who is jack the ripper?

Question

i was watching from hell and the murder is name is jack the ripper but in the movie some doctor guy was he really what why did he have take parts of there body and what the **** is up with the slitting of the throats haha

Answer 1

Jack the Ripper was the most notorious serial killer in history, even though he had relatively few victims (anywhere from 5 to 11 were reported). His murdering spree occurred in late 1888 in London's Whitechapel slum area, and involved primarily casual prostitutes. He was especially spooky in the sense he would come out of the fog, kill his chosen victim violently and quickly, and then vanish without a trace. He got the name "Ripper" because it is believed he either strangled his victim or slit her throat to silence her and then mutilated her body--sometimes removing internal organs. This led police to believe the killer had some sort of medical or surgical skill because of this (hence the thought he was indeed a doctor). It is said his blood lust grew with each person he killed because his last victim's body was nearly totally destroyed. From what I have read, I do not think the police have ever learned who Jack really was.

Answer 2

The name "jack the ripper" came from a letter sent to a London newspaper during the time of the Whitechapel murders, supposedly by the killer himself who used that name. Most historians believe this to be fake but the name stuck.

Another letter was sent to the leader of a local citizens vigilante group that contained half a human kidney, supposedly from one of the victims. It was not signed, but the introduction of the letter is simply stated "from hell".

The slitting of the throats was to silence the victims quickly so the killer could then proceed with the further mutilations. As for why those were done, you will have profilers going on about that forever. Needless to say the ripper had issues with women.

There are about a half dozen prime suspects who could have been the ripper. The Doctor of the royal family is just one of them, although the argument for him being the ripper may be stronger than the others.

Along with the "From Hell" film of 2001, there was a 2-part mini-series made in 1988 for the 100th anniversary of the killings called "Jack The Ripper" starring Michael Caine that was aired on CBS. It also supported the theory of the royal family Doctor being the killer.

But nobody will ever know for sure.

Answer 3

The movie you saw was based of the Freemason/Royal Conspiracy.
The Royal Conspiracy is the media’s most popular take on the ‘Ripper’ murders, from Moore’s graphic novel ‘From Hell’ followed by it’s adaptation of the same name, as well as the 1988 TV miniseries ‘Jack the Ripper’ with Michael Cane. These are all 99% fiction, as well as the theory. First of all, the theory goes that Prince Albert Victor, bored of the Royal life, led a double life and spent time with an ‘Unfortunate’, whom later he bore a child to, the next heir to the throne. However, this infatuation was forbidden to a person of Royal status and would backfire on Albert. Unable to do the duties himself due to health reasons, sent the Queens doctor, better known as Sir William Gull, along with his loyal driver, Netley, to seek out and kill each who knew of the truth; A band of prostitutes. The main basis of this theory is that all the conical victims knew each other, forming a band of friendship; truth is that NONE of the victims knew each other, which totally throws the theory into shaky truth.
Now, lets consider the logics of this theory.
Jack the Ripper was a man transparent to the whole East End police, an arrogant man who went as far as mutilating Eddowes in plain view, also interesting to note that Eddowes was killed near a house of a patrolling police officer.
How in the world does a carriage move around not be heard, especially at the time of the murders. No mention of this sound was made by anyone, witness or tenant.
At the inquest held after each murder, no witness mentioned seeing two or more people, including the woman who saw Annie Chapman negotiating with a client, most like the ‘Ripper’, just outside of Hanbury Street at the time of the murder. She saw one man.
Oh, and is it worth noting that no ‘Grape Vines’ were found at any of the crime scenes.

The name, Jack the Ripper, was not borne directly from his method of killing, as stated by a previous answerer, but rather from a letter received on September 27th, 1888 at the Central News Agency. This letter was alleged to be from the ‘Ripper’ because of a clue the author mentioned, stating he would ‘clip the ladys ears off’. The letter was entitled as the ‘Dear Boss’ letter but the letter was originally believed to be just another hoax. Three days later, the double murder of Stride and Eddowes made them reconsider, especially once they learned a portion of the latter's earlobe was found cut off from the body, eerily reminiscent of a promise made within the letter.
The name comes from how the author enclosed the letter, saying; “Yours truly
Jack the Ripper.

At the time of the murders, and after, a total of 14 victims were accounted as Jack’s, however, many were dismissed due to the inconsistencies and irregularities of the murders and victims, but in the end, 5 stood out and became the conical five. Debates still exist today with people trying to dismiss one or two of the conical five, or trying to elate possibilities of other allegory victims.
As for the removed and missing organs, the only things that were taken were the uteri (research of interesting theory/suspect Tumblety for this) and the last victim’s heart. No one really knows why.
And yes, he most likely slit the throat of his victims so as the silence them. No witness reported any screaming on the night of the murders (excluding Mary Kelly’s cry “Oh murder!” at 4 am and Annie Chapman’s, “No, stop!”), if no one heard them, he could have more time to perform his audacious atrocities.
Many theories to who the ‘Ripper’ was and debates on different aspects of the case and suspects are so dominant with the ‘Ripper’ world and, and as a warning from a Ripperologist, ‘the further you dig into the case searching for the truth, the further you get from it, the deeper the mysteries become.


Hope this intrigues you and entices you to more further studies.
Cheers ;)

Answer 4

Unless Scotland Yard has some dna secretly hidden away and they can test some dead people who are suspects, no one will ever know for sure. I have read extensively about this case and personally believe that the book "Patient 1167" by James Tully presents the most factual evidence to date. It is an excellent read if you are a Jack the Ripper buff.

Answer 5

It has never been proven who he was. There are several suspects but not enough to charge anybody