It is a mystery which has lasted for more than 130 years.
Now the descendants of Jack the Ripper’s victims hope to ultimately confirm the validity of one of the most notorious unsolved crimes of all time.
Following the discovery of information that pointed to Aaron Kosminski as the murderer, they are supporting a court motion for a new inquest into Catherine Eddowes’ death.
The Polish barber, who emigrated to the UK in the 1880s, was a suspect at the time of the five murders in Whitechapel, east London, in 1888.
But he was never arrested because police had no evidence of his involvement – until now.
A bloody shawl said to have been discovered on Ms Eddowes’ body, which was bought at auction in 2007 by author and Ripper investigator Russell Edwards, was subsequently seen to have the DNA of both the victim and Kosminski.
In October, the Mail revealed that Mr Edwards had found new proof of Kosminski’s ties to the highly secret Freemasons which may have encouraged his barbaric slayings and protected him from law enforcement, ensuring he was locked away in an asylum, where he died.
Since there is more information for a coroner to review regarding the circumstances of the death and, most importantly, who was responsible, Mr Edwards has now engaged a legal team to argue for an inquest.
The campaign has been supported by the descendants of both Ms Eddowes and Kosminski, who say it is time to unmask the true killer and get justice for the women involved.
Mary Ann Nichols, Annie Chapman, Elizabeth Stride, and Mary Jane Kelly were the other four victims.
Karen Miller, 53, who is Ms Eddowes’s three-time great-granddaughter, supplied her DNA, which matched her ancestor’s blood on the shawl.
She said: ‘The name Jack the Ripper has become sensationalised, it has gone down in history as this famous character.
‘It has all been about him, this iconic name, but people have forgotten about the victims who did not have justice at the time.
‘What about the real name of the person who did this? Having the real person legally named in a court which can consider all the evidence would be a form of justice for the victims.
‘We have got the proof, now we need this inquest to legally name the killer.
‘It would mean a lot to me, to my family, to a lot of people to finally have this crime solved.’
Calls for a new inquest have also been supported by the descendants of the other victims of the Ripper.
Sue Parlour, whose husband Andy is distantly related to Mary Ann Nichols, known as Polly, said: ‘There was no justice for these victims at the time. It was all such a long time ago.
‘But it would mean a lot to finally be able to name the killer, to get some closure on this.
‘These women have been dismissed as just prostitutes like they did not matter, but they did.’
The action has also received support from Kosminski’s descendants.
His three-times great-niece Amanda Poulos said: ‘I’m more than happy to finally establish what really happened.’
When the original inquest was held on October 4, 1888, a verdict of ‘wilful murder’ was returned. But police were still hunting for the serial killer at the time.
According to the legislation, every application for a further inquest to the High Court must be approved by the Attorney General.
Two years ago, Sir Michael Ellis, then the Attorney General, refused permission, saying there was not sufficient new evidence.
But barrister Dr Tim Sampson said that this set ‘a terrible precedent in relation to requests to reopen inquests involving the violent deaths of women and gives the impression that such matters are better brushed under the carpet or simply left to sensationalist reporting, rather than being exposed to dispassionate judicial scrutiny’.
He has written to Attorney General Richard Hermer claiming there is new proof to consider which if it had been available at the time ‘would have been justifiable for the coroner to charge and then seek to have Aaron Kosminski prosecuted for both the murder of Ms Eddowes and the other four victims’.
A judge of the High Court would hear the matter if permission was given.
Nadia Persaud, the coroner for East London, has indicated that she would be willing to preside over any inquest if asked to.
She has previously written to Mr Edwards’ solicitor, saying: ‘I would not oppose your application… it appears to me that a fresh inquest would be unlikely to reach any different outcome, the only new factor being the suggestion that the perpetrator might now be identified.’
Mr Edwards said: ‘A second inquest is the only way of confirming what happened. As we now have identified the true murderer with a wealth of evidence putting the man we named as the Ripper in the frame, we want justice to be served.’
Though I’m sure a lot of individuals will profit greatly from this mystery, justice is justice, and identifying a killer regardless of how old the case is—cold cases are just as essential as new ones.
Murder is not something to be disregarded, although it did happen an extremely long time ago and the perpetrator has long since died, and some people might not see the point of squandering money on this topic. However, the families of the victims out there want to know, and I’m sure a lot of Jack the Ripper aficionados out there want to know as well – I sure do!
More than a century after the incident, a portion of the shawl was purchased for auction. All that time, where had the shawl been? How many hands had touched it during that period, and how do they know it was the victim’s shawl? How can we determine whether the barber they are accusing had sex with the poor woman before the Ripper got hold of her and his DNA was on the shawl?
This just indicates that the shawl was in contact with both the victim and the suspect at some point. It might have happened months before. This doesn’t prove anything because he might have been a former client.
THE MONTHLY MOSQUITO 