How would Jack the Ripper kill?

Answer 1

He strangled them and then slit their throats. Some victims were also mutilated.

The theory that JTR strangled his victims first has been prevelant for over 120 years. If you look at what is left of the autopsy reports contained in the original file it is improbable that any of the victims were strangled. Strangulation is not an easy or quick way to die. It can take up to 5 minutes or longer. The Ripper was killing these women out in the open streets and sidewalks where he could be interrupted at any time. He had to get in and get out in record time. In fact, the night of the 'double event', when he killed two women, the 2nd murder was because he was interrupted and almost caught. He had to flee or be captured. So he made the 2nd kill to finish what he had started. The point being, he most likely slit their throats from behind. That would silence them immediatly and keep alot of the spurting blood off of him. The later victims took some time to finish. He had no time to waste on strangulation. His fear of discovery must have been enormous. There was some bruising on the face of at least one victim, but not from strangulation. He most lilely put a hand over the mouth and held the knife in the other hand. This method can be carried out very quickly and almost completely in silence.

Answer 2

It is largely believed that the Whitechapel Murderer first throttled his victims from behind to kill them. Once the victim was dead, or at least unconscious, he would lay the victim on their back and turn their head to the left. He would then slash the throat from left to right, directing any arterial rupture away from himself.

He would then lift the victim's skirt, opening up the abdominal cavity from the breastbone to the vaginal region and remove the internal organs. A few organs: the uterus from victim Annie Chapman, the left kidney from Kate Eddowes, and the heart of Mary Kelly were removed; most likely as trophies.

I'm not sure who believed that Jack The Ripper clubbed his victims before disenboweling them but that is not possible. None of the Ripper's known victims had head injuries. Although the evidence compiled from what was left of autopsy notes was sparse, they indicate the women were attacked from behind, their throats slit first. The spray of blood would not hit the killer if he were behind them. There was bruising on at least one victim's jaw, most likely her mouth was covered with the Ripper's hand to keep her from screaming. Once the throat was cut screaming would have been impossible. Then he got to work on their bodies.

We can always hope the victims didn't feel much but with a cut throat it would take a couple of minutes to bleed to death. They may have been aware when he cut into the abdomins.

The evidence suggested from the bodies of the majority of the victims, most notably Eddowes, Nichols, and Chapman indicated through bruising on their necks that the murderer had strangled them before cutting their throats and performing abdominal mutilations. There is no evidence on any of the victims to suggest that they had ever been clubbed. The one sole contrary to this fact was the Francis Cole slaying. She did sustain an injury to the back of her head but it is believed that the damage was sustained when her killer threw her to the ground or let her drop, the injury was consistent with the trauma of her head striking the ground.

Because of lost or stolen evidence associated with such a well-known crime it may be impossible to completely reconstruct the crimes to a degree that would satisfy a modern jury. However, what was left of autopsy reports and notes from the attending physicians there is absolutely no eveidence whatsoever that any of the victims had been strangled before being cut. Almost always with death due to strangulation the small bone known as the hyoid bone located in the front of the neck is broken or shattered due to the force needed to strangle a person to death. There is also the time factor to consider. The Ripper was taking a huge risk in committing his murders out in the open where anyone could and sometimes did interrupt. People that aren't knowlegable in the actual physical side of murder think that strangulation is like what is depicted in movies or on TV. It takes considerable time and strength for manual strangulation, with a struggling victim that has her own agenda, mostly escape. There was never a struggle heard from witnesses, in fact many could not believe how somebody could be killed in such a way as to not cause some kind of commotion. With what is left of evidence the logical sequence of events were probably played out like this:Victims preceded killer into dark alley or doorway. These were women of the streets. They conducted their 'business' in these places and would know and most likely lead their killer into the dark. Once away from foot traffic the killer slapped a hand over victim's mouth and cut the throat. With a little practice this would take less than 3 seconds. Once the throat was cut there was no chance of screaming or of resistance. The throat cuts were so severe that most of the victims were nearly decapitated. Since the Ripper was already behind the victim they were probably just lowered to the ground where he began the mutilations. This follows the evidence. We can't deviate from the actual evidence or what is left is just fiction.

Answer 3

No one knows. He was never caught, or positively identified.

Some people think that Jack The Ripper died soon after Mary Kelly's murder. The murders likely did not stop, the murder of Alice Mackenzie in 1889 and Francis Coles in 1891 were also attributed to the Whitechapel murderer. The Ripper did not disappear, drown in the Thames, get locked up in a 'looney bin' or move to another part of the world. He may have been caught during the committal of some other crime but it was never realized who he was.

//It is possible that Jack The Ripper kept on killing right into the early years of the 20th century. In particular is the murder of Emily Dimmock, occasional prostitute, although a married woman. Dimmock's body was discovered on September 12, 1907, by her husband and his mother. Throat cut sometime about 7 to 8 hours before discovery.

There are only a few specific reasons that a serial killer stops killing. Severe health problems including death. Moved to another, possibly safer hunting ground. Is incarcerated either in prison or a menal hospital. And the last, as they grow older, they begin to lose the drive of a young man. Sexual interests wane as does risk-taking. Most people as they age gain at least some wisdom and a little caution they did not possess in their youth. It is a guarantee that the Ripper falls into one of the above catagories. It is almost unheard of that a serial killer just stops. Many feel the Denis Rader, the Kansas family man and church elder known as BTK, just stopped. At the time when BTK was winding down Rader was well into middle age. It took only one little article in the local newspaper to taunt BTK back to his killer self. As he grew older his need to kill began to ebb, but he was more than ready to start up again just to frustrate and confound the local law.

Answer 4

The murderer known as Jack the Ripper was never identified, therefore we have no idea how or when he died for certain.

we don't know for sure but what we think we know is that he was caught then hung

I think this question pops up on a regular basis because of Montegue John Druitt. Druitt was found floating face down in the Thames in December 1888. This seems to be his only link to the murders. Since there was such a to-do about the murders stopping as suddenly as they started after Mary Kelly, people just assumed that it had to be Druitt. Why else would an educated young man from a good family throw himself in the Thames River? Unfortunately, this suspect just doesn't hold water. (pardon the pun) Druitt was teaching at a private school for young men outside of London. There were no trains running at the correct times. Druitt would not have been able to hack up prostitutes in the east end, catch his train, and be back to teach his students by morning. So we can finally put this suspect to rest.
Um, we don't know. He was never caught.

Answer 5

The killer known as Jack The Ripper was never caught so it is not known how he actually died. There are all kinds of theories and speculation but until someone finds physical evidence his life and death will remain a mystery.

Answer 6

Since there has never a definitive answer as to whom the Ripper was we have no way to know if he was married or if he killed his wife. If he was married his wife may have outlived him by years, we just don't know.

Answer 7

His weapon of choice was a knife...which he used to slit his victims throats.

Answer 8

Jack The Ripper was never caught so we don't know how he died.