10 Suspects Of The Jack "The Ripper" Murders - 125 Years On

125 years ago the streets of London were host to perhaps the most infamous series of murders in human history. Prostitutes were found mutilated with their organs removed, leading to sensational newspaper articles and mass speculation as to the identity of who would later become known as 'Jack the Ripper'. While the crimes have long since subsided, the mystery about who the killer was has not, with countless books being released and re-released positing various theories about who the Ripper may be. In this article I will examine 10 of the suspects to these crimes and the various reasons why they may or may not be seen as 'the smoking gun'.

10. Sir William Gull & The Masonic Conspiracy

This is possibly the most well known theory thanks to the films From Hell and Murder by Decree as well as the connections the theory has to royalty, which have ensured many people know something about this idea. The premise is that Victoria's grandson and heir to the throne, Prince Albert Victor- the Duke of Clarence- conceived a child with a Catholic prostitute and married her in a Catholic ceremony. The idea of a Catholic heir to the throne in a Protestant nation was seen as something that the Queen could not countenance and so when this was found out Victoria employed Sir William Gull as a royal assassin along with Joseph Netley and Walter Sickert as accomplices. The evidences revolve around many coincidences that were unveiled by Stephen Knight, who first advocated this theory in 1976. Firstly, four out of the five victims lived in a very close proximity of each other and could be seen frequenting the same pub. Should one of them have such incredible information as being witness to a Catholic marriage between a fallen woman and a prince, there is an argument that the others could have easily found out. Secondly, if the police were actually ordered not to attempt to halt the Ripper's crimes, it would explain their inability to capture him. However, Gull at the time of the murders was already over 70 years old and had suffered a minor stroke. Furthermore, while there are many coincidences and circumstantial evidence that allow this theory to continue to be bandied about, there is little in the way of direct evidence, particularly since Knight's chief 'witness' subsequently retracted his statement as a load of nonsense.