Geoprofile of Jack the Ripper reveals Tabram and Nichols connection.

[MrBarnett]

I already gave this a while back on this thread or the other, so I see you obviously skipped that or don't know about this.

https://www.casebook.org/press_reports/east_london_advertiser/ela880811.html

There. I am surprised you argued against this so long without knowing I have also been talking about this.

She wasn't stabbed through her clothes. So goodness only knows how you think he managed to stab her then?

So 'bosom of her dress torn away' is her blouse being ripped off?

Funny how each little error you make adds more support to the case you are making:

Emma Smith was stabbed and her killer was covered in blood.

Pearly Poll was on 'suicide watch'.

Tabram's blouse was 'ripped off'.

[Batman]

Tabrams clothes were described by a witness at the inquest as being in a state of disarray.There is no mention of her clothes being ripped or torn.

Maybe if you ignore all the references we have to them being ripped or torn for last few pages on this thread you might be inclined to believe that.

Can I recommend Sugden, Begg, Wescott? They are a good entry point into this case about Jack the Ripper.

[Batman]

So 'bosom of her dress torn away' is her blouse being ripped off?

Funny how each little error you make adds more support to the case you are making:

Emma Smith was stabbed and her killer was covered in blood.

Pearly Poll was on 'suicide watch'.

Tabram's blouse was 'ripped off'.

Oh that totally changes the complexion on everything now doesn't it? Having the bosom of her dress torn away is so different from having a 'blouse' torn away.

For pages this is all you have got. Details that don't change anything.

And we still have to learn if you think Tabram was a sex crime or not.

I hope at least you believe it is or else the JtR most certainly isn't for you.

[Abby Normal]

I wonder if they even believe the murder of Tabram was a sex crime or not after just having read the above posts.

If not, then I am afraid JtR isn't the case for them.

Hi Batman
I have to be completely frank with you-I have often wondered if these were sex crimes.

full disclosure-i think that ripper and torsoman were probably one and the same and being such, and that the torso crimes have even less indication of overt sex crimes-it does give me pause.


That being said I DO beleive there is a sexual componant to these crimes, just not an overt sexual compananent-its not obvious. As in-I beleive the ripper and or torsoman both got sexual pleasure in the cutting up of the bodies-and i think that masturbation was probably involved-with the ripper probably involving the organs he remove.


but I also dont like to get into the whole "labeling" thing for many reasons-but mainly because it opens up the whole "definition" can of worms and you have people arguing different types-legal, clinical, psychological blah blah blah. and it turns into a semantic goat rope.

but yes-gun to head-in a sense they are sex crimes.

[MrBarnett]

Thanks Gary

I know they were on a nice dry landing, but im trying to envision a scenario where this could all happen with the pissed off punter idea and really having a hard time of it--especially if most (or all) the wounds were NOT through her clothing.

is it true-were the stab wounds NOT through the clothing?

I think that is the case, Abbey. At least there is no specific mention of it.

Clearly the killer rearranged her clothing to gain access to her body, but having done so he seems not to have been primarily interested in her sexual organs, even if you include her breasts in that description. Her stomach, liver, spleen and throat seem to have born the brunt of the attack. There were several wounds to the lungs which may have involved entry through her breasts, but most telling of all only one injury to her 'lower part'. How you can determine from that that this was unequivocally a lust murder is beyond me.

[Batman]

Thanks Gary

I know they were on a nice dry landing, but im trying to envision a scenario where this could all happen with the pissed off punter idea and really having a hard time of it--especially if most (or all) the wounds were NOT through her clothing.

is it true-were the stab wounds NOT through the clothing?

They were even reporting knife nicks on scarfs, so one would think they would have noted this.

Obviously the fact her clothes had been ripped off in part and the rest is thrown off her or moved around so that everything was asunder tells us he prepared her this way before stabbing her. Those items would have been drenched in her blood... and yet his frenzied knife attack missed all the clothes apparently

[Batman]

I think that is the case, Abbey. At least there is no specific mention of it.

Clearly the killer rearranged her clothing to gain access to her body, but having done so he seems not to have been primarily interested in her sexual organs, even if you include her breasts in that description. Her stomach, liver, spleen and throat seem to have born the brunt of the attack. There were several wounds to the lungs which may have involved entry through her breasts, but most telling of all only one injury to her 'lower part'. How you can determine from that that this was unequivocally a lust murder is beyond me.

Do you think it might have anything to do with the fact that she had her clothes torn/ripped/disarrayed/pulled up, so that he could attack her semi-naked might have something to do with it being a sex crime? In particular, a lust murder?

Unless you think a typical stabbing has this going on, then how you differentiate between a typical stabbing and lust murder is beyond me.

[MrBarnett]

Oh that totally changes the complexion on everything now doesn't it? Having the bosom of her dress torn away is so different from having a 'blouse' torn away.

For pages this is all you have got. Details that don't change anything.

And we still have to learn if you think Tabram was a sex crime or not.

I hope at least you believe it is or else the JtR most certainly isn't for you.

For pages this is all I've got?

Perhaps you've missed the main point that both Gareth and I have been making all along: that of 39 wounds only one (a mere cut) was to her genitalia. The others were evenly spread across her thorax and abdomen. Yes, some were through her breasts, but even more weren't.

If the vast majority of her wounds had been to her breasts and genitalia, then I would say the likelihood is that there was a sexual motive to the crime. As it is, the evidence does not unequivocally demonstrate that it was.

[Batman]

For pages this is all I've got?

Perhaps you've missed the main point that both Gareth and I have been making all along: that of 39 wounds only one (a mere cut) was to her genitalia. The others were evenly spread across her thorax and abdomen. Yes, some were through her breasts, but even more weren't.

If the vast majority of her wounds had been to her breasts and genitalia, then I would say the likelihood is that there was a sexual motive to the crime. As it is, the evidence does not unequivocally demonstrate that it was.

There are multiple sexually elements to the crime from ripping her clothing naked to attacking her sexual parts. That makes it a sex crime regardless of if he slit her throat or bruised her chin or cut her knee or did anything else to her.

[Abby Normal]

I think that is the case, Abbey. At least there is no specific mention of it.

Clearly the killer rearranged her clothing to gain access to her body, but having done so he seems not to have been primarily interested in her sexual organs, even if you include her breasts in that description. Her stomach, liver, spleen and throat seem to have born the brunt of the attack. There were several wounds to the lungs which may have involved entry through her breasts, but most telling of all only one injury to her 'lower part'. How you can determine from that that this was unequivocally a lust murder is beyond me.

Thanks Gary!

I have no problem(kind of) if folks don't htink she was a ripper victim but Im still having a real difficult time envisioning the pissed off punter scenario, especially if shes not stabbed through the clothes and shes found lying with the skirt raised up.


even, as you mentioned, if she lies down on her back for the act.


so anyone else feel free to give a "pissed off punter"scenario. Ill try.


they agree for some business. they go to the landing. he gives her money. she lies down on her back(?) in the landing. She lifts her skirt.something goes wrong and he starts punching her or banging her head against wall/ground (the bruises and abrasions found on her head), rips the blouse/pushes up skirt more, pulls out his knife and starts stabbing her NOT through the clothes. kills her.

so where in this scenario does he strangle her? why does he move/remove the clothes to stab her directly to the flesh? what could she possibly have done to piss him off so much once theyve apprently started the process? This would have been a rather prolonged attack-yet no screaming or struggle is heard??

[Batman]

Also the fact her assailant was never apprehended is also a big indication that it was likely JtR.

[MrBarnett]

Thanks Gary!

I have no problem(kind of) if folks don't htink she was a ripper victim but Im still having a real difficult time envisioning the pissed off punter scenario, especially if shes not stabbed through the clothes and shes found lying with the skirt raised up.


even, as you mentioned, if she lies down on her back for the act.


so anyone else feel free to give a scenario. Ill try.


they agree for some business. they go to the landing. he gives her money. she lies down on her back in the landing (?). She lifts her skirt.something goes wrong and he starts punching her or banging her head against wall/ground (the bruises and abrasions found on her head), rips the blouse/pushes up skirt more and starts stabbing her NOT through the clothes. kills her.

so where in this scenario does he strangle her? why does he move/remove the clothes to stab her directly to the flesh? what could she possibly have done to piss him off so much once theyve apprently started the process?

I should declare a certain bias in this matter. I have my vicious blind beggar, who later became Pearly Poll's, husband in mind when I imagine the attack on Tabram.

Perhaps the small-bladed knife, possibly a penknife, wasn't up to the job of stabbing through clothing, so he tore her upper clothing apart to gain direct access to her body.

Ah, some will say, but he lifted her skirts, surely that denotes a sexual motive. It would do, I answer, if he'd used the opportunity to go to town on her genitals. He didn't. The chances are it was the abdomen he concentrated on once her skirts were lifted.

[Abby Normal]

Also the fact her assailant was never apprehended is also a big indication that it was likely JtR.

well I totally agree with that!

[Abby Normal]

I should declare a certain bias in this matter. I have my vicious blind beggar, who later became Pearly Poll's, husband in mind when I imagine the attack on Tabram.

Perhaps the small-bladed knife, possibly a penknife, wasn't up to the job of stabbing through clothing, so he tore her upper clothing apart to gain direct access to her body.

Ah, some will say, but he lifted her skirts, surely that denotes a sexual motive. It would do, I answer, if he'd used the opportunity to go to town on her genitals. He didn't. The chances are it was the abdomen he concentrated on once her skirts were lifted.

Thanks Gary!
Very Interesting. whats the motive?

[MrBarnett]

Also the fact her assailant was never apprehended is also a big indication that it was likely JtR.

That statement deserves an award.