Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Geoprofile of Jack the Ripper reveals Tabram and Nichols connection.

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

  • Originally posted by MrBarnett View Post
    Who's laughing now?
    I still am because apparently pubic mound, the labia majora, crotch, groin or even anus being stabbed would all indicate a different hand, right? Because that's where this reductionism is trying to take us eventually in these points and that's the road to none of the C5 being related (and therefore no JtR), unless you reel back in and take a look at the bigger picture.

    This is that sexual assaults of this type on the vagina area are all extremely rare, "pubic mound, the labia majora, crotch, groin or even anus" taken together. So even if Tabram was stabbed in any one of those places, it's a rare type of attack and so rare that serial attacks done like this are almost impossible to segregate out into different hands, in reality, especially considering area size, time and victimology being the same.

    So if you want to argue the minutia of attacks on the private parts, you are welcome to it, but it won't make the rareness of it go away.
    Bona fide canonical and then some.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by MrBarnett View Post
      It's explicitly stated in the OB record I attached.
      Okay, I would say this. If that designation is rare, then you probably have a point. However, if it is common with say violent homicides, especially concerning women, then it probably wouldn't support the lower regions meaning private areas.

      Which is interesting given what you are arguing now for above.
      Bona fide canonical and then some.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Batman View Post
        This is that sexual assaults of this type on the vagina area are all extremely rare, "pubic mound, the labia majora, crotch, groin or even anus" taken together. So even if Tabram was stabbed in any one of those places...
        Not stabbed, but cut. And we can't say for certain that it was in her vagina; in fact, given that it was a three inch cut (correct me if I'm wrong), it's unlikely to have been in her vagina at all, not least because a knife inserted into the vagina to the extent that it could make a three inch cut would probably inflict a lot more damage. Chances are that the cut was external, therefore, and located on the pubic mound, groin or any other "private part" sufficiently large in extent to sustain a 3" cut. Quite unlike Emma Smith, whose vagina was unambiguously and violently penetrated.

        Also unlike what happened to Polly Nichols, whose two small stabs to an unspecified "private part" could have been an accident of her killer's inflicting numerous long cuts in the lower abdomen. We know from Sptratling that at least one of those abdominal cuts started below the pelvis (or groin, according to the Star) and went upwards, so the killer was definitely wielding his knife in the vicinity of her private parts. The two small stabs inflicted thereto might thus have represented a couple of "false starts" or slips of the knife, rather than an intention to damage the "private part" per se.
        Last edited by Sam Flynn; 11-01-2018, 10:15 AM.
        Kind regards, Sam Flynn

        "Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Batman View Post
          Okay, I would say this. If that designation is rare, then you probably have a point. However, if it is common with say violent homicides, especially concerning women, then it probably wouldn't support the lower regions meaning private areas.

          Which is interesting given what you are arguing now for above.
          I take it you haven't done a great deal of research into Old Bailey cases.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by MrBarnett View Post
            I take it you haven't done a great deal of research into Old Bailey cases.
            No I haven't.

            So your claim is that it is rare then and that we won't find this designation with fairly common homicides?
            Bona fide canonical and then some.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Sam Flynn View Post
              Not stabbed, but cut. And we can't say for certain that it was in her vagina; in fact, given that it was a three inch cut (correct me if I'm wrong), it's unlikely to have been in her vagina at all, not least because a knife inserted into the vagina to the extent that it could make a three inch cut would probably inflict a lot more damage. Chances are that the cut was external, therefore, and located on the pubic mound, groin or any other "private part" sufficiently large in extent to sustain a 3" cut. Quite unlike Emma Smith, whose vagina was unambiguously and violently penetrated.

              Also unlike what happened to Polly Nichols, whose two small stabs to an unspecified "private part" could have been an accident of her killer's inflicting numerous long cuts in the lower abdomen. We know from Sptratling that at least one of those abdominal cuts started below the pelvis (or groin, according to the Star) and went upwards, so the killer was definitely wielding his knife in the vicinity of her private parts. The two small stabs inflicted thereto might thus have represented a couple of "false starts" or slips of the knife, rather than an intention to damage the "private part" per se.
              Variations in knife wounds will be found regardless of the body part being described, even by the same hand. For examples, the variations in knife wounds to their necks even in the C5 demonstrate this, but we have a history of pathology cases to show this is so.

              We do not even segregate out offenders based on even larger variations around a theme, but in these specific cases, the sexual assault involving targetting the vaginal area are so rare so to make the likelihood of several hands slim to none.

              Without even considering the other evidence like time, place and victimology. Not to mention lacking the guilty party, no other examples of reoffending and biggest of all Smith and Tabram chronological fit escalation of one offender with the C5.
              Bona fide canonical and then some.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Sam Flynn View Post
                Also unlike what happened to Polly Nichols, whose two small stabs to an unspecified "private part" could have been an accident of her killer's inflicting numerous long cuts in the lower abdomen. We know from Sptratling that at least one of those abdominal cuts started below the pelvis (or groin, according to the Star) and went upwards, so the killer was definitely wielding his knife in the vicinity of her private parts. The two small stabs inflicted thereto might thus have represented a couple of "false starts" or slips of the knife, rather than an intention to damage the "private part" per se.
                Hi Sam perhaps the three inch cut in Martha's private area was also a failed attempt by the killer to rip up towards the stomach/abdomen. Dr Kileen did think the cuts/stabs were done by, possibly a normal penknife. Thus no good for ripping so to speak.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Darryl Kenyon View Post
                  Hi Sam perhaps the three inch cut in Martha's private area was also a failed attempt by the killer to rip up towards the stomach/abdomen.
                  Given that he'd stabbed the stomach a number of times, I'd have expected to have seen at least a few cuts there, too, however unsuccessful. But cuts were there none.
                  Dr Kileen did think the cuts/stabs were done by, possibly a normal penknife.
                  I've always struggled with that; it would be very hard to punch through the thoracic and abdominal wall (especially chubby Tabram's) to penetrate the lungs, liver and stomach with a penknife.
                  Kind regards, Sam Flynn

                  "Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by jerryd View Post
                    That’s actually interesting Batman. Thanks for posting that. I did some research into a famed English pugilist named Charlie Mitchell. He was said to have worn at times an Astrachan trimmed coat. He was constantly arrested for violent attacks. In one case he beat a lodgng house keeper named George Savage. That was at 2 Harveys Buildings. The same address John Arnold of Pinchin Street torso fame lived
                    Someone like that would certainly be interesting.
                    Bona fide canonical and then some.

                    Comment


                    • https://www.casebook.org/witnesses/w/Alfred_Crow.html

                      Alfred George Crow

                      Here we have a 21-year old cab driver in the middle of the hot zone. A resident of 35 George Yard Buildings.

                      He, like Cross, came across a body, but unlike Cross and more like Paul, he was going to ignore it and actually did so. The body was on the first floor at 3:30 am as he was returning from work. He claims he just saw someone sleeping there.

                      He was living with his parents in hot zone in Lolesworth Buildings, Thrawl Street in 1891. He moved out in 1901.

                      So not only geographically is Crow a better fit for the C5 than Cross, but as a cab driver, would have most certainly gone passed the murder sites having worked his whole life in Whitechapel.

                      Does it make him JtR?

                      No.

                      Does it make him a suspect?

                      No.

                      One would need much more evidence than this to say he was anything more than a witness.

                      However, it goes to show how Cross as a suspect (geographically speaking) is now playing second fiddle to Crow by the same standards.
                      Bona fide canonical and then some.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Batman View Post
                        https://www.casebook.org/witnesses/w/Alfred_Crow.html

                        Alfred George Crow

                        Here we have a 21-year old cab driver in the middle of the hot zone. A resident of 35 George Yard Buildings.

                        He, like Cross, came across a body, but unlike Cross and more like Paul, he was going to ignore it and actually did so. The body was on the first floor at 3:30 am as he was returning from work. He claims he just saw someone sleeping there.

                        He was living with his parents in hot zone in Lolesworth Buildings, Thrawl Street in 1891. He moved out in 1901.

                        So not only geographically is Crow a better fit for the C5 than Cross, but as a cab driver, would have most certainly gone passed the murder sites having worked his whole life in Whitechapel.

                        Does it make him JtR?

                        No.

                        Does it make him a suspect?

                        No.

                        One would need much more evidence than this to say he was anything more than a witness.

                        However, it goes to show how Cross as a suspect (geographically speaking) is now playing second fiddle to Crow by the same standards.
                        Where did crow work and would his path take him by all the murder sites?
                        Was he seen standing near a victim by someone?
                        Did he give the police another name?
                        Did he have a discrepency with another police officer about his evidence?

                        But in some sense i agree with you that these witness types (that havent been cleared) need some more looking into.

                        Scwartz, diemshitz, bowyer, richardson etc. in modern times these folks would need to be cleared but for the most part the police didnt even consider them persons of interest that would need to be cleared unlike today.
                        "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 Abby Normal View Post
                          Where did crow work and would his path take him by all the murder sites?
                          He was a cab driver. Meaning the streets was his work. Cab drivers went all over Whitechapel.

                          Was he seen standing near a victim by someone?
                          No, but like Cross, giving the time of death of the victim, he would have to walked by her body on a staircase to get into his accommodation for the night.

                          Did he give the police another name?
                          No, but it's even debatable if Cross gave the police another name.

                          Did he have a discrepency with another police officer about his evidence?
                          Not really, but it's even debatable if Cross has discrepancies and if they are some, are they any different to those we find between witnesses recalling events? Some variation is expected.

                          But in some sense i agree with you that these witness types (that havent been cleared) need some more looking into.

                          Scwartz, diemshitz, bowyer, richardson etc. in modern times these folks would need to be cleared but for the most part the police didnt even consider them persons of interest that would need to be cleared unlike today.
                          How do we know this? I am sure they would have checked them out to find how well their story matched with reality. Corroboration can occur between witnesses and events. I am sure many witness accounts were corroborated in some way. Some weren't, but most were.
                          Bona fide canonical and then some.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Batman View Post
                            He was a cab driver. Meaning the streets was his work. Cab drivers went all over Whitechapel.



                            No, but like Cross, giving the time of death of the victim, he would have to walked by her body on a staircase to get into his accommodation for the night.



                            No, but it's even debatable if Cross gave the police another name.



                            Not really, but it's even debatable if Cross has discrepancies and if they are some, are they any different to those we find between witnesses recalling events? Some variation is expected.



                            How do we know this? I am sure they would have checked them out to find how well their story matched with reality. Corroboration can occur between witnesses and events. I am sure many witness accounts were corroborated in some way. Some weren't, but most were.
                            theres nothing on record that these folks were ever considered as people of interest or suspects. They might have been checked out to some extant see if there stories matched reality, but that's different than clearing them isn't it? and as far as we know that wasn't even done.
                            "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 Abby Normal View Post
                              theres nothing on record that these folks were ever considered as people of interest or suspects. They might have been checked out to some extant see if there stories matched reality, but that's different than clearing them isn't it? and as far as we know that wasn't even done.
                              If you look at the murder of Stride, that was a very intense investigation. From the moment the body was shown to a PC, arrangements were being made to interview and check everyone in the social club. They were able to track down a lot of people seen out that evening. They even followed up on what Lipski meant to it all. So I think they not only checked out witnesses closely for this murder, but everyone else who was seen around at the time.

                              Undoubtedly, IMO, investigators spoke to JtR at some point. He would have been known to them, even if just for a brief exchange on checking up on people. Yet, like everyone else, and what Anderson lamented, was that unlike the French, you can't hold people of interest as long as you want until they break and you can't hold them without some evidence against them.

                              Now if a smidgen of evidence that would be admissible in a court, came up, then the person of interest/suspect, would do well to provide evidence to contradict that they committed the crime and if under arrest, like Pizer, then exonerating evidence is the way to go forward with that defense, which is what he did, by having a PC alibi. If Pizer didn't have an alibi, or anything else to exonerate him, then the burden of proof is on the prosecution to prove he committed the crime. Maybe they won't prove it. In which case, he would be found not guilty. Does that still make them a suspect? Officially no. It means they are not guilty of the crime.

                              Does this side of legality make people who want to find the true identity of JtR happy? Absolutely not. What we want is a dragnet going around Whitechapel to clear each and every person that was there so we can narrow it down to some JtR candidates. However, in the real world, this doesn't happen unless a judge signs off on a DNA dragnet. The closest we have to the dragnet was the door to door searches they did to find any male who was either living alone or could be out to commit the crimes. They obviously did find some of these individuals because Anderson laments he had no evidence to hold them until they broke, unlike the French, who could do this.
                              Bona fide canonical and then some.

                              Comment


                              • I do find it a bit odd that crow had to walk right past the body and didn't notice anything out of place. I mean shes laying on her back, legs spread, skirt pushed up covered in blood. even if he could just make the outlines of her body surely that's not the way one would sleep there. it must have been close to zero visibility, and I find that hard to believe.
                                __________________


                                moving this over from other thread.

                                how could crow not notice something was amiss with Tabram??
                                "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

                                Working...
                                X