Ripper Victim?

[Fisherman]

Michael writes:

"Im sorry....is the contention now a head blow occurred but missed making the coroners headlines? Man...."

This, Michael, has always been on the table. You´ll find it qouted in both Beggs and Sugdens books. It was in the press at the time, and it is not the type of material that the sensation press would have cooked up on their own, I believe. It´s in Tabrams timeline on these very boards, and I would say that it has never been questioned.

As for all the theorizing about Martha Tabram receiving numerous stabs standing up, I think that is not a very viable suggestion. To begin with, I agree with Sam that it would be hard to do what the killer did in such a position, and, not least, people who are stabbed standing up are people who are conscious. They scream.

All the best, Michael!
Fisherman

[Sam Flynn]

what I've read over the years fully supports the possibility that Tabram was a victim of the Whitechapel murderer.

Hi Rob,

I'd say that "doesn't rule out the possibility" would be a better way of thinking about it.

[Nothing to see]

Jack strangled, throttled, choked his victims into eternity then he slashed their throats. That's Jack's MO. Then he begins ripping. That's also Jack's MO. As he matured he went further into destruction.

There is nothing about Tabram's murder that resembles Jack's MO. The only reason she is considered one of Jack's gets is because she was in the area and he started not long after she died.

I go with Killeen's statements. 2 different weapons. I think, 2 different men.

Not Jack.

[Sam Flynn]

Jack strangled, throttled, choked his victims into eternity...

That aspect of his "MO" has never been firmly established, NTS - indeed, it might only have applied to one of the canonical victims. The bit about throat cutting and "ripping" is common to four out of the five, so you're on safer ground there.

[Shelley]

Robert,
Ressler, Keppel are good, because i've used them too. Holmes & Holmes you'll have to get a book of thiers, but they are correct that MO remains similar, because some whacks on the head aren't really classed as MO, it falls into signature ( if they prefer a knock out that way and sometimes it's an adaption as you need to take other things into consideration if neccessary), and the mention of ' similar ' isn't the word 'same ' signature does not change because the needs and fantasies will remain with the criminal, however this does not rule out that needs and fantasies get stronger over time, but with those adaptions you can still find the signature, that's what is meant by signature. Stabbing & cutting are different in MO and it's style, of course you may get a killer who is mentally ill who cuts open a body, any pauses he may have, plus what is going through his mind at the time he may by pure accident stab the body, or have a frustration rather than anger and take it out on the body and a stab or stabs can occur, so some stabbing occurs, overall his mind will revert back to the cutting and his intent, so then the majority is cutting and some little stabbing, this will not be held as one who stabs...
Someone who mutilates and extracts organs does not move on to a victim later and hacks them to pieces so that organs cannot either be extracted, or leaves organs behind so that none are taken away, they will still take the same organs plus further organs from the same body. This is what Holmes & Holmes are talking about, also try Martens MD PhD and Lyle MD PhD, Dr Stone ( forensic psychiatrist), also Bartol & Bartol as well as Geberth.
Overall, psychology is primary the source for working out personalities. Psychiatry is concerned with mental illness & disorders of the mind, so it's good to get a bit of psychiatry and understand the mind.

Hope that helps Robert

Shelley

[Shelley]

That aspect of his "MO" has never been firmly established, NTS - indeed, it might only have applied to one of the canonical victims. The bit about throat cutting and "ripping" is common to four out of the five, so you're on safer ground there.

Sam,
Your'e right that this has not been firmly established in Jack's MO, however i would personally go with a ' Chokehold ' (not full strangulation.....he could have picked this up from seeing a trained police officer tackle a vicious and violent criminal) to render his victims unconcious, no blow to the head as with Tabram. Chapman has some signs in her body of strangulation but nothing with firm reliability such as petechiae in the eyeballs, nothing mentioned that this was around her neck or under the eyes. Personally i would rule out throttling.
And personally i would think Jack either moved away out of whitechapel, or he committed suicide or he died soon after, maybe locked way in an asylum....But womb to tomb still rings around in my head. I came accross Colin Wilson ( criminologist), has mentioned that Jack probably committed suicide. But there is life,death & rebirth too.

[Ben]

There is nothing about Tabram's murder that resembles Jack's MO.

Yes there is.

Murdering prostitutes with knives in the same very small, concentrated locality, and then attacking their lifeless bodies with a knife is still a very consistent method, irrespective of the specifics, most of which could easily have been discovered by the killer as he progressed.

[Sam Flynn]

It's the speed of that progression that bothers me, Ben, and the fact that he settles on an apparently consistent method so soon thereafter. Within a mere three weeks, someone turns up who inflicts very deep cuts to women's throats, going on to slash open their abdomens - a pattern repeated consistently over a short period of barely over two months. In the strict context of the Whitechapel Murders, the multiple stabbing seen in Tabram's murder is never seen again... or before, for that matter.

irrespective of the specifics

... I think we should respect them, though

[Chava]

The 39 stab wounds suggest a rage-filled, out-of-control killer. The later murders don't give me the same impression of anger. It's certainly possible that whoever killed Tabram didn't kill the others. However it seems to me equally possible that whoever killed Tabram out of rage might have discovered within himself a source of pleasure that he had never experienced before. And from then on went looking for it among the vulnerable prostitutes of the area.

[Nothing to see]

Jack matured as he killed. Each one became more graphic as he became more sure of himself. But he does have an MO and Tabram doesn't show Jack's signature. 2 different weapons, I think 2 different men. If Jack hadn't started in Whitechapel, if he'd been killing in Brighton or Swansea or Aberdeen, no-one would link Tabram's murder to Jack. She'd be a one off.

[Sam Flynn]

it seems to me equally possible that whoever killed Tabram out of rage might have discovered within himself a source of pleasure that he had never experienced before.

Indeed, it's possible, Chava - but why no more "dart-board" stabbings in Whitechapel?

[Ben]

Hi Gareth,

It's the speed of that progression that bothers me, Ben, and the fact that he settles on an apparently consistent method so soon thereafter.

It is very often the case that a serial killer's early attackwill bear little similarity to his later ones, irrespective of the timing between the two (which I don't personally consider all that significant, since he must have come up with the idea of organ extractions at some stage), and with Tabram-to-Nichols, we don't even have "little similarity". We have quite a lot of it. What I see is the characteristic experimentation and progression of many a serial killer. He tries stabbing once, then stabbing with a bit more focus on ripping, then he experiments with organ extraction, than facial mutilations etc.

If the Tabram murder reflected an unusual degree of anger, it may have been due in part to his faliure to murder one or two earlier victims - Mmes. Millwood and Wilson spring to mind. This time he resolved to make doubly sure that the victim would not survive or cry out.

Best regards,
Ben

[Fisherman]

Well, gentlemen and -women, I think I have offered a golden inbetween path to walk, if anybody thinks that it is hard to bridge the gap between stabbing and cutting/eviscerating. And I honestly think I have a lot going for this scenario, with Jack as a scavenger.

To accept Tabram as part of a progression/experimentation series, it would have made things a lot easier if she had had her abdomen opened alongside the stabbings, and if there had not been the issue of two blades involved.
If this had been the case, I think most of us would have said "How strange ... but there it is!", and accepted Jack as a stabber AND cutter. As it stands, though, it is a tough pill to swallow.
The reason I am not at all comfortable with the suggestion of nigh on 40 stabs as part of a progression towards cutting and eviscerating is that such a flurry of stabs have very little of control and rationality about it. It all seems the doing of an enraged or, shall we say, overenthusiastic killer. And I think it must be pointed out that he obviously did NOT grow tired of the stabbing concept at the George Yard landing. If he had found out that it gave him no satisfaction, he could have stopped stabbing after five, ten, twenty stabs. Instead we are asked to believe that he went from seemingly being completely possesed with stabbing into a female trunk rather randomly, to becoming a killer who was totally uninterested in ANY random stabbing, and who in a completely rational manner silenced, killed and opened up a woman with his knife.

Luckily, we can bridge this inconsistency. We KNOW two blades were present, and we have two wounds that stand out as being interpretable as being exactly the kind of rational measures that the Ripper took - the abdominal cut that may well have been aimed at opening her up at the focal point for the evinced Ripper interest, and the thrust through the heart, that made sure that she would not live to tell what had happened to her. Plus we know that the George Yard building had open galleries on the back of them, meaning that the Tabram killing may well have been - at least at some stage - a public affair.

Problems are there to be solved, and I think that both location and the evidence (dozens of stabs to the upper part of the body, but only the one wound, a cut, to the lower parts - why would the killer suddenly decide to add just the one wound there, and why did it come out as a cut?) and the rest of the elements involved (victimology, silence, time of the week etcetera) tells us a story of two knife-wielders, one enraged and unrational, and one that was very focused on what he needed to do - Jack.

The best,
Fisherman

[Sam Flynn]

Hi Ben,

He tries stabbing once, then stabbing with a bit more focus on ripping, then he experiments with organ extraction, than facial mutilations etc.

But nowhere do we see the "missing link" - viz., stabbing with a bit more ripping. We have two radically different styles (multiple, violent stabs with a knife to long, deep cuts and no stabs to speak of) manifesting themselves within the space of three weeks.

I find it hard to believe that the physical thrill of punching a knife into Tabram's body would have evaporated so rapidly in such a short space of time. If her killer were indeed an obsessive serialist, I should expect to see similar features echoed in other murders before or after her death.

[Ben]

Hi Gareth,

We have two radically different styles (multiple, violent stabs with a knife to long, deep cuts and no stabs to speak of) manifesting themselves within the space of three weeks.

Dr. Llewellyn specifically mentioned "stabs", thus bridging the gap between a killer who stabs his victims and a killer who slashes. In Nichols we see that "missing link" - stabbing and slashing. By the Chapman murder, he had simply decided to forgo the stabbing, having decided that opening up abdomens was more his bag. I'd have to argue very emphatically indeed that stabbing to slashing is not a radical change, certainly not when we consider the criminal diversity of the majority of serial killers.

Regards,
Ben