in marsh's leather store who took down an address without a house number- which has a direct symbiosis with the address on the package lusk received which also had no street number.
Great discussion Richard. I think the CCTV would definitely have helped, but unless the street lighting was up to date & the London smog/fog wasn’t there, the CCTV wouldn’t be much good. In many ways, I love the mystery surrounding the identity of JTR & hope the case is never actually ever solved. It’s still such an interesting case & no doubt will continue to be. What would you historians have to talk about if the case was solved?
We'd have to discuss Queen Victoria Joanna!
Richard you are right it was Mitochondrial DNA they tested on the shawl which cannot actually identify a single person as many many people can match to mitochondrial DNA and as you say can only eliminate a person. Also there was no real evidence that proves the shawl belonged to one of the victims just someone's word saying their ancestor was a police man that took it from the scene with no record of any chain of custody of the shawl coming from the crime scene and there have been claims the shawl was old enough to have come from 1888
Catherine Eddowes definitely did not have a shawl in her belongings. People are saying it looks like Edwardian, not Victorian. And it supposedly looks like table runner or scrap of cloth. 🤣😂
I wonder if they did have all the modern advantages, would we still be fascinated by Jack The Ripper to this day?
More than one person was at it - fueled by the press or opportunity
Mmm I’d be guessing no
You mean if he still got away with it despite the police being advanced with technology from the future? My goodness it would make it even more fascinating and terrifying
I think they did catch the Ripper since the killings were stopped and I don’t know any serial killers that stop killing
Lol, his own cell phone would have been used against him. Undoubtedly there were defensive wounds where the killer was scratched and likely left his dna under his victim's fingernails. As mentioned, all the CCTV footage,
It is HARD to get away with murder today.
Even just fingerprints would've likely made detection much more likely, IMO.
DNA probably not but fingerprints almost certainly. My own opinion is that they did in fact catch him and shipped him off to a mental institution under an alias thus sweeping it all under the rug. Probably by order of the Home Secretary.. CCTV is a bit fanciful.
The fact that investigators in those times were able to solve any crimes with such limited detection resources amazes me! Blind luck does exist but those guys had to be so sharp in understanding human behavior & the knowing the people in their districts. The BBC series “Dickensian” featured Det. Bucket whom despite the name was very interesting to watch solve his mysteries.
What a great video thank you so much, i don't think DNA would of been any good, because like you said you have to been known to the police, this is how they cought the suffolk stangler because his DNA was on file. I think if anything CCTV would of been the answer but who knows he might not of done the crime in the first if there was a greater way of beeing cought
Handwritten examination of Jack the Ripper's handwriting (such as from the bloody wall message and the "From Hell" letter) could have also possibly been done today. Same with better quality photography, video footage, and tape recordings.
DCI Colin Sutton would've caught him.
If in 1888, the police and society had modern technology. The chances of Jack the ripper of being caught is very high. I can answer your question regarding picking up finger prints from skin. The answer is, yes. There has been cases in the USA and Canada where they have solved crimes from picking up finger prints from skin. However, you'll need the right circumstances to do so, and even then nothing is guaranteed. They burned super glue to rise prints. But, you'll have to be extremely careful to pick them up. If it rained before the police arrived then I don't think they could pick up finger prints. Also, if Jack the ripper was wearing gloves, which was very common with both women and men of the time, then you won't pick up any fingerprints. If it was today you'll also be looking for fiber and hair evidence. Their may have been blood and skin under the victims fingernails. Jack the ripper was also a pickeriest. A pickeriest is someone who gains sexual gratification from penatrating their victims with a foreign object, like a knife for example. To them the knife represents their genitals. Their could have also been shoe prints at the scene if Jack the ripper had stood in the victims blood. Their could be sweat on the torn bloody cloth which the police had found. Teeth marks could also be checked, if Jack the ripper bit his victims. I know that he had mutilated his victims, but I don't know whether he bit them. With Amelia Dyer the baby farmer, for some reason Scotland Yard took samples from her hair. She lived in the same time period as Jack the ripper and was killing at the same time too. It's a mystery today why they took samples of her hair. As it is not sure that they had the technology to identify hair. But if they did then that's another form of forensics they had at their disposal. Entomology is the oldest form of forensic science and it was certainly around in 1888. However, the study of insects can only tell you certain things, such as time of death and whether the body has been moved. Botany is another science which they had at their disposal.
You make some very interesting observations. Are you acquainted with the novels of Dr Richard Austin Freeman who was a medical and jurisprudence (forensic) professional during the Whitechapel murders although not directly concerned with those particular crimes.
19-12 - With the apron you know it's been dumped very recently, because it's still damp with blood. This also debunks the idea that it was simply used to clean the knife and hands, it was likely used to carry his souvenirs. Considering the great risk involved with walking back into the area, we can assume he lived close to Goulston Street. I also think the statement about Juwes in a Jewish Street is in keeping with a man who just murdered one prostitute next to the Grand Synagogue and another next to the Jewish Workers Club.
I absolutely love your channel, ripperology is a new rabbit hole I've jumped down and in the hopes you'll see this I'm going to ask a question.
What are your thoughts on the possibility of being able to link Charles Lechmere to literally every crimescene? It also seems that it could be possible that he intentionally covered Polly's abdominal damage to avoid panicking Robert Paul, the other victims had wounds on full display.
Hi David. Pleased you like the Channel. I think it is possible to link Lechmere to the Mary Nichols Crime scene. Difficult for the others, but nothing is impossible!
@@JackTheRipperTours Thanks for the reply! I’ve seen another series of videos that point out all of the murder sites are either directly on or within close vicinity of routes he’d take between his house, place of work and his mothers house.
I’ll send you the link if you’re interested? it’s a five part series. I have noticed that it presented the kidney being Catherine Eddowes’ as fact though, perhaps a red flag.
@@DavidAGIII it is a terrible suspect. Truly zero evidence linking him to any of the murders. It was just some Swedish doc maker trying to make up a new suspect. A poor documentary.
@@Stantheman848 Please don’t take this to be argumentative but would you mind explaining why? Him being seen with a body, lying to the police and not coming forward for the inquest makes it interesting to me.
I concede I know nowhere near as much as people who have been interested in this for a long time
@@DavidAGIII your referring to the house of lechmere channel which is interesting but he still comes up with no more than circumstantial evidence against lechmere. the idea that he went down the site of the murders on his route to work is pretty silly when you considered in one of the most overpopulated areas of london at the time those would be the routes to work for 1000s of people and also his trying to claim Lechemere was both the ripper and the thames torso murderer kills his theory a bit
Well the Yorkshire ripper wasn't caught for years so I doubt Jack's few weeks of terror would have been ceased either ,although DNA wasn't a thing during Peter sutcliffe's time either .
They mentioned blood or semen, but not defensive things like dna under victims finger nails who may well 9f scratched ripper somwhere,probably every victim, jcvw
Definitely the cameras would've helped. I can't list exactly every modern technique, but he definitely would've been caught sooner. In a way if he thought so, the time of the events he took advantage of the shortcomings of detection of that time. Seems to be how most crimes are committed, criminals are aware of the shortcomings of the police, security etc.
The primary assumptions rest on modern DNA matching, and that one person alone committed the canonical five murders. To definitively solve these murders occurring today, one would have to first establish a clear link between the five murders, and that a foreign DNA sample from one of the murder scenes could be matched with a suspect...if no such common link is established, you may have solved one murder, but not the other four.
If there is no DNA evidence found, the best bets are surveillance videos from nearby shops, etc. and prison/committal records to see when or if certain individuals were at large at the time of the killings, and if they were so incarcerated shortly before the murders stopped.
Gaslight London's streets were still very dark, even with the light. Jack could easily hide. That would be much less likely once London began using electricity.
I think of a couple of things the police could have done with modern tech, investigators think jtr was actually interviewed by the police but there was no strong proof to accuse anyone, footprints should have left in some places and fingerprints too, then compare it to them people they are investigating, and SEE if the shoesize Match anyone or on the from hell letter or the box maybe a fingerprints to compare it to.
"DNA" alone wld not solve it... only arresting suspects and THEN comparing DNA wld make a difference..
but the CRUCIAL element is NOT the DNA matches, but the ARREST and consequent INVASION of the suspect's HOME and FINDING incriminating "STUFF" (knives, bloodied shirts, shredded shirts..etc.).
So the BEST and ONLY means would have been to simply SEARCH ALL ROOMS in the area...
Would Jack have even committed these crimes in the modern world? His mental illness(assuming he had one) might have been managed. Who really knows. Getting a hooker these days is done mostly online or over the phone so there would be more cellular evidence.
You definitely would have have had fingerprints and sweat (bodily functions) DNA at Mary Kelly’s. Would love to see a deep dive video more about her crime scene
That's a really good idea. I have seen so many different descriptions of Mary Kelly's room. Some say there were clothes, some say a fireplace with a kettle or a pot, some imply that the room was a lot larger than others, some say a candle. It'd be nice to see a definitive model of the room.
Bloody Hand-prints on the sheets or clothing, can be seen in the crime scene photos.
DNA, photographs of the bodies, fingerprints, profile analysis, all that in conjuction maybe just maybe would have helped in catching the killer. But then again the police would have to have had to gather dna and fingerprints data from at least a decade or two before the killings. . So almost impossible for the time. And it probably it all started there. The notion of a urban serial killer as such was new. It's been a long time since then thank god. Loved the episode. Cheers!
I think modern FBI behavior profiling would have blown the case wide open. I think John Douglas did do a profile of Saucy J.
Patricia Cornwell was the type that Sherlock Holmes slams in A Study in Scarlet. The type who twists the facts to suit her theory rather than form her theory around the facts.
If CCTV cameras were available it would have been possible to literally track any suspicious person from a murder location, within a certain time frame, literally across London right to his very address.
It's virtually impossible to stay out of surveillance in most of the UK, every city and town, motorway, bridge, train station, bus station, etc as well as the majority of retail and business premises, industrial sites, many private residences, bus and taxi cameras and dashboard cameras are closely scrutinised and kept under observation 24 hours a day.
I doubt that more than one or possibly two of the murders would have happened if public surveillance existed to the same extent as modern day London.
In the US we are slowly catching up to having CCTV in some places. Slowly. We mostly really on cameras people happen to have up on their store or house.
It's so daft to say if he was around now he'd be aware of the modern techniques or however you want to lay it out he'd then have took at minimum basic precautions just think how police to this day struggle to catch serial killers before they hit double digits lol
In America that's a technique that they use caught is used with super glue when they don't have they put a top over the body close it up and they use super glue super glue deceitful fingerprint on the body that happened
Jack the ripper is most interested history of all the time I always curious who was that ,and I think I was found if I been there .
If there was CCTV back then Charles Lechmere would have almost certainly been captured as the culprit. But some would still denie it.
How would that happen as u been told he not ripper n unlike stupid stow IV proved it DIDNT I REMEMBER
If Oyster cards were in use in the 1880s and JTR used one the police would have been able to track him. They can follow a person on CCTV to a tube stop and see exactly when they touch in. From that they can get the card number and track its movements. I believe they cought the man who put a bomb on a district line train a few years ago. Thanks for the video. I really enjoyed it.
Brilliant points, Chris.
If I remember correctly the Police surgeon was able to verify that the kidney was the victims based on being able to match the cuts on the body with those on the kidney.
Actually nearly all of the surgeons that examined the kidney stated they could not say whether or not it came from the victim Richard's other video on the from hell letter on thiis channel goes into this very well
He would have left finger prints on Mary Kelly's door I reckon and perhaps can on the piece of dress He cut off catherine,if his hands had been slightly sweaty at some point he could have left DNA I think they would find some
This is wonderful. I hope he gets sent to Dunmoor
Has he not dun enough already?
Met police, no chance,
Arrest the royals???
The only modern practices we can apply to Jack is the opinions of mental health and criminal analysts..If only we did have the D.N.A of Jack..Alas no.!!!.Might as well ask for D.N.A from a T-Rex…Though I’d be more scared of Jack if they recreated the both.!😳
One question that crossed my mind..Is it known of any sort of new plan or course of action the police might have took to help prevent the next victim after Mary Kelly..Of course Mary Kelly was Jack’s known last (though this is argued)..But after Mary Kelly’s murder did the detectives have any new plan to catch Jack or was the plan to just ‘plod on’,as normal.?.But the Kelly murder really involved the city of London police as well.Thus the investigation was and would have expanded more between the two police forces. This also asks if Jack did carry on murdering the same way how the investigation would have evolved..The met and city of London forces joining up..What other detectives and specialists might have helped..But Jack ‘stopped’???..Or went on later to just leaving a torso or two….
Great talk and video from the best channel covering Jack the Ripper..Thank you and all the best🎩👍
Yes, the DNA today would be a problem! Although we accept Mary Kelly as the last victim today, the Victorian police didn't have that knowledge and they were on the lookout for any crimes that might have meant his return. The two forces certainly did work together. They had the likes of Thomas Bond and his early criminal profiling, and the likes of Forbes Winslow were ever on hand to give an opinion about the killer's mental state. Thanks for your kind words about the channel.
@@JackTheRipperTours Thank you for your kind reply and brilliant research,work and videos.🎩👍
You can get a fingerprint off a body I saw it on an episode show of Forensic Files and I think they had to use glue to get it
Thanks, Mary, that's good to know.
If he could've been caught using modern means then I've no doubt we'd have a man who was utterly unremarkable. Not a genius, not particularly skilled nor particularly cunning. Just a small man possessed of some terrible urges and a little luck...
As someone once said "a man down the road with a very sharp knife".
It’s not that long ago that they let the Yorkshire ripper slip through their hands.
His dps and avoidance level was simply too high
I think they found Barney’s smoking pipe there
Sherlock would have caught the ripper, no dna or cctv needed.
Jesus, robbie savage looks rough these days dont he.
I think its possible they had him in for questioning, maybe suspected him. Who knows? But back then they would need to have virtually caught him red handed to get a conviction. Even these days in modern times they find evidence and cant convict. That Gacy comes to mind.. They searched and found all these Id items, driving licences ect of missing people, and STILL had to put a watch on him until they had more! So Dna would help make their job of getting a conviction a lot easier
Didn't the lead detective at the time say he knew or strongly suspected it was one particular person and that person was mentally ill and was found dead in the Thames and then the JTR killings stopped. He was satisfied the case was closed. Sorry if everyone knows about this already I'm into reading about serial killers but only have a few books on jack the ripper
Yes mate that is one of the possibilities
As per Peter Sutcliffe. They had much more advanced systems in place when he was murdering in Yorkshire, yet they'd had him in for questioning nine times but despite serious suspicions they released him every time. It took a rookie cooper out on a patrol as part of his training who randomly noticed a car parked strangely in a hotel car park and insisted that his sergeant take a look. A pure chance of luck and he was caught.
@@Castlebank_Sidings yeah . I'm sure on one of those occasions he'd paid a victim with a five pound note that was found in a secret compartment in her purse. He was one of only a few men who the money could have belonged to.. But he had an alibi that he was at a party that night and they believed him...They said he'd gone back for it but couldn't find it? That seems strange that he'd twigged the note could be traced.. I've only heard bits of it never looked that much into it.. Maybe he did try to retrieve it
I am not sure. He was very clever. He walked around the area a no one was able to see him . Even the only man who apparently was in front of him it could not describe him. One time i heard ted Bundy saying in an interview- we are your husbands and son .we are everywere-. Jack the ripper knew this an he was able to explod thia situation. People like him would have created more chaos if police have had the moder methods of detection and it was unable to stop him. He was going to be one of the great myths of criminology
He certainly wasn't walking around in a deer stalker hat with a surgeons bag in hand with an apron on covered in blood like they say lol you mentioned Ted Bundy I can guarantee in another 50 years he'll be classed as the modern jack the ripper even though he got caught
I love the channel and the videos. I'm not trying to be ungrateful here but I noticed last night that several people were discussing the video and information in the comments section which had essentially opened up the comments section to a group discussion and I came back here tonight to reply to some of them only to notice you have removed all the additional replies to comments leaving only your own official channels replies. I just wondered why you do that? Surely it means more views if people are coming back to discuss the case further? I can understand trolls or trouble makers being removed but some had some good points. Unless TH-cam removed for some reason
Hi Laura. The discussions are all there on the video. I'm reading them now. I'll look into it but I'm seeing all the comments? Just checked again and they are still there. I've only removed two comments today which were offensive to people commenting, but aside from that I can only think TH-cam may have removed some, although I don't know why that should be.
@@JackTheRipperTours Hi , sorry I wasn't complaining or anything I love your channel and videos. Maybe its my TH-cam I have refreshed and signed out and back in. It could be a glitch or something at my end. I still can't see them for some reason. Thanks for replying and clarifying I appreciate that. All the best and keep up the great work I love this channel
I think Lechmere would've been a person of interest.
If u seen Ed or Christers video there is a lot of evidence missing.
They also lied about 2 murders.
If u watched the christer or stow videos I will notice there a lot they missed out, also they have him killing on his way 2 work on a public holiday.
@@mathewlawton8944 Yes people seize on Lechmere because he was one of the very few people seen at the scene of the first victim but he doesn't fit the profile of someone who could have carried out the other four murders.
Hair, fingernail scrapings etc...
I hadn't thought of it before, but being near the docks, they must have been surrounded by seamen!
So you think a sailor did it?
They always carried knives?
It was Charles Lechmere!
No doubts!
Unequivocal!
He was a liar, when he had no reason to lie!
He was found with the first victim, before her blood pooled.
Done!
Him!
@@davidmoore1477 literally zero evidence linking lechmere to any of the murders.
You are another victim of the swedish doc maker.
His skin under her finger nails.
One word: Fingerprints.
That was a really fascinating discussion, gentlemen. Nicely done. Now....do I think he'd have been caught? Hmm. I honestly don't know. If JtR was also forensically aware then quite possibly not. However, I do think they'd have been able to link the victims. So we'd know for sure whether all of the C5 were killed by him, plus we'd know if any of the other ones (Martha Tabram, Alice McKenzie, Frances Coles, Emma Smith and Fairy Fay) were also part of the same series.
You know, I'd always considered DNA and fingerprints but never once considered CCTV. That would have told many stories with a lot more clarity. Who attacked Liz Stride? Was that really Annie Chapman that was seen? Who was with her? Who yelled LIPSKI at Israel Schwartz? Etc. That aspect is really thought provoking. Excellent video here, If you're reading comments and wondering whether to watch I'd recommend ir.
JTR would definitely have been caught today ..
it was so easy to be a murderer or criminal back then ..
cctv would have been the biggest tool .. especially in London .
Richard is looking great. He isn't aging as fast as the other "RippOriginals". Always great to see and hear him.
Very kind of you Marcus.
Touch DNA on the clothing when he rolled up the skirts to get to the abdomen. It would be lots of peoples DNA from clients and I doubt they washed their clothing very often. Transfer of hair or fibers, possible fingerprints, and forensic profiling could be helpful in reducing the suspect pool.
Yeah CCTV could also be helpful especially in Mitre Square.
The CCTV equivalent at the time were the local people. Did Jack have a bolthole, and lived day to day outside of the area , as no other linked crime occurred in other parts of London. After the Mary Kelly murder, was our killer questioned by Police, no more murders? but did he leave the UK? And go home? ref: familial DNA
DNA may give a direction in where to look, for Jack ie family/country etc. Victim and attacker cross contaminate each other with physical contact. The Police in the UK appear not to be using familial DNA search, to track down family members . In the USA Police have been using familial DNA search through Gedmatch with outstanding results. Meanwhile in the UK?
I contacted the Met Police in 2017 when they published an appeal re the murder of Eve Stratford, March 1975,Leyton London and Lynne Weedon 3rd September 1975 Hounslow, London. Both victims linked by the same DNA.
As per Police regs they would not discuss any aspect of an alleged active case? Not even with another serving officer or even a retired MET detective. Jo Yeates murder in Bristol, follow the evidence don’t assume or speculate. Now I am thinking of putting the familial DNA question to the Home Secretary through my MP.
As ya'll say,most crimes are solved by the hard work of policemen. And I think the progress made on the Ripper crimes in 1888 was brilliant. Sor Robert Anderson ID 'd the man, didnt he? As so.often happens, he couldn't get the witness to testify. I was thinking, if the girls had cell phones, they might have kept track.of their customers- surreptitiously of course, as a protective for each other. And also, as to fingerprints- it was autumn in London- wouldn't he be wearing gloves all the time? I very much enjoyed your broadcast. O I got a laugh out of your jab at Patricia Cornwell.
If it was modern day, not just CCTV, every one of those witnesses would have had a cell phone. Elizabeth Stride's attacker would have been recorded, and someone might well have called the police right then.
Bloody silly question!!🤦 Of course he would!. CCTV , eye in the sky, forensics etc etc........
Great upload, I think its likely they would have caught him with modern tools but a few thoughts. To be caught using his DNA it would have to be on file to compare it to or they would need to (if they caught him get a sample). I think CC tv and mobile phone tracking would more than likely place him in the right places at the right times. I think as we are speaking about "probably" 5 murders I think by the double event he would have come sharply into focus. Interesting discussion.
CCTV IS available to modern detectives "The Ripper" would have been arrested shortly after the first or second murder
Finding male DNA (semen, saliva, hair etc.) on a woman of the night would probably be very likely (perhaps even from multiple men) so may not help very much.
Well,if Peter Sutcliffe anything to go by the 20th century ripper answer has to be no,,but if dna involved answer yes,,jcvw
Everyone would have recorded him or taken pictures of him. It would have been all over social media.. security cameras everywhere. Not to mention DNA.
Under the fingernails....defensive collection by victim inadvertently....it could still be there. My sister in law solved her own murder this way.😔