Ripperology: Questioning the Dogma

[The Good Michael]

For instance, what about a group that includes Martha and Mary.....2 examples of "glut"...one more tentative and external...stabbing, shallow and deep....the second more intimate and curious. I could see those behaviours being involved in the evolution of a single killer.

So, you think a man went directly from stabbing to a slaughterhouse style of murder because they were both extremes? When you say the second was curious, are you referring to curious as strange, or the killer's curiosity about what he is doing?

Some of us think that JTR may have wanted to do a Kelly on all his victims, but was not given sufficient light or time to do do. I tend to look at Tabram as a sexual attack, but don't put it with the C5, though I could argue for its inclusion.

Cheers,

Mike

[Fisherman]

Mike writes:

"I tend to look at Tabram as a sexual attack"

Out of curiosity, Mike: What is it in the Tabram deed that makes you think of it as a sexual attack?

The best,
Fisherman

[Jeff Leahy]

Hi Sam

Are you suggesting that he cut off her breast and somehow it accidentally fell behind her head?


The viscera were found in various parts viz: the uterus & Kidneys with one breast under the head, the other breast by the Rt foot, the Liver between the feet, the intestines by the right side & the s pleen by the left side of the body. The flaps removed from the abdomen and thighs were on a table.

Why not just throw the whole lot on the floor or out the way on the other side of the room?

Pirate

[The Good Michael]

Fisherman,

I look at the multiple stabs as a sexual simulation, with perhaps the larger, bayonet-style wound as a climax. Of course this is conjecture. It's what is likely to me, however.

Cheers,

Mike

[perrymason]

Hi Mike,

I didnt mean to infer that Martha and Mary were consecutive murders at all, just that there is a progression that is trackable, and when we see a "series" I would expect evolution.

The curiousity comment referred to what amounts to be a surgical voyage through human anatomy, there are many actions taken and performed that give one the sense he was trying out different things....for example, her right and to a lesser degree left thigh. The curious placement of organs about her. In early Ripper cases, it would seem that mutilating the abdomens and taking things from within was his "thing"...with Mary Kelly, the only action we can use to assess what his goals might have been are what he did and what he took with him,.....and it would be a stretch to suggest that what happened to Mary was an effort by the killer just to remove her heart.

Most victims had some superfluous wounds,...the vast majority of Mary Janes are.

Best regards Mike, all.

[Jeff Leahy]

Hi Mike,

I didnt mean to infer that Martha and Mary were consecutive murders at all, just that there is a progression that is trackable, and when we see a "series" I would expect evolution.

The curiousity comment referred to what amounts to be a surgical voyage through human anatomy, there are many actions taken and performed that give one the sense he was trying out different things....for example, her right and to a lesser degree left thigh. The curious placement of organs about her. In early Ripper cases, it would seem that mutilating the abdomens and taking things from within was his "thing"...with Mary Kelly, the only action we can use to assess what his goals might have been are what he did and what he took with him,.....and it would be a stretch to suggest that what happened to Mary was an effort by the killer just to remove her heart.

Most victims had some superfluous wounds,...the vast majority of Mary Janes are.

Best regards Mike, all.

Good Morning Mike

Yes I'd agree with this. Sam would argue that the other murders show little attension to detail. Frenzied stabbing and wild mutilation. And going by the evidence he's probably correct.

However I dont think you can draw this conclusion at MJK murder scene. And this I suggest could also be true of the Chapman murder scene, though I state this as a possibility not as a matter of Fact.

But the breast under the head must have been a deliberate act.

I just dont see how else that can be interpreted?

Pirate

[Fisherman]

Mike writes:

"I look at the multiple stabs as a sexual simulation, with perhaps the larger, bayonet-style wound as a climax. Of course this is conjecture. It's what is likely to me, however."

Okay, Mike, thanks! I am much interested in Tabram, and I appreciate your wiew.
To me, Tabrams wounds differ very, very much from the ones inflicted on the subsequent victims. Importantly, Tabram was stabbed while alive, which I think introduces a flagrant element of sadism, if we are to buy them stabs as being sexually motivated.
And as you know, the sexuality in the deeds to come - if it was indeed all about sexuality - did not express itself in sadism, unless we are speaking of what is called necro-sadism; the cutting seemed more of a means to reach another goal altogether: the access to the abdominal cavity and the procuring of organs.

This all of course means that your stance, not to include Tabram, makes good sense.

Myself, I am of an other opinion altoghether, and I do count Tabram into the Ripperīs tally. And I can only see one single sexually oriented wound on Martha Tabramīs body.

The best, Mike!
Fisherman

[Jeff Leahy]

Just a quick comment Fisherman.

While i agree with your comments on Tabram. If you look at the photo I wonder if it does show signs of strangulation?

I would look at Tabram as an early MO gone wrong rather than a different MO.

Pirate

[Fisherman]

Hi Jeff!

There seems to be a slightly protruding tongue present in that picture, but that is all. No safe indications on strangulation were ever around, although Tabrams clenched fists have been brought into the discussion several times.

As for the MO, to see it as more of an early model gone wrong than a differing one, is to stretch things, I think. Stabbing repeatedly differs quite a lot from cutting and eviscerating.

The best, Jeff!
Fisherman

[Jeff Leahy]

Hi Jeff!

There seems to be a slightly protruding tongue present in that picture, but that is all. No safe indications on strangulation were ever around, although Tabrams clenched fists have been brought into the discussion several times.

As for the MO, to see it as more of an early model gone wrong than a differing one, is to stretch things, I think. Stabbing repeatedly differs quite a lot from cutting and eviscerating. The best, Jeff!
Fisherman

Yes I'd agree with this.

Have you followed Sam's Frenzied attack theories? In particular Eddows.

Clearly there were cuts to Martha's abdoman and I have always wondered if the frenzy was caused by Martha regaining conciousness as he began the assault? Panic?

yours Pirate

[Fisherman]

Hi Jeff!

Well, there was the three-by-one inch wound to "the lower part of the body", a wording that seems fair to interpret as speaking about the lower abdominal area.
I think the vital questions to ask here are
1. If that was a cut - why were the rest of the damages all stabs?
2. If that possible cut was deliberate - why do the rest of the wounds display something that leads the thoughts to a frenzy?

There is a handy solution to these questions, I think. But since it is something that I will develop in an upcoming issue of Ripperologist if everthing goes the way I hope it will, I donīt really want to spill the beans just yet.

The best!
Fisherman

[Jeff Leahy]

Hi Jeff!

Well, there was the three-by-one inch wound to "the lower part of the body", a wording that seems fair to interpret as speaking about the lower abdominal area.
I think the vital questions to ask here are
1. If that was a cut - why were the rest of the damages all stabs?
2. If that possible cut was deliberate - why do the rest of the wounds display something that leads the thoughts to a frenzy?

There is a handy solution to these questions, I think. But since it is something that I will develop in an upcoming issue of Ripperologist if everthing goes the way I hope it will, I donīt really want to spill the beans just yet.
The best!
Fisherman

I have had problems subscribing to Ripperologist as my technical computer abilities (apart from editing) are pritty poor..keep asking Adam if I can send a cheque, and Paul hasn't been much more help..

However if I ever work out how to subscribe without using Paypal I would very much like to read it..

I'm trying to put something together myself on Hunton and Hop Picking.

Thanks for your comments and advice

Pirate

[DarkPassenger]

I cannot believe some people, who obviously have not even a basic understanding of criminology, psychology or serial killers at all are commenting on their high-horses about Jack the Ripper! I'm talking about the ones who question the most blatant aspects of the case, not everyone, in case you think I'm ranting at you all!

How can anyone reasonably question the fact that Jack was a serial killer, that the conditions of 19th Century slum London was going to produce violent and sexual criminals just like serialists, and that Jack killed and mutliated his victims for anything other than a sexual thrill (or something along those lines)?

Maybe those who have never read half a line of text on sociology, psychology or criminology should keep their speculative opinions to themselves. I am not qualified - just yet - on these subjects but I'm damn well read in them. I've spent five years studying serial killers and I'm at the end of a criminology diploma, as well as well into a psychology degree. I'm sure many people on here will scoff at my mediocre qualifications and so they should, because there are plenty on these forums with far superior letters and plenty who have books on the shelves on subjects I have probably never encountered. But if I don't know what I'm talking about I don't comment, or I at least acknowledge my ignorance.

Some people here question blatantly obvious aspects of the case and dismissed decades of psychological, criminological and sociological research on people, society and crime. Overcrowded rat syndrome is the name Colin Wilson uses to explain why overcrowded conditions cause criminality, citing well-known research using rats in a small space. You found gangs of mindlessly violent rats attacked others, rat rapes, rat harems run by rat gangs. The findings informed sociologists and criminologists on social behaviour in overcrowded conditions, in trying to explain predatory crimes in urban areas.

Sorry for the rant but it really annoys me that too many people with no start in these subjects at all try to re-invent the wheel.

[Jeff Leahy]

Yo Dark passenger!

I'm not certain if that was directed at me or not. And I'm afraid I'm not an expert on rats. However psychology or not it would appear that London had a disproportionate number of serial killers at work or living in the area, in 1888.

And I believe a simlar environment happened in Mexico city in the 1970's.

As for going against the grain, I dont think including Martha Tabram as a victim is anything new. The McNaughten five were a later invention. And I still havn't totally dismissed Alice McKenzie as a Ripper victim. Possible.

I dont always agree with these guys but they have spent some time around the boards and done a little background research..

what exactly is the beef here?

Pirate

[DarkPassenger]

No, it wasn't directed at you Jack.

Just letting off steam - ignore me!