It seems that some Brits have cobbled up a recreation of the face of the Ripper. Feh. Seems to be aimed at drumming up rating for a British teevee show. I don't seem to recall any eye witnesses whom it could determined had actually seen the murderer.
But, I'm sure our local Ripperologist will chime in momentarily with the facts.
3 comments:
You are right, nothing more than propoganda to drum up an audience for an upcoming television production. Note that they tease the idea that they can pinpoint his street, but there is no information on where that is, or how it was determined, in the story.
Physical descriptions range from 5 feet tall to 5-10, clean shaven, bearded, mustached, dark, light, mid-to-late twenties, late forties, and so on. Many descriptions, from witnesses who were either together, or supposedly witnessing the same person within moments of one another, vary. To pick a description from the various witnesses and descriptions given would mean having to credit some, discredit others, all while recognizing that, timewise at least, these witnesses saw the same person.
Short of some major breakthrough, like the finding of missing evidence (much of the evidence referenced in reports of the time has vanished, and it is known that many within the London Police and Scotland Yard liked to obtain souvenirs), or new technology that is not even speculated about now, the identity of the Ripper will never be known.
However, I will try my best to watch the BBC production with an open mind. In every re-telling, there is historical information that was not either seen, or recognized as significant, in earlier analysis.
Seems that lawyers probably make the best amateur historians. The key to successful "history-ing" is the ability to analyze evidence and determine what is credible and what is not.
Here's what casebook.org, probably the leading Ripper site, has to say on their opening page:
"How accurate is it? Its impossible to say, but in all likelihood, the sketch contains more artistic fancy than actual police science. While it is true that we do know of many witnesses who claimed to have seen Jack the Ripper, we simply don't know which - if any - did actually see the killer. Even then, the descriptions given at the time were very generalized. Modern police sketches, called facial composites, require an in-depth interview with a witness, asking detailed questions about eyes, nose, lips, cheeks, chin, hairline, etc. Most contemporary witness descriptions only went so far as to describe the suspect's height, clothing, and possibly hair and skin color, as well as a perceived "ethnicity" (many, not surprisingly, claimed he was a "foreigner" - which at that time and place was generally taken to mean, a Jew). There simply isn't enough information in the surviving witness testimony to make such a detailed facial sketch of "Jack the Ripper."
All that being said, it is interesting to note that this facial composite bears a striking resemblance to Ripper suspect George Chapman (aka Severin Klosowski), who is currently voted as the #1 likely suspect in an ongoing Casebook.org poll."
The Casebook also has a listing of eyewitnesses, with a chronology, that shows how difficult deriving such a composite should be. That listing is at http://casebook.org/witnesses/.
Post a Comment