Prove it

[EricCarter]

What physical evidence links all 5 of these killings to one killer?

Medical evidence links four of the victims to one killer.[/QUOTE]

Thats not accurate Jon, the opinions of some attedning physicians as to the probable killer do...not the wounds themselves. By medical evidence, Polly and Annie can be easily grouped, and Kate can be a strong consideration if not a likely 3rd.

The medical evidence says that Polly, Annie and Kate were not resisting lying on the ground face up when their throats are cut. It also suggests that the next action is a cut into the midsection. It also suggests that Liz Stride had a single artery severed completely and she may have been cut while falling and being choked. It also says that Mary was attacked with a knife, so is conscious and resisting before the throat is cut but while the killer is using a knife.

Cheers Jon.[/QUOTE]

The medical evidence also states that Stride had a neckerchief on and was pulled very tight and the edge was frayed as if cut by a knife. So, the killer grabs the neckerchief instead of throttling as in the other cases still does the same thing. In this case though it aids in lowering her to the ground. He then cuts the throat as in the others, makes the first cut, then along comes Diemschutz and he has to get out of there with his ritual incomplete, which might attribute to the frenzied attack on Eddowes. As for Kelly she may have tried to resist, it was indoors and she was on the bed, he had to change his attack plan somewhat. It was the nature of the attacks and the dispatch of the victims that led to most if not all of the officials at the time to say that all was the work of one man and that it was the same man.

[Sam Flynn]

Seems Mary is the only victim with defensive wounds, so that may be part of the proof. This is the murder of a young healthy woman who is not homeless.

Not quite - it's the murder of a woman who put up a fight, Mike. "Putting up a fight" - if indeed she did put up much of a fight - is up to the victim, and not the murderer. One can't use variables that weren't of the killer's making to identify, or rule out, the killer himself.

Likewise - and similar to her age - the fact that Kelly wasn't "homeless" is down to her circumstances, and not the killer's. Again, we can't use such a variable to identify, or rule out, the murderer.

Now, having her body cut open and organs cut out was definitely within the gift of the killer, and it's these attributes that link her to the previous murders, and indicate that she was likely killed by the same person.

[robhouse]

I have posted this before... might as well post it again...

The “canonic five” murders, Nichols, Chapman, Stride, Eddowes, and Kelly, are remarkably consistent in terms of the wound characteristics, if we assume a general escalation of mutilation. Despite this, some researchers argue that Liz Stride and Mary Kelly may not have been victims of the Ripper. These arguments are very weak in my opinion.

The argument against Stride’s inclusion as a Ripper victim is that she was not mutilated, but this is very simply explained by the fact that Stride’s murder was interrupted by Israel Schwartz. The other main argument against Stride’s inclusion is that the clumsy approach of the broad shouldered man seen by Schwartz is inconsistent with the Ripper’s swift and silent modus operandi. But we have already discussed these objections, and I will not go over it again.

The theory that Mary Kelly was not a Ripper victim is more recent, but it is an even less supportable one. The gist of the argument is that Kelly’s murder was different in that it took place indoors, and the mutilations were much more extensive. This begs the obvious explanation, and I scarcely feel the need to go into this. Suffice to say that the Ripper did not choose the location of the murders, but instead was taken to spots that were habitually used by the prostitutes. Kelly was the only one of the victims who actually had a private room where she could take clients. Therefore the location of the crime scene has nothing to do with the Ripper or his modus operandi.
The fact that Kelly’s mutilations were more extensive than those of the other victims is explained by the simple fact that the killer had a long, uninterrupted period indoors in which he could perform more extensive mutilation.

But in an attempt to beat a dead horse, I will take a brief time-out from our narrative to discuss similarities in the wounds of the canonic victims. A detailed analysis of the post mortem report on Kelly’s wounds and mutilation clearly shows they were consistent with the rest of the murders. The murder is also consistent in terms of victimology, body positioning, and the time and location of the murder.

A comparison of the wounds shows remarkable consistency (quotations are taken from the inquests/post-mortems):

Body position:

All the canonic five victims, except Elizabeth Stride, were found on their back, head turned to side, with the legs open, bent up at knees. All except Eddowes have a hand across the torso. As the head of Scotland Yard’s Homicide Prevention Unit Laura Richards said on the TV documentary Jack The Ripper - The First Serial Killer, “The body has been displayed, intentionally, and left in that way for a purpose. He’s interested in people’s reaction, and the impact of what he’s done.”

Kelly: “left forearm flexed at a right angle and lying across the abdomen”
Chapman: “left arm was placed across the left breast”
Stride: “The right arm was over the belly”

Kelly: “The legs were wide apart, the left thigh at right angles to the trunk and the right forming an obtuse angle with the pubes.”
Eddowes: “Right leg bent at the thigh and knee.”
Chapman: “The legs were drawn up, the feet resting on the ground, and the knees turned outwards”
Stride: “The legs were drawn up with the feet close to the wall.”

Disarrangement of Clothes:

Most of the canonic victims, including Martha Tabram, were found with their clothes pulled up, exposing the abdomen and groin. This is a common feature of serial murder, as noted in Ressler et al, “Many victim’s bodies are left in what might be termed sexual disarray.” For example, Martha Tabram was lying on her back in what PC. Barrett thought was a position for sexual intercourse, despite the fact that Dr. Killeen did not seem to think that intercourse had recently taken place. Note that also, in the case of Tabram and Eddowes, the upper portion of the dress is torn away, probably to expose the breasts.

Tabram: “The victim's clothes were thrown upwards, completely disarranged, and the bosom of the dress was torn away.” “The woman's clothes were thrown up so as to expose the lower part of the body”
Nichols: “The clothes were up to her groins.”
Chapman: “Deceased's legs were drawn up, and the clothing was above the knees.”
Eddowes: “Her clothes were thrown up.” “The upper part of the dress had been torn open.”
Kelly: “The body was lying naked in the middle of the bed.” “The legs were wide apart”

Comparison of Throat cuts:
All of the victims except for Mary Kelly had their throats cut from left to right, and the resultant cause of death was severence of left cartoid artery. In the case of Kelly, the killer may have attacked from the front, and it was difficult to determine the direction of the throat cuts, but the cause of death was determined to be severence of right cartoid artery. Kelly, Eddowes and Chapman had notches cut into in the vertibrae of the spine at the neck.

Kelly: throat cut “down to the vertebrae, the fifth and sixth being deeply notched”
Eddowes: “the knife marking intervertebral cartilages”
Chapman: “There were two distinct clean cuts on the left side of the spine”
Nichols: “That incision completely severed all the tissues down to the vertebrae.”

Comparison of abdominal mutilation Kelly, Eddowes, Chapman:

In all cases, with the exception of Polly Nichols, the abdomen is entirely “laid open,” the intestines are removed and placed by the side of the body, and organs are removed (sometimes taken, sometime not), with a focus on the cervix, kidneys, liver, & uturus. In the case of Mary Kelly, there are obviously more extensive mutilations (Skin removed, breasts removed etc). Note that different organs are taken from each victim: Kelly (heart), Eddowes (kidney), Chapman (uturus). In all cases the uterus is removed from the abdomen.

Note: Nichols does not have the same extent of Abdominal mutilation, although the abdomen is clearly targeted. The wounds seem almost more stab-like in nature, which is similar to Tabram. No organs were removed.

Kelly: “The whole of the surface of the abdomen and thighs was removed”
Eddowes: “We examined the abdomen. The front walls were laid open from the breast bones to the pubes”
Chapman: “The abdomen had been entirely laid open:”

Kelly: “the intestines by the right side”
Eddowes: “The intestines were drawn out to a large extent and placed over the right shoulder”
Chapman: “the intestines, severed from their mesenteric attachments, had been lifted out of the body and placed on the shoulder of the corpse”

Kelly: “uterus and kidneys with one breast under the head” “heart absent.” “the liver between the feet”
Eddowes: “kidney carefully taken out and removed.” “uterus was cut through. . The womb was cut through horizontally, leaving a stump of three quarters of an inch. The rest of the womb had been taken away with some of the ligaments. The vagina and cervix of the womb was uninjured.”
Chapman: “uterus and its appendages with the upper portion of the vagina and the posterior two thirds of the bladder, had been entirely removed. No trace of these parts could be found and the incisions were cleanly cut, avoiding the rectum, and dividing the vagina low enough to avoid injury to the cervix uteri.”

Comparison of facial mutilation Kelly and Eddowes:

The facial mutilation began with Eddowes, and may be seen as an elaboration of the mutilations performed by the Ripper.

Kelly: “The face was gashed in all directions, the nose, cheeks, eyebrows, and ears being partly removed.”
Eddowes: “The face was very much mutilated.” “tip of the nose was quite detached” Cuts to eyelids, nose, upper lip divided, flaps cut in both cheeks.

In summary, the overall picture is one of escalating mutilation. There are some differences clearly, but overall there is a lot of consistency. The throat wounds are very similar, and the abdominal mutilation is fairly consistent (in general signature and intent) - the sexual organs are targeted and largely the entire abdomen is fair game. Body positioning is consistent.

[Fisherman]

Sam Flynn directs us to the text:

"The secretary mentioned the fact that the murderer had, no doubt been disturbed in his work, as about a quarter to one o'clock... he was seen... being chased by another man along Fairclough Street".

I´ve seen this before, Sam - but I´ve forgotten it´s origins. Could you enlighten me?
It is a very interesting piece, anyhow. The timing is spot on, and we know that Schwartz lived at 22 Ellen Street, which was quite close to Back Church Lane. So, if we assume that Schwarts took right on Fairclough, and then left on Back Church Lane, it all tallies very well.
But what about the railway arch? Where was that situated? The railway would have passed west and south of the crossing of Back Church Lane and Ellen Street, would it not?
At any rate, I think your guess that this piece may be connected to the interruption scenario makes eminent sense. Good suggestion! Is there any follow-up on a Stride thread?

The best,
Fisherman

[perrymason]

Hi Sam,

Some key and in my opinion skewed perceptions....

1. Not quite - it's the murder of a woman who put up a fight, Mike. "Putting up a fight" - if indeed she did put up much of a fight - is up to the victim, and not the murderer. One can't use variables that weren't of the killer's making to identify, or rule out, the killer himself.

2. Likewise - and similar to her age - the fact that Kelly wasn't "homeless" is down to her circumstances, and not the killer's. Again, we can't use such a variable to identify, or rule out, the murderer.

3. Now, having her body cut open and organs cut out was definitely within the gift of the killer, and it's these attributes that link her to the previous murders, and indicate that she was likely killed by the same person.

On Point 1 Sam, the ability to put up a fight at all is related to both the murderer and the victim. If Mary was stronger than the others due to her being almost half their age, then the killer may have been unable to force her compliance, as it appears he did without much resistance with 3 of the victims.

On Point 2, if Jack the Ripper targetted homeless woman, which 80% of the Canonicals seems to attest to, then your argument doesnt hold water. If the killer sought out older women on the streets without homes, then Mary is quite obviously an aberration. Why would a man like that be in a small courtyard looking for homeless, working, street whores?

On Point 3, as you demonstrate, the ONLY material evidence that even remotely suggests the Ripper in the case in Room 13 is that the killer there cut up a woman. But he cut her up without obvious intent or any focus, whereas the body cuts made on Polly and Annie... based on the men who examined them ...were made so as to access and extract abdominal organs.

Robhouse, anyone that calls Martha Tabram a Canonical is missing the entirety of evidence available from just the next two killings after her. I appreciate the thoughts and effort in the post, but no two Canonicals were killed in such a way as to clearly demonstrate the same killler, both Polly and Annie were believed killed so the man could take their uterus, and in Pollys case, we may have a legitimate interruption based on the poor choice for location, which he remedies and then completes his objectives in the 2nd kill, Liz Stride can almost be ruled out as an Interruption based on the existing professional opinions and she has no evidence that suggests she was even touched after she hit the ground, let alone was about to be cut open...Kate has all the signs including the likely "pick-up", buit some troubling circumstances makes this murder a potential "planned" murder, and there are no less than 7 policeman within range of the crime scene, with one having a window from his bedroom looking out onto it, and Mary Kelly is almost half the age of the priors, had a home, was likely in it when she meets her killer, and she has wounds that show us rage....something not seen unless the nose slice with Kate.

Most people write Jack off as a mutilator, so anyone that gets mutilated at that time becomes a potential victim. But Polly and Annie were killed so their abdomens could be cut into and organs extracted from that region. He wasnt just cutting....he was cutting with objectives.

The body cuts on Polly, Annie and Kate were to access abdominal organs. Which he takes. Please tell me how peeling flesh off her right thigh aided in her heart extraction, or how having to lift a head to place kidneys, a uterus and a breast under it is the most convenient means of removing an obstacle.

In my opinion, which is shared by few but that does include one of the foremost published experts in this field, is that Jack the Ripper, who surfaces with the death of Polly, likely killed 2 or 3 of the Canonical Group based on the evidence available. I see no just cause for further inclusions, such as Martha, Liz and Mary.

Best regards all.

[Fisherman]

Thanks for that, Rob - a very thorough listing, and quite useful.

Being a fervent Stride denier, though, I feel that I would like to take up two points. You write:

"Stride: “The right arm was over the belly”

and

"Stride: “The legs were drawn up with the feet close to the wall.”

...and you use that to tie her in with the others. But I think that should be challenged.
To begin with, when it comes to the position of the arm in the cases of Chapman and Kelly we have something that defies logic and - to some extent - gravity. Eddows´ (and Tabrams) pose is the one that seems to be what could be expected in a deed like this, with the victim flat on the back; the arms have fallen to the ground beside the body. With Chapman and Kelly, this does not hold true - one arm lies on the belly or breast area, and at least in Kellys case, it would seem that it has ended up there AFTER the eviscerations. A good case could be made for it having been placed deliberately on the stomach.
With Stride, though, we do not have that gravity-defying element, for she was lying on her left side, and so the arm would logically have ended up exactly where it was by itself - no need to believe that it was interfered with by her killer. Moreover, if the killer had been Jack, it is hard to envisage that he would start off by ritually placing her arm over the belly as she lay on her left side. How would he proceed from there? Roll her over on her back, eviscerate her, and then place the hand over the belly once again?

On the point of the legs being drawn up we have a parallel; Chapman, Eddowes and Kelly offer an obscene sight with their legs spread, and once again it can be argued that there may have been an effort on the killers behalf to shock. But in Strides case, the opposite seems to have been the case - her legs were lying on top of each other, more or less, thus hindering any voeyuristic urges on behalf of any bypassers. Plus, of course, her clothing was in order, concealing anything but the soles of her shoes. And, once again, Jack would not have started out by bending her legs at their knees and placing her legs on top of each other, only to move on to rolling her over on her back and start eviscerating afterwards, would he?

So, to be fair, I think that these two "similarities" in no way ties Stride in with the other victims, other than on a mere surface count - and that does not count at all, if you´ll excuse the pun!

The best,
Fisherman

[robhouse]

Michael,

You started this post and you specifically said "What physical evidence links all 5 of these killings to one killer?" So I responded with an analysis/comparison of the wounds... which you then refuted with a lot of your subjective theories that have nothing to do with "physical evidence."

Also, I never said Tabram was one of the canonic five... I just threw her in for analysis since I think she is a likely (although debatable) Ripper victim. In my own personal opinion... and I dont really care to debate it..

RH

[robhouse]

Fisherman...

You make good points here. I concur (concede). I still think Stride is a Ripper victim though. Cheers.

Rob H

[Fisherman]

Each one to his own, Rob! And you are not only quite welcome to that conviction - you may even be right...!

Cheers, Rob!

Fisherman

[perrymason]

Michael,

You started this post and you specifically said "What physical evidence links all 5 of these killings to one killer?" So I responded with an analysis/comparison of the wounds... which you then refuted with a lot of your subjective theories that have nothing to do with "physical evidence."

Also, I never said Tabram was one of the canonic five... I just threw her in for analysis since I think she is a likely (although debatable) Ripper victim. In my own personal opinion... and I dont really care to debate it..

RH

Hi Robhouse,

On your second point, This is your quote;

"Most of the canonic victims, including Martha Tabram....,"...

On your first point, what you did is summarize some medical findings and place your interpretation of what they mean and how you believe they then link a victim to other victims. You included the data that supports your idea and excluded data that could show it to be faulty.

I make long posts...so did you....so Im not going to point by point rebut you or add what should have been and denounce what shouldnt have been used in your argument.

You like many others discard all the data regarding the crimes excluding the things done with a knife. Things anyone with a knife could do. And you dont highlight the specific murders within the Canon that show us that Jack very likely could do things with knives that the average street thug could not. Thats why you dont see further damage on Liz.....her killer wouldnt have even known a kidney from a uterus most probably. Or where to find them.

Jack took Annies with minimal cuts.

Read your own post....

"Chapman: “uterus and its appendages with the upper portion of the vagina and the posterior two thirds of the bladder, had been entirely removed. No trace of these parts could be found and the incisions were cleanly cut, avoiding the rectum, and dividing the vagina low enough to avoid injury to the cervix uteri.”

You neglected to mention that the killer has only extracted organs he takes with him prior to Mary Kelly, you neglected to mention that he takes the uterus on 2 of the 3 organ theft murders, Mary being the odd one out even though he extracted the uterus....you forgot to highlight the skill and knowledge used on some murders and the absolute absence of any skill or knowledge in others, and you compared a face that was erased to one that had cuts.

You cant say any of the murders from start to finish were almost identical unless you talk about only 3 of them...at most. And you cant say that Mary Kellys mutilations are just escalated versions of injuries made on Annie....in Annies case they were done to obtain the organ he takes. In Marys case, you can only say that they were done based on the killers whims..

Best regards Robhouse.

[robhouse]

Well, that is your interpretation. Your personal assessment of the difference between Eddowes' and kelly's facial mutilations is entirely just your personal interpretation. Eddowes face was actually quite extensively mutilated, and I think it is clear that if the killer had more time and privacy, as he did with Kelly, it would be moresow. That is why I focused on comparing the character of the wounds, as opposed to the extent of them. And yes, I admit, I selectively chose aspects of the post-mortems to highlight similarities. However, I do not see anything in your post that actually supports the argument that the 5 were not by the same killer.

The quote "Most of the canonic victims, including Martha Tabram...." is just bad writing on my part although if you had read my previous sentence that identifies the canonic 5, I think it should be clear I do not include Tabram. I should have said "Most of the canonic victims, and additionally Martha Tabram."

Rob H

[robhouse]

By the way, I dont think I ever sugested that any of the five murders were "almost identical", nor do I think this should be the criteria on which to judge which murders were done by the Ripper. I do not think that the murder of Kelly is any more or less similar than any of the others, (excluding Stride). In other words, I do not see that Nichols, Chapman, and Eddowes are any more similar to each other than say Chapman, Eddowes and Kelly. However, as a series, there is an escalation (as I have always maintained)... the differences in Stride, I ascribe to her interruption by Schwartz, not Diemschutz. The character of the throat cuts alone is practically sufficient to attribute all 5 to the same killer.

Cheers.

Rob H

[perrymason]

By the way, I dont think I ever suggested that any of the five murders were "almost identical", nor do I think this should be the criteria on which to judge which murders were done by the Ripper. I do not think that the murder of Kelly is any more or less similar than any of the others, (excluding Stride). In other words, I do not see that Nichols, Chapman, and Eddowes are any more similar to each other than say Chapman, Eddowes and Kelly. However, as a series, there is an escalation (as I have always maintained)... the differences in Stride, I ascribe to her interruption by Schwartz, not Diemschutz. The character of the throat cuts alone is practically sufficient to attribute all 5 to the same killer.

Cheers.

Rob H

Hi again Rob,

First off Id like to back down from an offense/defense kind of exchange with you or anyone here...its not what I envisioned but I should have considered that...but you seem like someone with a good grasp of the cases and I feel that could characterize myself that way as far as attributes brought into the discussions. Maybe you bring more relevant life data to the table, but Im no ex-cop, Im not a doctor, Im not trained in Graphology, Forensic Crime Investigations or The Late Victorian period. And even if I do sometimes, its not that I mean to infer I know better than anyone else about unresolved issues. I know by the tone of many responses that's the case. Just so its clear on unknown issues... I am tied with everyone.

I do read ridiculous amounts on any and all topics although any criminology interests have been restricted to these cases, I have a fairly keen eye for detail, and can add and subtract pretty well.

Now...... I cant be accused of anything above nor taken any more seriously than the case I make warrants.

So....... the portion of your post that I made bold to me is where our fundamental differences are...because to me, there is remarkable if not eerie similarity with the Canonical Victims 1 and 2, and they both bear a remarkable resemblance to the 4th Canonical murder...with escalated violence that you seem to expect to see...as do I with reservations. Why the "Ripper" killed anyone is the real question, and since we cant ask it we have to rely on a secondary line of questioning...something like how did the women die? What can we say are definitive Ripper elements, and are repetitive that Fall, and within the Canonical Group.

I see 3 women that were likely approached by the killer posing as a client, they led or were led to a deserted and dark location where the killer somehow overpowers the women without appreciable noise or evident struggle, he then lays them down on their backs and first uses his knife, cuts the throats far more than needed, and then opens or lifts the clothes to access the abdomen. He then opens the abdomens, and when time or his fancy permits, he excises and takes organs from within that region. The first 2 victims, it appears by the evidence, were killed so he could obtain the uterus. In the first murder, his amateur sidewalk location choice perhaps prohibited that from happening. He kills again soon after, and kills in a backyard. The third victim in this group has facial injuries and some physical evidence taken that indicate new behaviors, but the fundamentals of the prior murders start to finish are still evident.

One woman is killed by someone who grabbed her scarf from behind, twisted it tight to cut off her air and voice, and perhaps in one swift move, turns to the left, slides a sharp knife across her throat with her body weight coming down on it as well as she falls to the ground. On her side. Her knees curled into her somewhat like a fetal position. She died like that. Untouched.

One woman is found in her room in the middle of the night, while she is undressed and in bed sleeping off a bender before Mayors Day. Her killer attacks her with a knife while she is one her right side facing the partition wall, with her head by the upper right corner, perhaps partly covered by a sheet. She attempts to fend off the knife with her left arm and sustains several defensive cuts. Once the killer has overpowered her he cuts her throat then moves her to the middle of the bed. In some unknown order he cuts off the womans breasts, empties the womens abdomen and leaves the organ contents in various places by or under her body. He removes flesh from both thighs, only the left one having the exterior facing portion intact. Her face is slashed repeatedly from many directions and is unrecognizable. She can only be identified by her hair,or ear, and eyes apparently. Her door is set to lock as the killer leaves, taking only the heart, and she is left in a room with locked windows and door.

Its just what the accepted evidence says, I tried to omit slant.

Thats not 5 murders by one man.

We can nitpick cuts and intestines, but it seems just on the face of it, if Jack didnt kill Liz, then he may have killed 3 women in almost identical fashion from start to finish, in all relevant aspects or features, in 5 weeks. Within those three can be found commonality, there is escalation and innovation, and there is demonstrated skill with a knife and some understanding of anatomy.

Best regards Robhouse.

[Sam Flynn]

One woman is found in her room in the middle of the night, while she is undressed and in bed sleeping

That is a matter of opinion, Mike - as we know of old

Her killer attacks her with a knife while she is one her right side facing the partition wall

Not much he could do about that, short of moving the bed.

She attempts to fend off the knife with her left arm and sustains several defensive cuts.

The cuts on her left arm, of which there appear to be only 4 or 5, were probably sustained after death. The only pre-mortem wounds would appear to have been a cut on her thumb and some abrasions on the back of her hand. That doesn't sound like she put up all that much of a fight: indeed, it's not impossible that she sustained them whilst doing the "window trick" and, in the gloom (whilst possibly tired and spreeish), just failed to negotiate the broken glass.

Its just what the accepted evidence says, I tried to omit slant.

And a brave try it was - but you didn't succeed in all aspects, Mike.

We can nitpick cuts and intestines, but it seems just on the face of it, if Jack didnt kill Liz, then he may have killed 3 women in almost identical fashion from start to finish, in all relevant aspects or features, in 5 weeks. Within those three can be found commonality, there is escalation and innovation, and there is demonstrated skill with a knife and some understanding of anatomy.

More slant, I'm afraid. There is little skill or anatomical understanding in the previous murders in my view - certainly no more nor no less than was necessary to "do for" Mary Kelly. There are also significant differences, if one must nit-pick specifics, between the deaths of Nichols, Chapman and Eddowes.

In all this, you've missed the single most important point - that 4 women had their body cavities cut open and organs willfully exposed and/or removed. That sort of behaviour is quite, quite rare.

[smezenen]

I see good points on all sides of this discussion so I thought I would throw my 2 shillings in here. While I have doutes about Stride I think kelly was killed by the man that we refered to as Jack the Ripper. I think he may have had a partner. I think that when we look at the evidence we can count and/or discount any or all of the victims based on the criteria we decide put to the case, change the critera and you change who is included and who isnt. I see it this way the C5 are the C5 becouse the people that investigated these crimes at the time decided that of all the unsolved murders in london in and around the autum of 1888 these 5 where consideredthe most likely to have been commited by the same person or persons unknown. I think Tabrm was killed by two men and I think they where probably soldiers in holiday dresss. I think Jack killed more than just 3 or 4 or 5. I believe he was active for a few years before that autum, we just dont see his work before Nichols. Consider that he may have killed ony one victim a year in different cities or even countries for years before he goes on a blood binge. We dont connect it becouse its not as violent and the body count is under the radar so to speak.