Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Geoprofile of Jack the Ripper reveals Tabram and Nichols connection.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • . Can I ask the people who doubt strangulation in Martha and the C5 how they think he was able to overcome the victims so quickly and silently?
    I certainly wouldn’t say that they definitely weren’t strangled first but how much noise would we expect if the killer suddenly and unexpectedly clamped his hand over his victim’s mouth then quickly followed it with a stroke of the knife? This would have taken a second or two with the victim undoubtedly in shock.

    Also, as Gareth points out, just because no one heard anything it doesn’t mean that no noise was made. With a hand over the mouth any noise wouldn’t have been very loud after all.

    Of course this doesn’t discountnstrangulation but I doubt think that we can be certain of the fact. How much noise might be made by a victim during the initial stages of strangulation?
    Regards

    Herlock






    "Crime is common. Logic is rare. Therefore it is upon the logic rather than upon the crime that you should dwell.”

    Comment


    • Originally posted by MrBarnett View Post
      There is more evidence of Martha having had a blow to the head than that she was strangled.
      Indeed. Why bother with strangulation when a sudden, quick bash of the head against the stone steps would have sufficed?
      Kind regards, Sam Flynn

      "Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Sam Flynn View Post
        Could I ask, respectfully, why anyone should think that Jack the Ripper was the only person capable of quickly and silently overcoming his victims?

        If indeed they were dispatched silently. Just because nobody noticed or reported hearing anything doesn't mean that no sounds were made, and there's some evidence that at three victims - Chapman, Stride and Kelly - may have sounded their own death-knells. In either instance, the fact that sounds were heard might have something to do with the fact we had witnesses who were not only awake, but easily within earshot.
        Chapman said "no" and there was small thud next to the fence. It didn't even draw the attention of the witness in the next garden to look over.

        If you are arguing for Stride being a JtR victim, then that doesn't make sense given you argued from several pages that Tabram wasn't.

        Eddowes was murdered silently next to an open warehouse with the caretaker inside sweeping it out. He had just opened the doors.

        Nichols on a residential street at night.

        Tabram outside people's apartment doors on the landing.

        Kelly was dispatched slightly differently with a sheet thrown over her head first. She had some defensive wounds.
        Bona fide canonical and then some.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Sam Flynn View Post
          Indeed. Why bother with strangulation when a sudden, quick bash of the head against the stone steps would have sufficed?
          This is at odds with your punter in 'frenzy' model that stabs her all over (after removing some of her clothes so he can stab her naked.

          Chikatilo ripped in a frenzy by the way, so frenzy doesn't rule out lust murderers.
          Bona fide canonical and then some.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Darryl Kenyon View Post
            Can I ask the people who doubt strangulation in Martha and the C5 how they think he was able to overcome the victims so quickly and silently?
            No gunshots, sign of poisoning, stabbed through the heart, hit on the back of the head with a cosh etc. Without going through the notes not much sign of blood splatter if the throat was cut well still alive. To me, there is evidence of at least some asphyxiation in Martha, Polly, Annie and Liz. And with Kate and especially Mary with the extensive mutilation it is difficult to say. It is not a case of following a theory it is a case at looking at the facts. Prostitute murdered in the night with signs of strangulation and then being attacked brutally with a knife in the heart of a district where other similar murders occurred in time and place. The only other slightly credible theory is a soldier [or two]. And what evidence is there for that? A wound which may or may not have been caused by a bayonet, a soldier who was hanging around nearby who talked to a police officer [master criminal there] on a night when a lot of soldiers were given the night off [bank holiday], and a totally discredited witness in Pearly poll. On the balance of evidence I know which theory I prefer.
            Very good overarching theory that doesn't require more complexity of adding more murderers.

            The question of how he dispatched them so silent, even with models involving a little struggle, don't explain why they aren't screaming a lot.
            Bona fide canonical and then some.

            Comment


            • Hi Sam I think bashing someone's head against a stone wall would give the person time to cry out. If Martha was strangled from the front [two hands] or in a choke hold from behind he could have been lowering her to the floor dropping her [she was a portly woman], and that's how she got the bang on the back of the head. I am not sure about the covering of the mouth before a slit throat, wouldn't that lead to a lot of blood spray, rather than blood seeping out after strangulation? as seems to be the case. Finally i don't believe Liz cried out [BS man not Jack] plus Annie may have shouted No before the thud on the fence but that could just be her fighting back before Jack got a proper strangle hold [ note the protruding tongue]. I Think Mary was killed differently already being on the bed but by Jack.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Batman View Post
                Very good overarching theory that doesn't require more complexity of adding more murderers.

                The question of how he dispatched them so silent, even with models involving a little struggle, don't explain why they aren't screaming a lot.
                A theory with a rather annoying loose end - Pearly Poll.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Darryl Kenyon View Post
                  Can I ask the people who doubt strangulation in Martha and the C5 how they think he was able to overcome the victims so quickly and silently?
                  No gunshots, sign of poisoning, stabbed through the heart, hit on the back of the head with a cosh etc. Without going through the notes not much sign of blood splatter if the throat was cut well still alive. To me, there is evidence of at least some asphyxiation in Martha, Polly, Annie and Liz. And with Kate and especially Mary with the extensive mutilation it is difficult to say. It is not a case of following a theory it is a case at looking at the facts. Prostitute murdered in the night with signs of strangulation and then being attacked brutally with a knife in the heart of a district where other similar murders occurred in time and place. The only other slightly credible theory is a soldier [or two]. And what evidence is there for that? A wound which may or may not have been caused by a bayonet, a soldier who was hanging around nearby who talked to a police officer [master criminal there] on a night when a lot of soldiers were given the night off [bank holiday], and a totally discredited witness in Pearly poll. On the balance of evidence I know which theory I prefer.
                  HI DK
                  I think the ripper rendered them unconscious first by strangling and or punching knocking them out.

                  with Tabram, I think he may have grabbed her by the throat and banged her head against the ground or wall.

                  Mary Kelly I think was already passed out I think and her killer went right in on the slit throat.

                  stride may have had her throat cut first also.

                  the rest probably punched and or strangled first.


                  but im not clear on McKenzie-any one know? did she have signs of strangulation and or being knocked out?
                  "Is all that we see or seem
                  but a dream within a dream?"

                  -Edgar Allan Poe


                  "...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
                  quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

                  -Frederick G. Abberline

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Darryl Kenyon View Post
                    Hi Sam I think bashing someone's head against a stone wall would give the person time to cry out.
                    It would barely take a second, and a sudden whack would bring with it the bonus of an element of surprise, if not shock too. Not much time to say or do anything.
                    Kind regards, Sam Flynn

                    "Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post
                      but im not clear on McKenzie-any one know? did she have signs of strangulation and or being knocked out?
                      No, the doctors said they saw no reason why she shouldn`t have cried out, but it was probably shock.
                      She has the same holding down bruises that Stride had, so my guess is that Stride was the same.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by MrBarnett View Post
                        A theory with a rather annoying loose end - Pearly Poll.
                        I have yet to read any source that actually believed her story including the investigators at the time. It seems the doubts over Poll have been there since Poll came forward with a tall tale.

                        Nearly all the authors who mention her, conclude Tabram's murderer got away with it largely because of Poll's nonsense.
                        Bona fide canonical and then some.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Batman View Post
                          This is at odds with your punter in 'frenzy' model that stabs her all over (after removing some of her clothes so he can stab her naked.

                          Chikatilo ripped in a frenzy by the way, so frenzy doesn't rule out lust murderers.
                          Hi Batman,

                          Did Chikatilo also commit more controlled murders?

                          I don't find this issue particularly easy to resolve. For instance, couldn't Tabram and the C5 all fall under the signature element of overkill?

                          And considering Kelly was hacked to pieces, by a perpetrator demonstrating no skill at all, isn't this murder also indicative of a frenzied assault to the body?

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Batman View Post
                            I have yet to read any source that actually believed her story including the investigators at the time. It seems the doubts over Poll have been there since Poll came forward with a tall tale.

                            Nearly all the authors who mention her, conclude Tabram's murderer got away with it largely because of Poll's nonsense.
                            Was that her intention do you think?

                            The author who mentions her in most depth is Tom Wescott. He seems to see her as an agent of a shadowy group behind the murders and/or their cover up. How does a single serial lust murderer fit into that scenario?

                            Comment


                            • Can I just say, for the record, that I'm not a huge fan of the "shadowy group" theory"!

                              If I indicate anything to the contrary in any subsequent posts, either expressly or by implication, please feel free to rebuke me in the strongest possible terms!

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by John G View Post
                                Can I just say, for the record, that I'm not a huge fan of the "shadowy group" theory"!

                                If I indicate anything to the contrary in any subsequent posts, either expressly or by implication, please feel free to rebuke me in the strongest possible terms!
                                Same here.

                                But it's a bit like what Andy Griffiths says about Lechmere, you can't just ignore Poll, just sweep her under the carpet and pass on to Nichols. What was her motivation? Was she a fantasist? Or was she trying to divert suspicion onto a soldier, and thereby away from someone else?

                                For me, it's either the soldier story has a basis in truth, or she was covering for someone - an individual who was close to her.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X