13 differences between Jack the Ripper and the Yorkshire Ripper

Police leading murderer Peter Sutcliffe, known as the Yorkshire Ripper, into Dewsbury Court under a blanket. (Photo by Keystone/Getty Images)
Police leading murderer Peter Sutcliffe, known as the Yorkshire Ripper, into Dewsbury Court under a blanket. (Photo by Keystone/Getty Images) /
facebooktwitterreddit
Prev
4 of 6
Next
26th November 1980: Detective Chief Superintendent James Hodson, head of Leeds CID, leading the hunt for the murderer the ‘Yorkshire Ripper’. (Photo by Keystone/Getty Images)
26th November 1980: Detective Chief Superintendent James Hodson, head of Leeds CID, leading the hunt for the murderer the ‘Yorkshire Ripper’. (Photo by Keystone/Getty Images) /

7. The Yorkshire Ripper letters were hoaxed

Police received letters from Jack the Ripper, most of which they determined were hoaxes. However, there were three they thought might be legit, but no one knows to this day if they were or not.

Police also received letters in the Yorkshire Ripper’s case. Most were also disregarded as hoaxes, but a few they believed were really from the killer himself –and which, by the way, were signed “Jack the Ripper.”

However, the police later realized the information was not as “first hand” as they thought and realized it was details anyone could’ve gotten from the news.

It took a couple of decades, but DNA from one of the envelopes was eventually tied to a man named John Samuel Humble, who was sentenced to eight years in prison in 2006 for “perverting the course of justice.”

6. They had the Yorkshire Ripper’s voice (or so it seemed)

There were no audio or visual recordings of Jack the Ripper, but the Yorkshire Ripper sent police a tape-recorded audio message.

Or so they thought.

Because the accent of the voice they believed belonged to the Yorkshire Ripper was unique, police thought that was their big break in the case. Surely, they’d catch him now. Not only did they hope that someone would recognize it, they were confident they had traced the specific area where the accent had come from.

They invested gobs of money into the manhunt and into making the tape as public as possible. No one recognized it, and it turned out they had wasted a lot of resources –both time and money–chasing a dead end. Because as it turned out, the same man who had hoaxed the letters, John Samuel Humble, had also sent in the tape.