Fairy Fay: The Ripper Victim

‘Fairy Fay’

Whilst the brutalities of 1888 would remain a _______ memory to ________, many murders and their subsequent investigations have gradually become vague with the passing of time, some even reaching the standards of myths or legends. Of all the potential victims of the Ripper’s wrath, ‘Fairy Fay’ is the least reputable, with not only her potentiality in question, but also and more importantly, whether she existed in the first place. Her story is eerily comparable to that of any other Ripper victim, perfectly weaved together, leaving, however, certain unavoidable knots in which the legitimacy of this candidate falters. The mystery of ‘Fairy Fay’ was first recounted by journalist and historian Terence Robertson, for the October 29th

The two are virtually identical, with the exception that Cullen added that ‘Fairy Fay’ was mutilated. The dates of the author’s written works are similarly problematic, with Robertson’s published in 1950 and Cullen’s in 1965. The fairly short time period between the two author’s works would suggest that Cullen’s source was Robertson’s work, however this is a trivial detail to the greater issues. If ‘Fairy Fay’ did indeed exist, why are the accounts of her tragic end appearing sixty two years later? It would be reasonable to assume that such an event would have at least one mention by the press, considering their fixation over the later murders. However, I had no such luck while looking through archives. ‘Fairy Fay’ was not mentioned in any newspaper during the time, whatsoever.

Keeping this concern in mind, nevertheless, I continued my research. Robertson describes the decision that “cost her her life” was her decision “to take a short cut home from a pub in Mitre Square.” To determine the accuracy of this statement, I managed to find maps of Mitre Square and the surrounding area, as it would have appeared in