Source A describes two murders, which startled London, the killings of Martha Tabram and Polly Nicholls. Whitechapel (setting of the murders) was a crime-ridden place. It wasn't the cleanest of places, or best laid out. Whitechapel was a string of narrow passages. From this source we can learn about Polly Nicholls" death.
.
Firstly, she died a similar, extraordinary violent death as Martha Tabram, which suggests the same "demented" killer. She was claimed to be the "poorest of the poor", a prostitute, which infers there could have been no motive. As the police didn't have the forensics or scientific knowledge that we have today, they had no evidence to work on. .
.
This source is useful, but it does have its weaknesses. Firstly we have to take into consideration that it is a newspaper article and it is very limited in what to offers. The language is quite simple and unspecific. The author probably hasn't seen any of the bodies, and suggests another weakness in the source. Basically this article is just generating/reflecting emotions of the "startled people in London" at the time. .
Q2.).
Source B deals with the Coroner's report of Polly Nicholls. Effort has been made to talk about the appearance of the body, but insufficient to show how it was an "extraordinary" murder. The coroner made many assumptions of whom the murderer is, without referring to Polly. The coroner states "no mere slaughterer of animal could have carried out these operations", but we have to take in to account there was a huge disagreement about the question of whether the killer was skilled or not. One claim was anyone could have carried it out, as skilled as it looks. This source purports the murder and makes assumptions of whom the murderer was. .
.
Source C includes no assumption of who the murderer was, and it has a very different tone to both sources. It is exact, missing out no detail. It is very serious, and is the only evidence of the killer.