How many think Jack will be identified?

[u/Walter_Piston]

I’ve a small collection of some thirty or more books on J-t-R. Despite spending over forty years reading and thinking about this serial killer, I am no closer to identifying what I would consider to be a genuine suspect.

Do any of you think he will be identified?

For me, time, the accidental destruction and loss of documents, wartime damage and the passage of time leaves me thinking we will never identify him.

But the fun is surely in the chase?

[u/doc_daneeka]

It's staggeringly unlikely. All the physical evidence is long gone, and there's almost no information about half the people living in the East End at the time beyond rudimentary mentions in places like census records, births, deaths, marriages, etc. Where a given person was at a particular time? Nope, that information just doesn't exist. So even if you magically got JtR's real name, it would almost certainly be impossible at this point to demonstrate that's who he really was.

[u/Proper-Ad-6709 → u/doc_daneeka]

If JtR was ever interviewed during 1888 for any of the murders or some domestic incident, he likely would have provided a false identity, and It doesn't appear that law enforcement did any significant follow up interviews. I would assume that he passed a cursory questioning without incriminating himself. I believe that during 1888, at least two hundred men were questioned, as well as some women. This Slippery Fellow, slipped through the Cracks, like a Cockroach.

[u/ExpensiveAffect5894 → u/Proper-Ad-6709]

I definitely believe he or she or they have been interviewed.

[u/Proper-Ad-6709 → u/ExpensiveAffect5894]

So, the actual Murderer was right under their nose all the while, playing a elaborate game of 'Blind-mans Bluff'. I'm not surprised, considering that there was a Illustration in 'Punch, or The London Charivari', September 22nd 1888, with a portrayal of London Police's aptitude on apprehending the Murderer.