Read Naming Jack the Ripper: The Biggest Forensic Breakthrough Since 1888 for Free Online Page B

did none of thepolicemen on the beat in the area see or hear anything about the attack at that time? And why did Emma appear
reluctant or unable to describe the men other than mentioning that one was quite young? Was she telling the truth?
    One theory is that the men who attacked her worked for her pimp, or that she had failed to pay them protection. Another version is that they were one of the gangs of youths who roamed the East
End, always willing to use violence to rob their victims. The gangs were nicknamed ‘High Rip’ gangs, a name originally adopted by a gang in Liverpool, but which had become common
coinage across the whole country. The High Rip gangs were known to use extreme violence for the sake of it, regardless of whether or not they intended to rob their unfortunate victims – but
even by their standards, the attack on Emma was particularly vicious.
    It has been suggested that the Ripper was part of the gang that carried out the attack, choosing later to work alone, but it is merely supposition unsupported by hard evidence, and it flies in
the face of what we know about serial killers, who are almost always loners. The suggestion by some researchers that Emma Smith may have been attacked by the Ripper working alone, and that she used
the gang story to deflect attention from the reality that she was soliciting that night, doesn’t add up: why, at death’s door, would she go out of her way to fabricate a cover story?
I’m very keen to stick to the facts and not get involved in wild supposition: I believe that Emma Smith was attacked by a gang of youths, as she claimed, and that this attack had turned into
a murder, probably not intended – the use of the stick may have been intended to humiliate her rather than cause death.
    Perhaps the answers to all or some of the questions about Emma’s murder would be revealed if the original investigation reports were still available. But I believe
we know enough about it to discount any involvement of the Ripper.
    The next murder, a few months later, is harder to understand, and it is the one I am happy to accept, despite the opinions of many of the Ripperologists, as the first excursion
of Jack the Ripper.
    Bank holidays were clearly a time when prostitutes could easily find punters from among the large number of men who, enjoying a rare day off from the grind of work, would frequent the pubs and
the music halls. Loosened up by alcohol and a sense of freedom, these men could have the pick of the local unfortunates who solicited along the streets, the pubs and the riverside areas of the East
End. Criminals also profited by the number of prostitutes around, who offered easy pickings, especially after they had been drinking. The women had to have their wits about them to avoid being
robbed of their pennies or ill-used by their clients. It is therefore unsurprising that the next Whitechapel murder took place, like the first, after a bank holiday Monday.
    The victim was Martha Tabram, found dead in the early hours of Tuesday, 7 August 1888. Her body was found only thirty seconds walk from where Emma Smith was attacked four months earlier: I know,
because I have walked all the sites of the Ripper’s crimes and timed all his routes. I have walked them quickly and slowly, and recorded all the possible variations. But this of course came
later, when I found out who he was and where he most likely lived . . .
    Martha Tabram was thirty-nine years old at the time of her death. She was born Martha White in Southwark in 1849 and she had married Henry Tabram, a foreman furniture
packer, in 1869, when she was twenty. He worked steadily and provided for her and their two sons. But after only six years of marriage the couple separated because of Martha’s continuous
heavy drinking. Henry initially supported his estranged wife financially, and reasonably generously, at twelve shillings a week, but he dropped the amount to two shillings and six pence after she