|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Phil Hill
Sergeant
Username: Phil
Post Number: 36
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Friday, January 14, 2005 - 3:29 pm: | 
|
So we come to one case already flagged up by some of you as too controversial to revisit.
I suggest that, if the discussion gets too heated we simply park it, and move on, but for completeness - here we go!!
MARTHA TABRAM
IMHO the facts are relatively simple and straightforward, it's the interpretation that is complex.
Found in the early hours of Tuesday 7 April 1888 (the previous Monday had been a Bank Holiday), the body of a woman was found on an unlit landing in George Yard Buildings, Goulston St.
The weather had been poor, gloomy and threatening.
Martha was last seen by her friend, allegedly going off with a soldier, at around 11.45a.m on the Tuesday. She had been drinking.
Tabram had been stabbed 39 times probably by a right-handed man using a pen-knife, but perhaps one wound - on the chest bone - had been made by something like a bayonet or dagger (longer bladed). There were wounds to the vaginal area - a particular focus?
The woman was identified as Martha Tabram, a prostitute.
The time of death is difficult to ascertain, as the body was probably not discovered for some time. No body seems to have been present at around 1.45 when the Mahoney's were about. Alfred Crow saw a body on the landing at around 3.30 but assumed it was a drunk. The murder was discovered by John Reeves at c4.50am.
On that basis it seems safe to say that Tabram was killed where she was found between 2 -3am. the doctor who examined the body thought 2.30am.
A Grenadier - who said he was waiting for his mate who had gone with a girl - was seen by a PC in Wentworth St at around 2.am -
Her friend, "Pearly Poll", who claimed to have been with her earlier that night, failed twice to identify soldiers from Guards regiments based at the Tower and Wellington barracks.
In this case, rather than starting by asking questions, I'll simply say - let us know what YOU think are the key issues or points that come out of this case, for the JtR case as a whole?
Phil |
Richard Brian Nunweek
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Richardn
Post Number: 1265
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, January 14, 2005 - 4:17 pm: |
|
Hi Phil,
I truely believe that Tabram was the first victim of Jack', i am not convinced that she was his intended target, for i recently have swung to the idea that Pearly Poll may have been the woman he was after, as she resided at Crossinghams lodging house in Dorset street.
That is a purely bias opinion , for as kelly was known to frequent the kitchen at that residence, anyone wishing [ Barnett] to attempt to scare a certain person of the street in the form of prostitution might have targeted her, although Tabram was a friend and associate to Pearly Poll, and proberly was familiar with Mary kelly... who knows.?
My main question is why was Tabram on the first floor landing where was she going or she and her killer going?.
I appreciate that the evening was wet, but she and her killer were out and about that night, and a alley way job, would not have inconvienced them.
Or if it was raining hard then why not just inside the entrance , surely more suitable than laying on a landing where one could be disturbed from people entering or leaving?.
I have a distinct feeling that Tabram was anxious to get away from a suspicious character and tried to find refuge in George Yard, when she was apprehended when reaching the first landing.
That makes more sense to me.
Regards Richard.
/ |
Maria Giordano
Inspector
Username: Mariag
Post Number: 280
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Friday, January 14, 2005 - 5:13 pm: |
|
I think the first thing we have to do is deal with Pearly Poll's story. Do we believe it in its entirety? What do we make of her being unable to identify any soldier?
As to speculation,Richard, here's a scenario:
Martha is inside the doorway with a customer. As they are concluding business, Jack comes upon them. He offers her money to come up to "his room"(he doesn't really live there). If he's been fighting the demons in his head that tell him to kill loose women and he suddenly came upon an illicit couple, might this not drive him into a rage and also seem to him like Divine Providence placing him there at the "right" time? He leads her upstairs then and kills her in a fit of rage on the landing.
This is just a scenario, one of many we could posit. What I think we need to do though is not spin tales before we have tried to look at the evidence and I apologise to Phil for going off on a tangent there.
Mags
|
Phil Hill
Sergeant
Username: Phil
Post Number: 37
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Friday, January 14, 2005 - 5:23 pm: |
|
Why shouldn't a relatively dark landing in a place which is not to often frequented, be a suitable place for a prostitute to take her client? I see no difference in principle between the GYB landing and the backyard at 29 Hanbury St. people occassionally used both, but the asignation would be over in minutes.
I think Martha led Jack there.
If Joe wanted to kill Pearly Poll, and knew her, how could he have been so badly mistaken? Why not kill her at a later date? Sorry theory would need more expansion to even begin to convince me.
Don't tell me that numerologically her name adds up to 39? and her shoe size was 39 (European)?
Seriously, interesting posts,
Phil |
Howard Brown
Inspector
Username: Howard
Post Number: 201
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Friday, January 14, 2005 - 5:42 pm: |
|
Here's a post I made over at the Forums regarding Mrs.Tabram...
Its further illustration that I have too much time on my hands....
By the way,to administer 38 wounds to Mrs.Tabram required at least 22-25 seconds to perform, if not more. I didn't figure in the 39th wound as there is a possibility that it wasn't from the same hand. I think it did,but thats irrelevant....
I used a knife with a 4 inch blade to "assault" a 6 inch thick, 18 inch wide, 16 inch long piece of semi-dense polyurethane "foam" last week that served as an erzatz Mrs. Tabram [ to represent the chest-to-groin area and on a 5 foot,3 inch woman,thats an over-estimate !!!]....actually 6 of these pieces were made....I placed a piece on the floor and with my faithful assistant in all things high-tech Ripper manning the watch for time,I began my assault,using my hip as the point of origin for the attacks....The reason being that according to the testimony from back then,something on the order of a penknife seemed to be used,rather than a long bladed instrument,as was used on say,Mrs. Chapman,etc..Attacking the piece from an overhand thrust would have required more time and more depth into the piece,which is not in conjunction with Mr. Paul Begg's mentioning of a penknife [ page 52,the Definitive History...]...
So within 22 seconds,I was able to make 38 3 inch poke-wounds on 3 attempts and 25 seconds the other three times...I jabbed it in a feigned frenzied fashion just like the bad boy that I am...
It gave me an idea as to how long the original monster had to do such an attack and how much available distance from any witnesses he may have had.
A casual- paced walker [ solo ] could cover roughly 60 feet on both sides of the street,up to the front door of the George Yard Bldg. from the beginning of the attack,where he would or could have been seen performing the real deal on the first floor landing either by someone from within the building or a walk-in from the street,because thats where the woman was murdered....................................It may also be noteworthy that it was very difficult to NOT poke the same spot twice on the makeshift torso...This may have been even harder to do in the original spot, if there wasn't any lighting other than ambient light at all..
A very risky affair for Tabram's killer. If one would check the area covered by these 38 wounds,you'll notice the concentration within a space as small as this makes one wonder about this ferocious attack. In short, it probably took longer than a half minute for the real murderer and maybe,just maybe,its the reason why 38 definable wounds were made as they were....very risky and a very strange assault.
HighTech How
P.S. For my money,she wasn't a Ripper victim... |
Sir Robert Anderson
Detective Sergeant
Username: Sirrobert
Post Number: 136
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, January 14, 2005 - 9:28 pm: |
|
"Her friend, "Pearly Poll""
Help me out folks - somewhere I remember someone suggesting she was a he, as she had a deep voice and manly characteristics.
Sir Robert
"I only thought I knew"
SirRobertAnderson@gmail.com
|
Phil Hill
Sergeant
Username: Phil
Post Number: 38
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, January 15, 2005 - 3:17 am: |
|
Sir Robert - I recall a recent discussion on that point.
Howard - I suppose that if anyone but the person living in the apartment closest had arrived, then it might be possible for Jack to feign copulation as he knelt over the victim.
Another possibility is that had Jack interrupted by a casual passer-by, or even been "cornered" by anyone bar the police (perhaps even them) - he might have struck out. For instance in the backyard at Hanbury St, a resident who popped into the yard at that moment MIGHT have ended up as another victim.
Just a supposition, and it never happened, but I cannot see how Jack could have escaped from 29, or Mitre Square easily otherwise, if caught in flagrante.
I think the nearest anyone came to interrupting him was probably Cross in Buck's Row.
Phil |
Richard Brian Nunweek
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Richardn
Post Number: 1268
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, January 15, 2005 - 3:52 am: |
|
Hi Phil,
I think it is safe to assume that Mary Kelly knew a tremendous amount of prostitutes, a lot of them would have looked up to her, being young and quite attractive, and with tales to tell about trips to Paris etc.
The reason I suggested that she may have known Pearly Poll, is because that woman was a resident at crossinghams, infact she proberly knew Tabram, who was a friend of Pearlys, she certainly would have known Annie Chapman who also was a resident.
It was reported at the time that Chapman and kelly were friends.
Is it not possible that the killer pinpointed women that kelly was familiar with. and if so why was this his motive.
Richard. |
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 3890
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, January 15, 2005 - 4:47 am: |
|
Sir Robert
Some of it is under Victims/Martha Tabram/Pearl Poll. I think it had cropped up on a Tabram or Chapman thread, and eventually Leanne opened a special thread for it. It was Leanne who thought she was a he.
When I think about the Tabram murder, I imagine a very frustrated man repeatedly stabbing her and obviously not finding whatever it was he was looking for. I feel there's a good chance that Jack killed Tabram, and then found when he ripped Nichols that this was what he'd wanted to do to Tabram. But he still stabbed Nichols, and also Eddowes I believe. I see him as moving from stabbing to ripping. But as usual, not sure about anything.
Robert |
Phil Hill
Sergeant
Username: Phil
Post Number: 42
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, January 15, 2005 - 4:49 am: |
|
But wouldn't SOMEONE have twigged - all these murders are linked to people I know!!
or - Gosh! What a coincidence, everyone killed seems to be associated with this lodging house!!
I'm not saying that they would have told the police (directly) but it does strike me as very odd. Almost too direct.
As for other women "looking up to" MJK, I would have thought the reverse might be true. They would be jealous of her youth and good looks (thus ability to charge more) and perhaps not impressed by her assumed airs and graces.
MJK was said to have a temper - and we know from Chapman's recent past that when tempers flared they could do so with a vengeance.
Phil |
Jfripper
Sergeant
Username: Jfripper
Post Number: 22
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, January 15, 2005 - 9:16 am: |
|
Hi All,
Just to add my views.
I strongly believe Martha Tabram to be a victim of JTR.
I find the idea of MO being used to try and differentiate why Martha was not, yet Nichols, Chapman, Eddowes and Kelly? were victims of Jack implausible, as it is well documented that many serial killers do not rigidly stick to their MO's.
What about the killers 'signature'?
Jacks 'signature' is not that well defined in this murder as in the later ones, but I do see the beginnings, namely, the knife and the abdominal injuries.
An old saying is: "Learn by your mistakes"
Maybe Jack did learn something from this murder.
Strangulation, followed by throat cutting is faster and easier; and a lot less bloody than just randomly stabbing when despatching the victim.
One other point.
First I would like to say that do not wish to offend, but I believe another point worth noting in regards the murder of Martha Tabram is that she was a very plump woman. This may have caused a problem for Jack. Just an idea!!
Cheers,
Michael
Late News.
Jack used to reside at 29 Hanbury Street. In fact, his mother still did live at this address in September 1888. |
Harry Mann
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Saturday, January 15, 2005 - 4:05 am: |
|
Phil,
As Alfred Crow assumed the body to be a drunk,it may also,I believe,be safe to assume that the landing was a place where drunks often sought a place to sleep.
That being so,it might also be safe to assume,that a local person bent on murder,might consider it a place where a defenseless drunk victim might be found. |
Ditto
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Friday, January 14, 2005 - 10:52 pm: |
|
Sir Robert
Yes, the gender of Pearly Poll has been discussed in the Victims thread under Martha Tabram under "Pearl Poll".
Discussed is probably not an accurate description,the suggestion that "Pearly Poll" might be a man was, to say the least, cause for great mirth.
Still everyone is entitled to an opinion and I believe that there may have been more to "Poll"
than meets the eye.
I appreciate that others may think differently.
I suspect that she failed on purpose to identify the two soldiers.
In fact the police had to find her at her cousin's , a Mrs Shean.
The point is that, in order for "Pearly Poll" to be taken at her word as to what she did or didn't see or who she could or couldn't identify, more needs to be known about her.
Pearly Poll's account of the two soldiers surely has direct bearing on whether Martha Tabram is perceived to be a Ripper victim.
It certainly must colour one's thinking on the subject.
Regardless of what her gender might be, is she a credible witness?
Regards Di
|
Maria Giordano
Inspector
Username: Mariag
Post Number: 284
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, January 15, 2005 - 1:06 pm: |
|
Howard-
Kudos to your foam for making the ultimate sacrifice!
I've been stabbing a three inch thick chuck roast with one of my cooking knives that's about 7 inches long, has a pointed end and is thin bladed. I hold the roast at arms length to simulate it being on the far side of a body. I'm finding that fatigue sets in after a few hard stabs and I'm dragging the knife instead of making clean up and down wounds. Of course, I'm standing at the counter as I stab, not kneeling on it beside the meat (and I'm not going to do that--I'm already thisclose to being declared insane over JTR as it is).
Thank god there are people in this world I can tell this to who I know will just nod and say "interesting" instead of looking at me like I'm some kind of freak!!
I wonder how many of us are believed to be "cooking" when we're really in the kitchen performing these important forensic experiments?
Mags
|
Phil Hill
Sergeant
Username: Phil
Post Number: 47
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, January 15, 2005 - 1:14 pm: |
|
In legal terms, of course, ditto, Poll had proved herself an utterly unreliable witness. After the two abortive identity parades, he evidence would have been useless in Court.
As regards what she saw, I have no reason to doubt that she and Martha encountered some soldiers, whom they serviced. I am perhaps more interested in the evidence of the policeman who saw a Grenadier hanging around (waiting for a friend) close to the murder scene within half an hour or so of the time it was committed.
There must have been many soldiers around in London at that time - we know of at least two battalions in town at the time. There must also have been at least one regiment of Household Cavalry, and perhaps others. Colchester is a major garrison town and is not that far from the East End.
I am undecided on Tabram and JtR - part of me leaves room in my thinking for a murder committed by a soldier who later left London for duty overseas.
But on balance, I feel this was probably Jack's first real assault, the frenzy came when he realised what he could do whatever he wanted. But he was not sure what he wanted. The risky location and the MO spring from his relative inexperience. Other potential JtR assaults did not lead to much (Millwood and Wilson).
At the Tabram stage he was still using the knives he carried, a pen-knife and perhaps another.
by the end of the month and Polly he had bought a new knife and thought about what he really wanted. I like Robert's explanation (above) too.
Phil |
Howard Brown
Inspector
Username: Howard
Post Number: 203
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, January 15, 2005 - 3:36 pm: |
|
Maria...
Thanks for the thumbs up,my dear ! Its appreciated. I've worked where I work for longer than anyone else,so I can "get away" with my experiments and its funny,but the ladies,mostly Hispanic ladies, get a kick out of my quasi-Columbo antics !
....and like you,I get rolling eyes and raised eyebrows about my attempts at recreating events and aspects of the case....you..are..not..alone !
|
Lindsey Millar
Inspector
Username: Lindsey
Post Number: 208
Registered: 9-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, January 15, 2005 - 6:27 pm: |
|
Richard,
The reason I suggested that she may have known Pearly Poll, is because that woman was a resident at crossinghams, infact she proberly knew Tabram, who was a friend of Pearlys, she certainly would have known Annie Chapman who also was a resident.
You say that Mary Kelly "certainly would have known Annie Chapman" (or do I misunderstand you?).
Do we know for certain that she did, or are you supposing something that may not in fact be.. well, a fact? I just haven't come across any information that suggests that any of the victims actually knew each other - of course, I could have just missed it. God knows, my head goes around in circles enough with this case, that this information could have been right in front of me, and I simply missed it. Sorry to be so nit-picky, but I don't think we can assume anything in this case that isn't a proven fact. Perhaps I'm wrong in feeling this way. However, if you're certain without a doubt that MJK knew any of the other victims, please point me in the right direction - I know so little about the facts that I am always open to correction and direction. If it's written as a fact that Kelly knew any of the other victims, I'd really like to see it.
Howie and Mags.. thank you both for not only giving me a chuckle at the thought of the pair of you stabbing polyurethane foam, and chuck roast respectively, but actually seeking to gain more information on this case with a "hands on" experiment. Rest assured that I won't roll my eyes at either of you, but indeed give the pair of you the thumbs up. Whatever it takes to further investigation, I say!
Sadly, all I have in my 'fridge is pork chops and a slab of cheese, and I doubt I could get anywhere with a stabbing experiment with those... So, thank you both for "doing it for me".
Bestest,
Lyn
"When a man grows tired of London, he grows tired of life" (or summat like that)
|
Richard Brian Nunweek
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Richardn
Post Number: 1275
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, January 16, 2005 - 4:20 am: |
|
Hi Lyn,
There is a report mentioned [ somewhere] which i will have to search for, that states ' Rumour has it that Chapman and kelly were friends'
Mrs maxwell states that she often saw kelly about the place'[Crossinghams] .
That would imply that she most certainly hung around the kitchen area, with the rest of the women boarders in these type of houses, we know that Pearly Poll in August was resident there, and we know Chapman in sept was resident there, we also know that Tabram and Poll, were known to venture out to try and find business, and i find it most likely that Kelly knew both these women.
We should not forget that the murder area was not that large, and kelly was known to put herself about , i would imagine she was a well known popular figure in that area, judging by the huge amount of intrest and genuine sorrow after her death.
Richard. |
Sir Robert Anderson
Detective Sergeant
Username: Sirrobert
Post Number: 144
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, January 16, 2005 - 1:29 pm: |
|
"the suggestion that "Pearly Poll" might be a man was, to say the least, cause for great mirth."
I apologize for raising the gender issue in a thread called "Back to Basics", although to the extent that it casts any light on Pearly Poll as a credible witness, I suppose it could be said to be relevant.
I now see that this subject was "debated" at great length on the boards. There's also some interesting points in Sugden pp.25-28. It seems like more than a few sources described her as masculine looking.
What I find particularly interesting is that she would not directly speak to testify in front of the August 23rd inquest.
"On this occasion, complaining that her chest was 'queer', she gave her testimony through an officer." (Sugden p.27) {Folks, I'm not suggesting the word queer here means anything than not feeling well}
I think if you look at the totality of the physical descriptions of her, her reluctance to speak at length in front of a crowd, well, I can see why this school of thought developed. It does stand to reason that some of the "unfortunates" might have been transvestites.
Reread those 4 pages in Sugden in this light and see if her reluctance to be a witness might be attributable to reasons other than the usual fear of the police.
Sir Robert
"I only thought I knew"
SirRobertAnderson@gmail.com
|
Frank van Oploo
Inspector
Username: Franko
Post Number: 443
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, January 16, 2005 - 6:02 pm: |
|
Hi all,
Here are some of my views on the murder of Martha Tabram.
Like Phil, I believe Tabram lead her murderer to the first floor landing. The silence surrounding the murder coupled with the obvious frenzy in which it was committed to me indicate that it was a surprise attack. I feel that she said or did something to him that made him explode into rage, attacking her straight away. If it was the Ripper, something I’m not sure of, I don’t think he had gone out that night with murder on his mind, which I think he did in the other cases.
There seems to have been only one wound to the lower abdominal area, which was a 3-inch cut. The other ones to the lower torso were to the liver, stomach and spleen, which are situated just below the chest area, but still inside both halves of the rib cage (perhaps between 12 and 16 inches above the crotch).
Unfortunately, only 32 of the total of 39 wounds are accounted for in the available information, which means that 7 of them could have been anywhere on her body. Another misfortune is that we don’t know for a fact if the wound to the heart caused instantaneous death or even a quick one or not (although there was some blood in the pericardium, which is what causes a heart to stop beating, not necessarily the stab to the heart). If it had, for instance, caused instantaneous death, we could safely have drawn the conclusion that the stab to the heart was among the last to be inflicted, since she was found lying in a pool of blood with a deal of it between the legs as well.
The fact that almost 25% of the total amount of wounds was inflicted to the relatively small area of the throat suggests that it was purposely attacked and may well have been done to silence her. Considering that it’s very feasible that Tabram’s killer was triggered by something she had said to him, the notion of an initial attack to the throat seems even more plausible.
As I believe it was uncommon for prostitutes to service their clients while lying on the ground, I think the initial attack was done while she was still standing on her feet. If so, stabbing her from the hip would rather have caused her to fall down or collapse forward than backward. Furthermore, in that case her lungs and throat would not have been injured yet, leaving room for her to scream. As Tabram was found lying on her back and most probably didn’t make a sound, I tend to believe she was not stabbed from the hip, but rather overhand and in the throat.
What I would have liked to know as well, is whether the stabs to the lower part of the body (stomach, liver, etc.) were done through her clothes or not. If they weren’t, they must have been done after her killer had pushed her skirts up and would have indicated some sort of twisted sexual interest, which would be a clear link to the Ripper.
In my view the significant links to the Ripper were the ‘overkill’ that was exercised, the location, the silence surrounding the murder and the position of the body with the skirts pushed up.
I think this’ll do for now.
All the best,
Frank
"Every disadvantage has it's advantage."
Johan Cruijff
|
Adam Went
Detective Sergeant
Username: Adamw
Post Number: 145
Registered: 12-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, January 16, 2005 - 6:50 pm: |
|
Hi all,
I believe Martha Tabram was the first victim (exluding Ada Wilson, who survived) of Jack the Ripper. I have always been of this opinion.
I've said it before and I'll say it again, Jack the Ripper could not have just jumped out of the shadows and started tearing 5 women to pieces, for no apparent reason. He has to have had an earlier history of criminal violence and petty offences. My view is that he started out as youngester, stealing, pickpocketing, probably living on the streets most of the time. And after a while, the lifestyle hardened him into a brutal creature, and he turned to more brutal attacks, like stabbing Ada Wilson twice in the throat when she refused him what he wanted. Then, after this attack, he layed low for a few months, before striking out the built up rage on Martha Tabram. After her, he went completely mad, and went on to commit the 5 other murders. Martha Tabram was stabbed 39 times, a very serious attack, but she wasn't really mutilated like the other victims.
Her case was also merged with the police investigations of the killings of Polly Nichols and Annie Chapman, so it's apparent that she was generally accepted as a victim by the police of the time.
Her body also follows the trend of the locations of the bodies of the other victims. She was also found in a very secluded, quiet spot, just like the others. Her age also fits in with 4 of the other 5 victims. It seems that the Ripper especially liked women heading towards being middle-aged.
Finally, after Martha Tabram was killed, the other 5 murders happened within 3 months of that. Very quickly. Him killing her and getting away with it may well have opened the door for him to do more, and be more brutal with each one.
So yes, I personally strongly regard Martha Tabram as the first victim of Jack the Ripper.
Regards,
Adam.
The Wenty-icator!
|
Donald Souden
Inspector
Username: Supe
Post Number: 409
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, January 16, 2005 - 9:26 pm: |
|
Adam,
It seems that the Ripper especially liked women heading towards being middle-aged.
We always have to guard against seeing patterns where there are none or where apparant patterns are simply the result of chance. And that may well be the case in suggesting that JtR was drawn to nearly middle-aged women. While the pool is much too small to allow statistically sound inferences, a quick check of many of the "unfortunates" mentioned in the Ripper investigation shows that most were in their 30s and beyond (Coles and probably Kelly being exceptions).
Moreover, most seemed to have been married, had drinking problems and left their families in their 30s. It was likely cirumstances and not choice that led most of them to walk the streets of Whitechapel. They were also for the most part quite vulnerable and usually desperate to get sustenance and shelter. Given those conditions, it is a sad fact that absent the Ripper most of the victims (and their sisters) had a life expectancy measured in years, not decades.
Thus, it is a good probability that most of the prostitues eking out an existence in Whitechapel at the time ranged in age from roughly 35-50. Further, if JtR preyed on prostitutes simply because they were the most vulnerable and accessible women, it is most likely his victims will fall into that age range. Put eight white and two black marbles in a sack and draw out one the odds are overwhelming you will select a white marble.
The same holds true for the murder sites. Few serial killers (or at least long-successful ones) like to play to an audience, which argues for a secluded site. In fact, it is interesting that the Ripper murder locations were as open as they were and that lends credence to the idea that the sites were chosen at least in part by the victims, who doubtless had a good sense for places relatively safe for a quick coupling.
None of this says that JtR didn't have a a fixation that saw him seeking middle-aged women or that he had some kink that made him murder in places only semi-secluded. Rather, I am suggesting that we must be careful not to see patterns in things that are really determined by chance not choice.
Don.
"There were only three times I'd have sold my mother into slavery for a cell phone . . . and two of those would have been crank calls."
|
Adam Went
Detective Sergeant
Username: Adamw
Post Number: 148
Registered: 12-2004
| | Posted on Monday, January 17, 2005 - 5:25 am: |
|
Hi Donald,
I agree with what you are saying completely, that seems to have been the common age range for prostitutes to be on the streets at that time, but I was just pointing out that all except 1 of the victims, or 'canonical' victims, were only a couple of years apart from each other, age-wise, and that's quite interesting. It may be a little more curious if Mary Kelly had been in that age range too, but since she is not, then there is no real pattern.
About the location of the bodies, I am neutral on whether Jack the Ripper led them or they led him. I feel quite sure that Jack accosted them, not vice-versa, and beyond that I don't know. But it probably was the women who lead him, I'm not sure.
Still, atleast in the case of Polly Nichols, I don't think she did, or was capable of leading him anywhere. She is the only victim that I feel was grabbed without any conversation from the Ripper first, and was killed right at or very close to the gateway she was found at. It would be a different story if she was sober, but since she was very drunk and probably wouldn't make much sense anyway, my personal opinion is that she was not accosted, nor did she accost Jack.
Personally I don't believe in patterns in the Ripper case. As I said once before, I believe the attacks to have been spontaneous, with no links to the number 39, etc. But, I just thought that was a point worth raising, the age range between the victims.
Regards,
Adam.
"Listen very carefully, I shall say this only once."
- Vicki Michelle,"Allo' Allo'"
|
Jeff leahy
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 19, 2005 - 12:31 pm: |
|
Hello Evreyone
I posted on Tabram on another thread but have been following your theories and thought I'd make some comments about JtR's MO.
Jacks appears to have strangled his victims, laid them to the floor face up, positioning the head to look away from the wall, fence or partician they were closest to. He then lifted the skirts, knees bent, mutilating the abdoman and finally cutting the throat (possibly an original intent on decapitation).
Does anyone know exactly the position of Tabrams body? Does it bear any similarities to the 5?
For me the attack on Ada Wilson is the key because it gives a natural development in MO.
Jack Stabs at the genitals. When his victims take flight he finds it difficult to inflict the mutilations he desires. He Stabs at the throat (site the gingery mostach man Annie Millwood) but still they struggle to much.
If Jack originally stalks his victims, possibly random stabs, then is it possible that he first attacks Nichols in Brady street? Like the others she escapes until the Ripper hits apon the idea of stangulation. Leaving him more time to experiment with what he really wants.
Take this with an ever further decline into insanity and the changing and more extreme MO. And I beleive that a development from Tabram to Nichols is possible given the three month gap in which he had time to fantisize about the Tabram killing.
If we add strangulation to Tabrams MO and a better knife...surely this is the only real major change in development and not the big change sometimes suggested.
Besides this, as I've said, I just cant by the drunken soldier. He gets drunk loses his temper and stabs a prostitute 37 times with his pen Knife (Wilson reports a clarsp knife) he then takes out a baionet still in a rage and has another go? This is a soldier who is going to have one hell of a hang over in the morning.
For me Tabram is a natural sequence in the Rippers MO. He does Tabram, he gets away with it and he has time to work out what went right and what went wrong. Jeff |
totally anonymous
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Sunday, January 16, 2005 - 1:18 am: |
|
I would pay a handsome price for a video of Maria stabbing the chuck roast!
"I really hate cooking!!!! |
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 2916
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Friday, January 21, 2005 - 6:44 am: |
|
Jeff,
"If we add strangulation to Tabrams MO and a better knife...surely this is the only real major change in development and not the big change sometimes suggested."
You forget the maybe most consistent element in the Ripper's MO -- the cut throat. Which is NOT apparent on Tabram! Throat cuts were a rather common way of killing people in those days (which several cases -- also domestic ones -- display), and on four of the five so called canonical Ripper victims, this is a brutally obvious ingedient. With the exception of Stride, the throat cut has been done with two deep cuts, almost severing the head.
This is a feature that in my mind would be done on a "practice victim" like Tabram first hand, then the experiment with stabbing or mutilation. But it is totally lacking on Tabram.
"Besides this, as I've said, I just cant by the drunken soldier. He gets drunk loses his temper and stabs a prostitute 37 times with his pen Knife (Wilson reports a clarsp knife) he then takes out a baionet still in a rage and has another go? This is a soldier who is going to have one hell of a hang over in the morning."
I am sorry, Jeff, but what you're saying here is based on misconceptions. Those things have happened on occasion; you are basing your views upon what you think a person is capable or not capable of, which is a serious mistake. Far more worse crimes than that on Tabram has occurred in similar situations -- we have several cases here at home with similar frenzy and wounds in connection with violent deaths on prostitutes. You have no idea what people are capable of, Jeff.
Besides, the change of weapon could actually indicate that two persons were involved.
"For me Tabram is a natural sequence in the Rippers MO. He does Tabram, he gets away with it and he has time to work out what went right and what went wrong. Jeff"
And three weeks later he suddenly appears out of the blue with the murder on Nichols, having developed a technique and mutilation method that bears very little relation to the wounds inflicted and technique used on Tabram?
No thank you, I could be wrong, but I don't buy it. To me the Tabram murder bears all the hallmarks of a client-related killing. Believe me, Jeff, prostitutes are very vulnerable people and they subject themselves to all kinds of sickos and violent creatures. They attract them like flies. This is a fact today and it was most certainly true in 1888.
All the best
G. Andersson, author
Sweden
(Message edited by Glenna on January 21, 2005)
The Swedes are the men That Will not be Blamed for Nothing
|
Ditto
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Thursday, January 20, 2005 - 11:13 pm: |
|
Hi
Is it possible that The Ripper killed Tabram and the M.O changed because the motive for the other murders was different?
Help me out here.
Can a murderer change his M.O due to motive eg killing for the sake of it then deliberate elimination of certain targets.
Could he have killed someone because he thought they had knowledge of something that could reveal his identity?
Was there something that happened as a direct result of the Tabram murder that might have given him cause to think that he may have given the game away?
I'm not implying Royal conspiracy or anything of that ilk.
I'm also not suggesting that the victims had direct knowledge of the Ripper(they surely wouldn't be venturing off into unsafe places with him if they did!)
But what if they unwittingly had knowledge of something that could incriminate him?
Please forgive me if this has been examined before but I thought it could explain a change in M.O.
Regards Di
|
Jeff Leahy
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Friday, January 21, 2005 - 8:31 am: |
|
Hi Glen
Many thanks for your reply. Of course I am theorising. For me a 'developing' Jack makes more sence than a ready made Killer.
There are a couple of facts I'd like to clarify: You said Tabram was killed 3 weeks before Nichols but Phil stated 8th April? which is a longer gap.
I was trying to allow a development from Ada Wilson through Tambram, Nichols and finally Kelly. So understanding any other similarities between Tabram and the excepted 5 is important.
THe Stangulation and throat cutting thing has always puzzled me. Why both? My train of thought is..is it possible that the throat cutting is part of Jacks ritual as much as a way of killing? Did Jack try to dicapitate his victims, discover this is difficult, and go on to face mutilation?
As for my soldier with a hang over, I am indeed aware that people can do terrible things for very little reason. Especially to the week and vonrible, I spend almost every day researching crimes, missing bodies, an unsolved murders. However I'm also very aware how uncommon such events actually are in reality.
That is why I find the Whitchappel murders so fascinating, Jack excluded, there was also a disproportionately high number of known serial killers operating in a small space, in a small space of time. (I read somewhere that something similar happened in a mexico getto-violence over spilling into copy cat murders)
I realize it's opinion but I find it difficult to beleive the lone soldier story. Infact your two killer argument interests me more as I have never excluded the possibility that Jack was two people.
Getting back to Tabram...Glen..it would be useful to see two lists. Similarities/Differances.
My main interest is the possitioning of Tabrams body. Was she on her back, skirts raised, legs bent, head turned away from nearest wall?
Forgive my amitor sleuthing but I feel the Tabram murder very important, in that, if you except Tabram, then your looking at a very different killer. One that is changing and evolving, learning his craft as he goes along. (or a descent into madness depending on veiw point) In which case I think it alters your veiw on which suspects might fit the pattern.
Dispite your problems with the MO you have to admit that if Jack didnt do Tabram it is quite a coinsidence that this bruttal murder took place (and it was an uncommonly violant crime even for this time) so near to the emergance of Jack himself.
Jeff
|
Robert W. House
Inspector
Username: Robhouse
Post Number: 182
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, January 22, 2005 - 12:32 pm: |
|
Might as well weigh in...
Since the time that I bashed this about last year with Glen et. al., my opinion has not changed: Tabram was (in my opinion) a victim of JTR. I also suspect that JTR did earlier attacks, the main one being Annie Milwood, especially with regard to the concept of evolution in MO. Milwood was attacked in the lower torso and legs, at White's Row, was (possibly) a prostitute, and was 38 years old.
The important thing relating to evolution, is that these attacks targeted the lower torso/ stomach area. Thus the evolution is primarily in the technique of killing, not in the real target of the attacks...Thus the technique of killing may have evolved from 1. clumsy attack with a knife, stabbing the lower abdomen (Milwood), 2. strangulation followed by a frenzied stabbing of the torso/abdomen (Tabram), and 3. strangulation followed by slitting the throat, then mutilation of the abdomen (Nichols). The main target of all these attacks is the same: the lower torso and abdomen.
There has been a lot of development in the theories of criminal profiling since Ressler and Douglas, and the organized vs. disorganized killer classifications are rarely used now. This is mainly because many killers (including probably the Ripper, and also for example, the nightstalker Richard Ramirez) fall into the "mixed" category. This means that the classification effectively becomes meaningless. Now there are many more classifications for serial killers.
In any case, I digress... serial killers almost always will talk about their first murder as being the most difficult. They make mistakes, fumble about, and then often end up really regretting the act, and vowing to never again commit such an atrocity. Prior to actually commiting any acts of violence, many (if not most) serial killers will fantasize about commiting violent acts. Then, the first attempts will be like taking their fantasy on a "test run". In many early attacks, the perpetrator will often not even bring a weapon, and just end up using whatever is laying around. Bundy may have been such a case, as he spoke of one of his earliest attacks in which he attacked a girl with a board he picked up. Often on a second "test run", the criminal will bring along a weapon which will go unused. Then finally, on a third attempt, the criminal may bring along a weapon and actually complete the murder. These ideas are discussed in much greater detail in "Serial Killers: The Method and Madness of Monsters" by Peter Vronsky. Thus, in a sense, it seems that the evolution in method is a sort of evolution in the mind of the killer, an evolution in the determination to deliberately go through with the act of murdering someone.
Also (to Jeff et al), there is an excellent dissertation by Quentin L. Pittman, in which he argues for the canonization of Tabram, which I am in favor of. He discusses the position of the body therein. At this URL:
http://casebook.org/dissertations/dst-recanon.html
I think that any real discussion of Tabram might begin with specific reference to many of the points Pittman puts forth in his article, and also with a more complete analysis of the evolution in technique of serial killers in general.
Also, (to Glenn especially)... I recently spoke on the phone with a guy who is an actual criminal profiler and who taught geographic profiling techniques at both Quantico and NCLF, and he stated emphatically that Jack the Ripper was NOT a signature killer, and that mutilation by itself is not signature. He also said that MO is highly situational (and thus can vary quite a bit). Just a little side note.
Cheers.
Rob H |
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 2946
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, January 22, 2005 - 1:01 pm: |
|
Hi Rob,
"I recently spoke on the phone with a guy who is an actual criminal profiler and who taught geographic profiling techniques at both Quantico and NCLF, and he stated emphatically that Jack the Ripper was NOT a signature killer, and that mutilation by itself is not signature. He also said that MO is highly situational (and thus can vary quite a bit). Just a little side note."
Interesting. Although I must admit it puzzles me. I am quite cautious about the generalisations of profiling, but he must be the only profiling expert so far that wouldn't regard the Ripper as a signature killer -- which other Quantico profilers have done. Not to mention that it goes against every police handbook I have ever read on the subject.
It could be that your contact has another definition of what signature is. As far as I know, signature is all the post-mortem activities done to a victim not necessary for the killing of the victim -- like certain wounds inflicted after death, or like the trophee-taking. In all these post-mortem activities the killer leaves signs behind him, which -- according to profilers -- tells us what kind of character he is, what his motives are and the basis of his psychological fantasies connected with the crimes.
However, it may be true that mutilation doesen't necessarily have to imply signature in itself, surely personal traits things like trophee-taking, the placing of the organs over the victims' shoulder, the cuts in Eddowes' face, the positions of the bodies etc. are clear examples of what is referred to as "signature".
Either he has applied a very personal definition of this term or else he needs to read up quite a bit on the Ripper case. Because if those things aren't signature, what is?
And yes, I agree that MO is situational, but that doesen't mean we should take that for granted in every case and then stop looking at other possibilities. There could be other explanations.
"Thus the technique of killing may have evolved from 1. clumsy attack with a knife, stabbing the lower abdomen (Milwood), 2. strangulation followed by a frenzied stabbing of the torso/abdomen (Tabram), and 3. strangulation followed by slitting the throat, then mutilation of the abdomen (Nichols). The main target of all these attacks is the same: the lower torso and abdomen."
Not on Tabram, Rob. There the stabs were directed towards the throat, the chest and the upper abdominal area. There is no real focus on the genitalia.
All the best
G. Andersson, author
Sweden
(Message edited by Glenna on January 22, 2005)
The Swedes are the men That Will not be Blamed for Nothing
|
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 2947
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, January 22, 2005 - 1:51 pm: |
|
Hi Jeff,
"There are a couple of facts I'd like to clarify: You said Tabram was killed 3 weeks before Nichols but Phil stated 8th April? which is a longer gap."
That must be a mistake.
Tabram was killed on August 7th and Nichols on August 31st.
"THe Stangulation and throat cutting thing has always puzzled me. Why both? My train of thought is..is it possible that the throat cutting is part of Jacks ritual as much as a way of killing?"
It is very common for serial killers (or killers in general) to strangle their victims first -- not necessarily to kill them, but to keep them from resisting and to make them unconscious. Then they move on to the big work.
I personally don't think he saw the strangulation as killing in itself (some were probably only smothered enough to pass out, or we would see stronger marks on their throats, in my opinion), but that the throat-cutting in fact had this role. Just my two pence, though.
"However I'm also very aware how uncommon such events actually are in reality."
No, Jeff. Unfortunately they are not -- don't know what your experiences are, but not in my book. On the contrary.
And as for the Ripper context: just look at the throat cut incident of a domestic house wife in Westminster the same night as the so called "double event"!
"That is why I find the Whitchappel murders so fascinating, Jack excluded, there was also a disproportionately high number of known serial killers operating in a small space, in a small space of time. (I read somewhere that something similar happened in a mexico getto-violence over spilling into copy cat murders)"
That is true. Therefore we should be cautious about attributing every murder we see in the area during this time to the Ripper. We have the torso murders, for example; in my mind quite possibly committed by the same person and not the Ripper.
We shouldn't automatically assume that the Ripper started the whole business; some of the early murders (as I see it probably performed by someone else) could very well have triggered off the Ripper to start his work. We are sometimes taking for grated that the Ripper began, and I think that is a mistake.
Then, that we have copy-cats after the Rippers is not strange, of course, considering the vast attention the murders were given in the press and among the general public.
It is always easy to attribute a victim to a serial killer, because we expect him to deliver another body. We expect to see a victim as a part of a series, because we know a serial killer roams the area.
The illustrated papers theorized during the Tabram murder about it being apart of a series long before the police did. It wasn't until Phillips established a connection with Chapman to the previous murder on Nichols, this was really something the police considered 100%.
"I realize it's opinion but I find it difficult to beleive the lone soldier story. Infact your two killer argument interests me more as I have never excluded the possibility that Jack was two people."
In Tabram's case I think it is quite possible that two persons committed the crimes.
But I can't with any stretch of the imagination see the Ripper as two persons. No witness statements indicate such a possibility; only one person was seen together with the victims (unless we count Mr Broad Shoulders and possibly the Pipe Man together in the case of Stride, but then again, I don't think Stride was a Ripper victim at all -- that was in my mind a killing with domestic roots). Besides that there are no signs whatsoever that the Ripper collaborated with someone else. I don't subscribe to this idea at all.
"My main interest is the possitioning of Tabrams body. Was she on her back, skirts raised, legs bent, head turned away from nearest wall?"
I actually think Tabram's body position was -- in total contrast to Stride -- quite similar to the other Ripper victims, on her back and the skirt pulled up a bit. But on the other hand, this is an extremely common -- almost blueprint - body position in most killings of this nature.
"Dispite your problems with the MO you have to admit that if Jack didnt do Tabram it is quite a coinsidence that this bruttal murder took place (and it was an uncommonly violant crime even for this time) so near to the emergance of Jack himself."
Yes, of course, but stranger things have happened. I don't buy coincidences, I try and look at the fact. As I said, prostitutes lead a dangerous life and it would be natural for them to encounter all kinds of violent individuals on bank holidays or weekend nights. Stride's murder was in fact an even greater coincident (if she was not murdered by the Ripper). There are certainly signs of an evolutionary technique in the Ripper, but the developments between the three (as I see it) true canonical victims Nichols, Chapman and Eddowes are not that dramatic, if we compare it to Tabram's murder three weeks later. Not everything can be explained and accepted by the "developing killer" theory.
All the best
G. Andersson, author
Sweden
(Message edited by Glenna on January 22, 2005)
The Swedes are the men That Will not be Blamed for Nothing
|
Sir Robert Anderson
Inspector
Username: Sirrobert
Post Number: 175
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, January 22, 2005 - 2:24 pm: |
|
" (some were probably only smothered enough to pass out, or we would see stronger marks on their throats, in my opinion),"
A question, Glenn. Wouldn't partial strangulation to induce unconsciousness open up the issue of how the Ripper avoided getting blood splattered? Wouldn't the victims need to be dead to avoid spurting?
Sir Robert
"I only thought I knew"
SirRobertAnderson@gmail.com
|
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 2951
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, January 22, 2005 - 3:06 pm: |
|
A good point, Sir Robert.
This has actually puzzled me. It is actually possible to suffocate someone to death without leaving marks (it only takes some pressure on the right place -- we had such a case here not long ago). So yes, I suppose you. And since I am not an expert on the medical stuff I can't really state anything with certainty regarding that.
I have no answer to this, I am afraid.
I have been looking that one up on several occasion in a lot of forensic handbooks but there never seems to be a definitive answer about this.
All the best
G. Andersson, author
Sweden
The Swedes are the men That Will not be Blamed for Nothing
|
Frank van Oploo
Inspector
Username: Franko
Post Number: 449
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, January 22, 2005 - 5:49 pm: |
|
Hi Sir Robert & Glenn,
Maybe I'm missing or misunderstanding something, but the way I see it is that spurting and getting blood spattered don't necessarily go together. I think the Ripper cut the throats of his victims in such a way that the flow of blood was directed away from him, regardless of whether there was any spurting or not.
Of course I admit that there would be less chance of getting blood spattered if he strangled his victims to death before cutting the throat.
All the best,
Frank
"Every disadvantage has it's advantage."
Johan Cruijff
|
Frank van Oploo
Inspector
Username: Franko
Post Number: 450
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, January 22, 2005 - 6:08 pm: |
|
Hi again Glenn,
"I actually think Tabram's body position was -- in total contrast to Stride -- quite similar to the other Ripper victims, on her back and the skirt pulled up a bit. But on the other hand, this is an extremely common -- almost blueprint - body position in most killings of this nature."
I know you're not fond of 'tedious details', and I think you may regard this as one, but I'll take my chances anyway.  The thing is, I wouldn't say that Tabram's position was just 'quite similar', it was rather identical than quite similar. And her clothes weren't just pulled up a bit, they were turned up as far as the centre of the body, leaving the lower part of the body exposed.
Then, a (serious) question: what do you mean by killings of this nature? Do you have any examples?
Thanks!
Frank
"Every disadvantage has it's advantage."
Johan Cruijff
|
Sir Robert Anderson
Inspector
Username: Sirrobert
Post Number: 177
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, January 22, 2005 - 6:13 pm: |
|
"the way I see it is that spurting and getting blood spattered don't necessarily go together. "
True, Frank. But when you're killing victims in semi -public places under chaotic conditions, it sure would help in staying tidy.
Sir Robert
"I only thought I knew"
SirRobertAnderson@gmail.com
|
Frank van Oploo
Inspector
Username: Franko
Post Number: 452
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, January 22, 2005 - 7:19 pm: |
|
"But when you're killing victims in semi -public places under chaotic conditions, it sure would help in staying tidy."
Quite true, too, Sir Robert, and I think he managed to stay relatively tidy. He had to choose, if he actually took time to do that, between spending more time to strangle his victims to death and spending more time and attention to avoid getting covered in blood.
He seems to have been good at one of them at least or he was just incredibly lucky.
All the best,
Frank
"Every disadvantage has it's advantage."
Johan Cruijff
|
Sir Robert Anderson
Inspector
Username: Sirrobert
Post Number: 179
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, January 22, 2005 - 7:31 pm: |
|
"He seems to have been good at one of them at least or he was just incredibly lucky."
My personal belief is that it points at someone quite physically strong. The Ripper seems to have choked his victims with such overwhelming force that they couldn't cry out. (MJK's apparent/alledged cry of MURDER! not withstanding.)
Sir Robert
"I only thought I knew"
SirRobertAnderson@gmail.com
|
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 2952
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, January 22, 2005 - 8:19 pm: |
|
Sir Robert,
"My personal belief is that it points at someone quite physically strong. The Ripper seems to have choked his victims with such overwhelming force that they couldn't cry out. (MJK's apparent/alledged cry of MURDER! not withstanding.)"
No, that I find questionable.
Yes, I do think that he was quite physically strong but not necessarily for the choking part.
As I said, if this was the case the victims would bear marks from this.
Secondly, again, this is not necessary. Choking someone without any force at all is possible.
Besides, all indicates that it was the surprise factor that made the victims defenseless, not strength as such.
All the best
G. Anderson, author
Sweden
The Swedes are the men That Will not be Blamed for Nothing
|
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 2953
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, January 22, 2005 - 8:30 pm: |
|
Frank,
"The thing is, I wouldn't say that Tabram's position was just 'quite similar', it was rather identical than quite similar. And her clothes weren't just pulled up a bit, they were turned up as far as the centre of the body, leaving the lower part of the body exposed."
Yes yes, you bugger, I know. I just preferred to express myself cautiously, since I didn't remember in detail completely. If I had wrote "identical" I would probably have gotten the wrap for that instead. I have learnt...
"Then, a (serious) question: what do you mean by killings of this nature? Do you have any examples?"
What do you mean? I didn't mean totally identical to Tabram. I referred to practically all violent female killings of sexual nature, serial or not. This is probably the most common body position seen in such murders, and it usually indicates attempts to degrade the victims (if it's a signature) but it could also be a natural result of the nature of the attack. The victim on her back; legs apart, the clothes drawn up... This is something you come across in a majority of cases, and it doesen't have to be a result of a deliberate post mortem act in a serial killer context (although that can never be ruled out). The point is that it is so common that it hardly tell us anyting in the question of who did it -- the Ripper or not.
All the best
G. Andersson, author
Sweden
The Swedes are the men That Will not be Blamed for Nothing
|
Sir Robert Anderson
Inspector
Username: Sirrobert
Post Number: 180
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, January 22, 2005 - 8:52 pm: |
|
"Secondly, again, this is not necessary. Choking someone without any force at all is possible."
I hadn't thought of that. How do you go about doing it? (Just asking - no intention of putting it to practical use. Well, not today at any rate. We're snowed in.)
Sir Robert
"I only thought I knew"
SirRobertAnderson@gmail.com
|
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 2956
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, January 22, 2005 - 9:15 pm: |
|
Does everybody here besides us have snow?
We haven't seen a single snow flake since Christmas Eve...
Sir Robert,
Please do not think I know this from personal experience or practice  but there is a certain point on the neck that only need a very light pressure, and if the suffocaton was made by force this would leave clear marks on the neck.
We had a murder case here in Sweden two years ago, where a girl was found in her bed in her own locked apartment with no visible signs on the neck at all. The police didn't discover that it was a murder by suffocation until during the more thorough post mortem. Until then it had been treated as an unexplained death by natural causes and the police not initially called to the scene, resulting in the murder scene had been totally cleaned away in the meantime, destroying all the traces.
So suffocation doesen't at all require force.
Then there are other signs of suffocation (which most of the Ripper victims display), like bleeding in the eyes and swollen tongue or lacerations on the tongue. Unfortunately the medical doctor on the scene in this Swedish case (who was not not a police doctor but an ordinary emergency doctor) missed those, since there were no marks on the throat whatsoever.
the post mortem showed that it was made with very little force. And I have seen several other cases of this. I also have this mentioned in apolice handbook, but cant find it at the moment.
All the best
G. Andersson, author
Sweden
(Message edited by Glenna on January 22, 2005)
The Swedes are the men That Will not be Blamed for Nothing
|
Frank van Oploo
Inspector
Username: Franko
Post Number: 454
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, January 22, 2005 - 9:47 pm: |
|
Tjena Glenn,
"If I had wrote "identical" I would probably have gotten the wrap for that instead."
Not from me you wouldn't, not from me, my Swedish friend...
Thanks for answering my question. I wasn't trying to attack you there if you thought so. Your answer was exactly what I was looking for. Thanks again.
All the best,
Frank
"Every disadvantage has it's advantage."
Johan Cruijff
|
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 2961
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, January 22, 2005 - 9:51 pm: |
|
No sweat, Frank.
(i know it was no attack, just kidding... but it is true that sometimes you may get wrap for things no matter how you put it -- I have learnt to be a bit more cautious, though, if I am not certain on a detail).
All the best
G. Andersson, author
Sweden
The Swedes are the men That Will not be Blamed for Nothing
|
Adam Went
Inspector
Username: Adamw
Post Number: 157
Registered: 12-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, January 23, 2005 - 5:56 am: |
|
Hi all,
I'd just like to throw a few more of my own opinions on a few points that have been raised here recently.
Sir Robert Anderson, you wrote:
"My personal belief is that it points at someone quite physically strong. The Ripper seems to have choked his victims with such overwhelming force that they couldn't cry out. (MJK's apparent/alledged cry of MURDER! not withstanding.)"
I question the strength of the killer. He was someone agile and fit, certainly, but I don't know if he was overly strong physically.
Because it wasn't just Mary Kelly who was heard to have cried out. Elizabeth Stride was also heard giving 3 screams, yet fairly quiet ones. And there is a question mark over a possible scream heard from Polly Nichols. Not only that, but there was evidence that both Elizabeth Stride and Mary Kelly had resisted their attackers. For women, who had spent years on the streets, and were therefore worn down with various things, and also being attacked suddenly and likely by surprise, to still be capable of resisting indicates to me that the killer may not have been that strong. My personal belief is that the man Schwartz saw attacking Liz Stride on the street is the Ripper, and if that is the case, then Liz even managed to get away from him briefly.
Furthermore, if he knew what he was doing with a knife, and became accustomed to such things, it wouldn't take him super human strength to do what he did. So, agile/fit, definitely, but physically strong I think is questionable.
Glenn, you wrote:
"You forget the maybe most consistent element in the Ripper's MO -- the cut throat."
I've said this before, and I'll repeat it again here.
I do not believe the killings of Jack the Ripper could have been done by someone who just lurched out of the shadows and started ripping women to pieces. He surely had previous experience with attacks. Martha Tabram fits the bill of escalating brutality, indicated in the other canonical victims. He stabs Martha, but doesn't mutilate her. He then has a build up of blood lust over the next 3 weeks, before striking out with a new method on Polly Nichols. He then continues on with the same method with the other victims.
It's also important to note that police of the time merged Tabram, Nichols and Chapman together into 1 case. They apparently considered her as a victim, as she was for several decades afterwards. This is an important factor, as the police of the time had the best overview.
"I actually think Tabram's body position was -- in total contrast to Stride -- quite similar to the other Ripper victims, on her back and the skirt pulled up a bit."
Stride's killer was interrupted during his work. And Diemschutz testified to having prodded her to see if she was alright or not, since it was almost total darkness and he couldn't really tell. Both of these factors put together could contribute to why the positioning of Stride's body was different to other victims. And in any case, her body was found in a location like the other Ripper victims. Next to a wall, and kind of behind the gate. Note Annie Chapman. Next to a fence, and partly hidden beside the entrance to the doorway. So you see, they are similar.
"Not on Tabram, Rob. There the stabs were directed towards the throat, the chest and the upper abdominal area. There is no real focus on the genitalia."
Somehow I don't think the killer was focused on much at all in the killing of Tabram. The mutilations on the other victims were, I believe, thought out. In the case of Tabram, it was more rage and fury than being meticulous.
"As I said, if this was the case the victims would bear marks from this."
But there were marks. Haven't you ever read about the bruises that were seen around the shoulder/jaw/upper chest area? Whilst I don't think the killer was overly strong, there was indeed marks on the victims.
I think I've covered everything I wanted to for now.
Regards,
Adam.
"Listen very carefully, I shall say this only once."
- Kirsten Cooke,"Allo' Allo'"
|
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 2962
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, January 23, 2005 - 7:05 am: |
|
Hi Adam,
I agree with you on the strength issue. The only mistake you do is that you in your reasoning take for granted that Stride and Kelly were Ripper victims. I know from what you told me that you really are not as 100% sure of this anyway as you make it out to be, so therefore there is no reason to lock yourself into a corner like that. Therefore you shouldn't refer to Stride and Kelly in order to prove a point you believe in.
"I do not believe the killings of Jack the Ripper could have been done by someone who just lurched out of the shadows and started ripping women to pieces."
And I say it again: even if we include Tabram that is exactly what he did anyway! Three weeks later after a frenzy stab murder he starts to mutilate, focus on the genitalia, cut their throats to a degree that he nearly severs the head etc. -- out of nowhere! Three weeks later! Where the heck did those ideas come from? Not from the Tabram murder, because the similaritites just aren't there. And ideas that he with relatively small changes and additions continues to use in at least three murders in a row. So even if he was Tabram's killer, he as a murderer really comes out of nowhere anyway with these elements.
Apart from the cuts in the lower torso on the Ripper victims, I see no evolution at all from Tabram to Nichols. They are instead quite different. The changes in three weeks from Tabram to Nichols are pretty much more dramatic than between Nichols, Chapman and Eddowes.
"It's also important to note that police of the time merged Tabram, Nichols and Chapman together into 1 case. They apparently considered her as a victim, as she was for several decades afterwards. This is an important factor, as the police of the time had the best overview."
No, not really -- not in the beginning. The papers created a connection between Emma Smith, Tabram and Nichols long before the police did. It wasn't until Chapman and Dr Phillips this link really started to take off on the police's part.
"Stride's killer was interrupted during his work. And Diemschutz testified to having prodded her to see if she was alright or not, since it was almost total darkness and he couldn't really tell. Both of these factors put together could contribute to why the positioning of Stride's body was different to other victims."
Not the darkness thing. Dutfield Yard was not much darker than Mitre Square, where the murder occurred in a corner and the nearest gas lamp stood on the opposite side of the square. I believe the Ripper had no real problem doing his thing in darkness.
On the other hand, an interruption in Stride's case could of course explain why she lay as she did, but once again, since I don't believe her to be a Ripper victim I find it questionable to apply details fro Stride on other ripper victims. Once again you are taking things for granted regarding Stride and then assumes this could explains things in the Ripper murders as a whole. What if your assertions about Stride should turn out to be wrong? Then the whole reasoning falls together like a house of cards. It is dangerous to build any reasoning from Stride in order to prove things in the other murders. This must be done with caution.
"Somehow I don't think the killer was focused on much at all in the killing of Tabram."
Well, from what we can see he seemed to be clearly foucused on the genitalia and the womb. Tabram's killer was not.
"The mutilations on the other victims were, I believe, thought out. In the case of Tabram, it was more rage and fury than being meticulous."
You just explained why I dont believe it was the same man. Thank you for proving my point.
"But there were marks. Haven't you ever read about the bruises that were seen around the shoulder/jaw/upper chest area? Whilst I don't think the killer was overly strong, there was indeed marks on the victims."
No, only from grabbing or pushing on the body. Not marks from strangulation! I am talking about strangulation marks on the throat. You don't find any of those on the Ripper victims, which was the whole point.
The bruises on the shoulders and the chin probably derived from holding the women during the throat cut or to push them onto the ground. Not from strangulation, which was the whole issue of that discussion.
All the best
G. Andersson, author
Sweden
The Swedes are the men That Will not be Blamed for Nothing
|
Sir Robert Anderson
Inspector
Username: Sirrobert
Post Number: 185
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, January 23, 2005 - 11:53 am: |
|
One angle that I think needs to be considered is that the killer of Tabram may have limited himself in terms of what he wanted to do because he may have felt that Tabram's friend, Pearly Poll, was waiting for her. Like Stride, a case of Rippus Interuptus....
Sir Robert
"I only thought I knew"
SirRobertAnderson@gmail.com
|
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 2976
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, January 23, 2005 - 1:12 pm: |
|
Sorry. I certainly don't see Tabram as a Ripper Interuptus, Sir Robert. The murderer was most certainly done with her.
And I am not sure Stride was one either...
All the best
G. Andersson, author
Sweden
The Swedes are the men That Will not be Blamed for Nothing
|
Sir Robert Anderson
Inspector
Username: Sirrobert
Post Number: 191
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, January 23, 2005 - 10:23 pm: |
|
"Sorry. I certainly don't see Tabram as a Ripper Interuptus, Sir Robert. The murderer was most certainly done with her. "
I don't how we can say that with certainty.
I accept MJK as a victim, and therefore I lean towards the notion that that crime scene represents what Jack would have done, given unlimited time.
Or the luxury of time, more accurately.
Sir Robert
"I only thought I knew"
SirRobertAnderson@gmail.com
|
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 2988
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Monday, January 24, 2005 - 3:48 am: |
|
Hi Sir Robert,
Well, it's just my interpretation of it.
I don't get the feeling (or rather: I don't see any signs of) that the murderer of Tabram was interrupted. And even if he was, he managed to have quite a few things done to her either way, that tells us quite much.
"I accept MJK as a victim, and therefore I lean towards the notion that that crime scene represents what Jack would have done, given unlimited time.
Or the luxury of time, more accurately."
Yes, that is the popular view.
I can't prove it and I am not 100% certain, but I have serious doubts about MJK. And besides, I have always felt that the "luxury of time" argument doesen't hold up to explain some of the differences. I can see why people believe it, but I don't really buy it straight off.
All the best
G. Andersson, author
Sweden
The Swedes are the men That Will not be Blamed for Nothing
|
|
Use of these
message boards implies agreement and consent to our Terms of Use.
The views expressed here in no way reflect the views of the owners and
operators of Casebook: Jack the Ripper.
Our old message board content (45,000+ messages) is no longer available online, but a complete archive
is available on the Casebook At Home Edition, for 19.99 (US) plus shipping.
The "At Home" Edition works just like the real web site, but with absolutely no advertisements.
You can browse it anywhere - in the car, on the plane, on your front porch - without ever needing to hook up to
an internet connection. Click here to buy the Casebook At Home Edition.
|
|
|
|
