|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Gary Alan Weatherhead
Inspector
Username: Garyw
Post Number: 165
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, July 26, 2003 - 9:09 am: |       |
Robert
Ah Yes, thats it. Voices from the dead. And people wonder why these chaps go from job to job. Unless he was playing the I'm crazy as a loon game that many like to play. In America they often play it to avoid meeting their makers. I quess they would play it in your neck of the woods to get into a comfortable mental hospital.
I don't know about over there but here the prisons are just filled with criminals
As far as Tabram is concerned, Inspector Abberline, whoe opinions I think we all respect, continued to believe Tabram was a JTR victim after many had begun to question her status. Sir Robert Anderson, whose opinions I don't respect felt she was a victim too. But then he knew who JTR was and just wasn't telling. It sounds like something a petulant child would say.
Best
Gary |
Robert Charles Linford
Inspector
Username: Robert
Post Number: 482
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, July 26, 2003 - 9:42 am: | |
Hi Gary
I'm not terribly clued up on other murderers (something I hope to remedy), but, just from memory, I think this was during Sutcliffe's trial, when he was going for an insanity ruling. He claimed to have heard a voice emanating from the grave of a Polish or Russian man, at the cemetery where he worked.
I think I remember one of the newspapers reporting all this, and adding that since then the Polish or Russian man's widow had become the target of sickos, weirdos etc. It then gave the name of the road where the woman was living! It's so nice to have a sensitive Press.
Robert |
Gary Alan Weatherhead
Inspector
Username: Garyw
Post Number: 166
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, July 26, 2003 - 10:00 am: | |
Hi Robert
This is a paraphrase from the local paper a month or so ago. 'The police refused to release the informants name for his own safety. But the informant, his cousin, gave police the information needed. to set up a sting..etc.'
Best
Gary |
Caroline Anne Morris
Inspector
Username: Caz
Post Number: 228
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, July 28, 2003 - 9:53 am: | |
Hi Randy,
I suppose it's also possible that Kelly's murder still didn't give him ultimate satisfaction, in which case he may have concluded that if this didn't do it for him, nothing could. Perhaps his mental and physical health faded away with the realisation that this was as good as it was going to get and it still wasn't good enough?
Love,
Caz |
Robert Charles Linford
Inspector
Username: Robert
Post Number: 489
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Monday, July 28, 2003 - 8:10 pm: | |
Hi Randy, Caz
Randy, I tend to think that maybe he had the idea for the ripping on the spot. Nichols received two stab wounds. If he was interrupted, then presumably he did these first (while he was still in Tabram mode) and then he stumbled on an idea...but you could be right, he may have fantasised about the ripping beforehand.
I agree it's suggestive that the shortest periods between murders were also after interruptions - that's if Stride was indeed a victim (always a big "if"). Heaven knows I don't understand his motivations, but if he was prepared to kill again within an hour of almost being caught, it sounds like he was desperate.
But that's one of the things that makes me wonder about the gap to Kelly. Forty days seems a bit long anyway, but if we're talking about a man who could kill twice in an hour...I can't help feeling something happened to him. Maybe a short prison sentence for an unrelated offence?
Of course he may have been waiting for a chance to murder indoors, and people have pointed out that Kelly was killed on almost her first night alone. But there were other single women with their own rooms, and I doubt that he was targetting Kelly in particular.
I also find it hard to believe that he was a client whom Kelly brought home, as that would mean that he waited patiently for her to undress and fold her clothes neatly.
I doubt if he stopped killing because he was satisfied, although the "awful glut" may have quietened him down for a while. I feel he'd have been back eventually in some shape or form, unless he was incarcerated or he died. Caz, I agree that if he didn't find satisfaction, it's quite possible he went crazy or killed himself.
What puzzles me is, as his "hits" seem to have been so difficult, surely he must have had several misses? There must have been times when a prostitute led him to somewhere he didn't like the look of - or maybe some member of the public came and stood too near. The prostitutes wouldn't have minded who heard or saw, as long as it wasn't a policeman, but he would. If he'd been prowling the same streets night after night, having to say "I've changed my mind", you'd have thought the prostitutes would have mentioned this suspicious person.
Of course it could all equally well have happened the way AP sees it - every now and then one of them just wouldn't leave him alone and thus triggered him into killing.
Robert |
Randy Scholl
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Monday, July 28, 2003 - 7:00 pm: | |
Hi Caz.
I agree, and I'm glad you caught that. However, it seems to me that both possibilities are two sides of the same coin. Or better, two possible ways in which the issue could be resolved -- in the one case because he attained his ultimate satisfaction in the deeds, or in the latter case because he realized that the deeds were ultimately unsatisfying.
(Which of the two scenarios is most likely I think depends a great deal on whether the killer was focusing primarily upon the commission of the acts for their own sake, or on how much shock value they had on the public. If it were primarily for shock value, it seems to me much more likely that he'd gain great satisfaction from his last act, and be able to rest upon his laurels after that point.)
As for mental and/or physical deterioration, I can't say for sure. He may have at worst sunk into a quiet but manageable desperation because no more kicks were to be found. He may even have realized the colossal folly of his actions and (implausible as it may seem) straightened out and became an upstanding citizen. |
Monty
Inspector
Username: Monty
Post Number: 199
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, July 30, 2003 - 8:29 am: | |
Robert,
Im not sure about a mortuary attendant. But Im curious, as you are, on the lack of damage to the organs.
Garys statement in his Friday post.."Or how about a security guard who might have liked to rub shoulders with the police and obtain information on their habits and practices.
Now that does grab me. It goes along with an idea I once had that the killer studied or gleamed info regarding the police activities.
To me he seems to have a quest for knowledge (which, as we all know, is power).....that and his own agenda.
Monty
|
Robert Charles Linford
Inspector
Username: Robert
Post Number: 497
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, July 30, 2003 - 12:16 pm: | |
Hi Monty
And I suppose then as now a certain number of security people were ex-policemen, like Morris (although I don't suspect him).
By the way, Monty, Jeff on the "Liz Stride - the Murder" thread wants to know if six inches is the kind of length of cut anyone would get if they cut a woman's throat.
Robert |
Monty
Inspector
Username: Monty
Post Number: 203
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 05, 2003 - 10:11 am: | |
Robert,
I guess it would depend on how much of a struggle there is.
Ear to ear is roughly 6 inches isnt it ??
To be honest with you, I havent a clue...sorry.
Monty
|
Diana
Detective Sergeant
Username: Diana
Post Number: 121
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 06, 2003 - 9:36 am: | |
vis-a-vis why he quit. Another possibility is conversion. During the Watergate hearings here in the US one of the perpetrators, Chuck Colson found Christ and did a complete turnaround. The Salvation Army was very active in Whitechapel at that time, holding street meetings, etc. Suppose he had a conversion experience. |
Gary Alan Weatherhead
Inspector
Username: Garyw
Post Number: 199
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 06, 2003 - 9:49 am: | |
Hi Robert
We are still waiting for your answer to Jeff's query: And what special knowledge do you have that would prompt him to ask you such a question?
All The Best
Gary |
Robert Charles Linford
Chief Inspector
Username: Robert
Post Number: 524
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 06, 2003 - 10:00 am: | |
Hi Gary
My answer to Jeff's query is : I don't know.
As for special knowledge, my only knowledge of throat-cutting is with my own, while shaving.
I find shaving a nuisance...particularly on the nights when I turn into a werewolf.
Robert |
Gary Alan Weatherhead
Inspector
Username: Garyw
Post Number: 201
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 06, 2003 - 10:21 am: | |
Hi Robert
If your using a blade long and sharp enough to sever a carotid artery, I would try a safety razor for your own protection.
All The Best
Gary |
Robert Charles Linford
Chief Inspector
Username: Robert
Post Number: 528
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 06, 2003 - 12:21 pm: | |
Hi Gary and Diana
Gary, I wouldn't be foolish enough to shave with a blade such as you describe. Oh, no no no no no...I've been using a samurai sword. Trouble is, it's a bit unwieldy, and every time I cut my head off I sustain yet more cuts as I can no longer see in the mirror.
Diana, what you suggest is I suppose a remote possibility. But wouldn't someone who'd undergone a genuine moral transformation have handed himself in to the police, so as to expiate his sins?
Robert |
Gary Alan Weatherhead
Inspector
Username: Garyw
Post Number: 202
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 06, 2003 - 2:25 pm: | |
Hello
Getting back to Martha, Sugden considered that it was more likely than not that she was a ripper victim. He states as follows "...(T)he departures from the Ripper's modus operandi are not necessarily significant. It is a mistake to think that a killers technique will inevitably remain the same. Experience and circumstance alike prompt development and change. The techniques of some serial killers are known to have varied much more dramatically than is suggested by Martha's case....(T)he Son of Sam...only reverted to use of the revolver after an unsucessful and particularly gruesome attempt to knife a girl to death...(A)nd Peter Sutcliffe strangled his twelth victim...with a ligature to...escape the stigma of his nickname, The Yorkshire Ripper."
He continues "In time and place, type of victim, the sudden silent onslought, the signs of strangulation, the multiple stab wounds, the absence of weopons or clues left at the murder scene, above all in the frenzied character of the attack,(and) in virtually every other respect the Tabram murder is kin to its successors" THE COMPLETE HISTORY OF JACK THE RIPPER, SUGDEN (revised)pg 347-8
Sugden also points out that she was left in a very similar position to the other victims with her clothes pulled up. Sugden believes that this was a more disorganized attack then those that followed.and he believes, I think quite correctly that the killers signature or m.o. evolved during the subsequent attacks.
Many people place great importance in the opinions of the investigators and authorities who were present at the time of the killings and justifiably so. They had access to files and information which may be gone forever. Of the primary officials associated with the ripper case only Mcnaghtan discounted Tabram as a victim and he was not involved in the day to day investigation. I guess you would have to call him a near contemporary authority. In fairness though he presumably had access to the files before they were plundered.
Of course the big question is the methodology of the killing. As is noted above killers develop and change their signatures over time. (I read somewhere that there is a slight difference between m.o. and signature but I would say it sounds like a meaningless distinction)
We all know that she was stabbed 39 times all of which could have been done with a clasp-knife except for one wound which deeply pierced her chest. The powers that be said it could have been a bayonet. This is what caused Mcnaghten to discount her as a victim. Sugden believes he was wrong and the A-Z states the other side of the argument. "Jon Ogan, however, points out that IT WAS NOT BELIEVED FOR LONG THAT A BAYONET WAS ONE OF THE WEOPONS USED TO ATTACK HER; moreover there was ample time between the last sighting of Martha alive at 11:45 p.m. and Crow's assumed sighting of her body at 3:30a.m. in which she could have found another client and taken him to the landing." (pg 445)(my emphasis)
Did the doctor decide she was killed by a bayonet because that is what the evidence shows or did he come to the simple conclusion that she was last seen with a soldier and therefore the longer deeper wound COULD have been a bayonet wound. I have looked at bayonets placed alongside long knives and the differences between some of the various weopons are very difficult to tell. No-one saw the weopon and the doctor has made a surmise based on the wound. The wound cannot tell the length of the knife, since the instrument may not be inserted all the way. The type of blade and shape can be surmised by the nature of the wound. However, a great deal depends on how the knife was inserted and how it was retracted.
Why would the soldier kill Tabram after being eyewitnessed with her as well as her friend for most of the evening? What would his motive have been? Robbery can be ruled out. What does that leave. Logically it leads to the conclusion that she finished with her client and found her killer in the time between 11:45 and 3:30. What would have been his motive. Most likely it would have been a sexual serial lust murder undertaken for the first time by a man who evolved into the more experinced, more purposeful, but more organized killer known as JTR.
It is interesting to note that Mcnaghtan may be responsible for a genuine ripper murder to have been discounted because of confusion about the weopon used to kill Martha.
All The Best
Gary |
Gary Alan Weatherhead
Inspector
Username: Garyw
Post Number: 203
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 06, 2003 - 2:34 pm: | |
Hi Robert
Speaking of cutting your head off with a sword I was tempted to do the same a short while ago as the long arduous post I was just working on had to be retyped from scratch because the cat walked on the keyboard and deleted it.
Best
Gary |
Robert Charles Linford
Chief Inspector
Username: Robert
Post Number: 531
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 06, 2003 - 5:46 pm: | |
Hi Gary
I know how you feel. My old computer used to freeze sometimes, and if it did this I had to switch off and switch on again, thereby losing any typing I'd done.
Perhaps the cat was protesting about the appearance of Barnaby and Burgho at the top of the screen!
I think the doctor said the main wound may have been done by a dagger or a bayonet. It's possible he was led towards the bayonet idea by the police investigations, but I don't think he actually categorically insisted it was a bayonet, did he?
One of the wounds was apparently three inches in length and one in depth. This looks a bit like an embryonic rip.
I do think there's a fair chance that Tabram was an early victim, by a killer who hadn't yet discovered what it was that "turned him on".
Re MO, I have a nagging feeling - and it may be irrational - but I feel that, in some way, Jack must be given some sort of "credit" for creativity or lateral thinking. He was just about the first to do this sort of thing - leaving women disembowelled on the streets of a mighty metropolis, then escaping on foot. It may seem to us no longer startling, but in those days it must have been astonishing. It wasn't the kind of thing that would occur to many people to do, though some sick individuals may have thought about it. So he may have had the capacity for flexibility in his MO.
Robert |
Gary Alan Weatherhead
Inspector
Username: Garyw
Post Number: 209
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 06, 2003 - 7:37 pm: | |
Hi Robert
You are correct the doctor who did the post motem was Dr. Killeen. He had two years experience as a doctor and did indeed use the words bayonet or dagger. He was called upon to do the post-mortem because Dr. Wynne Baxter was on vacation. I think his inexperience was the reason Sugden was cautious about some aspects of the medical evidence. Sugden also notes that "Some of the wounds may have been inflicted with a bayonet. But it is important to note that he did not positively assert that a bayonet had been used, only that the wound on the breast bone had been inflicted with a strong bladed weopon which COULD HAVE BEEN (authors emphasis) a bayonet or a dagger" (Sugden)pg 30.
It is also noted that bayonets could be bought on the street for a penny and children often were found using them as playthings.
Killeen was responsible for the ambidextrous notion and being ambidextrous myself I can't picture myself slashing with one hand and thrusting with the other while the victim was down on the ground. For example If I was on the victims right side I would use the right hand over the top to stab. The left would be too awkward to use except in a difficult backhanded slash.
An interesting point about the possible embryonic rip. That didn't occur to me.
I believe in an evolving M.O. which may have begun with the attack on Ada Wilson.
Jack was the first killer I am aware of to position the victims in a degrading position with their legs open for the ultimate in shock value and authority defiance. Compare this with the signature of the Torso Killer.
Best Regards
Gary |
Jon Smyth
Detective Sergeant
Username: Jon
Post Number: 71
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 06, 2003 - 8:20 pm: | |
Hi Gary
A little error?
"You are correct the doctor who did the post motem was Dr. Killeen. He had two years experience as a doctor and did indeed use the words bayonet or dagger. He was called upon to do the post-mortem because Dr. Wynne Baxter was on vacation."
Wynne Baxter was a Coroner, he was on vacation so his deputy Mr Collier presided over the inquest.
Dr Killeen would have performed the poste mortem regardless.
I know, a minor point. And it does not change the point you are attempting to make, re; the inexperience of Dr Killeen.
But, an autopsy has its procedures and regardless what we as laypeople think about the 'possible' experience or inexperience of a doctor, if the established procedures are followed there is little chance of making the mistake to which you refer.
But then, even the experienced make mistakes.
Regards, Jon |
Gary Alan Weatherhead
Inspector
Username: Garyw
Post Number: 210
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 06, 2003 - 8:58 pm: | |
Hi Jon
Thanks for making the correction I knew Baxter was a Coroner, I don't know what I was thinking. Sugden was, however, not fully confident in Killeen As long as that point gets through and we get closer to the truth I am not concerned with being 100% right.
All The Best
Gary |
Jon Smyth
Detective Sergeant
Username: Jon
Post Number: 73
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 06, 2003 - 10:58 pm: | |
It is a shame that in so many issues we discuss it is not always what was said, but what was not said, that we have to 'assume' was meant, that we end up disagreeing on.
For instance, the issue of the wound in the breastbone. Killeen felt sure the weapon that caused this wound was not the same that caused the other 38 stabs, we've discussed this many times.
When a knife pierces the breastbone we suspect it will leave a hole which resembles a cross-section of the blade that passed through.
Killeen does not go into such detail so we are left assuming that he was comparing the width & depth of the wounds.
If the breastbone had a hole pierced through it which was wedged shape, or an elongated triangle, then this would resemble a stout-backed knife, which could be either a bayonet or dagger.
We have to assume this wound is either deeper or wider than those others which penetrated the flesh.
Hence, we are left with an accumulation of assumptions which to disagree on.
Such is this aggravating series of Whitechapel murders.........
But, it is perhaps presumptious to suggest Killeen was inexperienced, when it is us who know so little about what he saw.
Regards, Jon
|
Gary Alan Weatherhead
Inspector
Username: Garyw
Post Number: 213
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, August 07, 2003 - 12:45 am: | |
Hi Jon
Killeen unfortunately did not testify as to the shape or type of wound directed at the breastbone. If he had we might be able to rule out a soldier as having been the killer because the bayonet which made a triangular impression was discontinued by the military the year before.
As far as experience goes he did have less than two years as a surgeon according to the medical directories. In addition we do not know for how long he acted as a Police Divisional Surgeon. Of course he may have been competent for his length of service or vice versa.
Nevertheless when Chief Inspector Swanson prepared a 'special report' on the case he elected not to mention a bayonet. Instead he used the term knife or dagger. This may mean nothing or it may indicate a lack of confidence formed by Swanson based on Killeen's experience and equivocation regarding the weopon. However, at this point I agree that we are taking supposition too far for my liking. But,as you say this is what we are left with in these murders.
All The Best
Gary |
Jon Smyth
Detective Sergeant
Username: Jon
Post Number: 101
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, August 16, 2003 - 10:02 pm: | |
Here is a demonstration of the difference between a knife wound and a dagger (bayonet?).
http://medlib.med.utah.edu/WebPath/FORHTML/FOR115.html
Actually the site is a good one, if pathology is in your blood.
Regards, Jon |
Robert Charles Linford
Chief Inspector
Username: Robert
Post Number: 592
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, August 17, 2003 - 5:45 am: | |
Hi Jon
Thanks for posting that link. Gruesome but interesting.
There was one image of stab wounds by a former boyfriend of the victim, and the comment was "the number and location of the stab wounds suggest extreme anger with a sexual motivation" - I found myself wondering where it would be possible to stab a woman without suggesting a sexual motivation. Does it look sexual to you?
Robert |
Glenn L Andersson
Detective Sergeant
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 92
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, August 17, 2003 - 7:10 am: | |
Hi Robert,
"I found myself wondering where it would be possible to stab a woman without suggesting a sexual motivation. Does it look sexual to you?"
Well, I could very much imagine that "ordinary" rage or anger could be reasons for such a deed, it doesen't necessarily have to be sexually related, I feel, even though I've found it usually is in most cases I've come across.
Yes, gruesome site indeed.
All the best
Glenn L Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
|
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.
|
|
|
|
