Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Geoprofile of Jack the Ripper reveals Tabram and Nichols connection.

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

  • Geoprofile of Jack the Ripper reveals Tabram and Nichols connection.

    I decided to map a modern geoprofile of JtR onto an old map of Whitechapel with markers for important events including the Canonical Five.

    THE MAP
    Modern Jack the Ripper Geoprofile old Whitechapel map here.

    JtR could not have anticipated geoprofiling which was discovered in the 1990s, a century later.

    The geoprofile is a simple mathematical model that makes two assumptions.

    • That the perp will not commit crimes where they live.
    • That the perp will not travel more than they need to find a target.

    In order to cover their identity, serial offenders will try to hit in many directions away from their ‘base’. They accidentally reveal their ‘base’ because it is possible to triangulate this place. This is not too different from when policemen put pins on a map. It just has added mathematics.

    This is a lead in the JtR case. One of the few we have.

    The Hot Zone
    The reason why it is so interesting is that the geoprofile reveals a hot zone which is of huge interest to researchers even before geoprofiling was done. In fact the hot zone is bang on top of well known JtR related events and places.

    The area of the hot zone in the geoprofile is where Flower & Dean meets Lolesworth street. It also takes in Thrawl St. and a bit of Heneage St which means a bit of Brick Lane.

    Close up of hot zone map here.

    The Hot Zone Content in Relation to the Case
    In the hotzone are the markers A, B, b and I on the old map of Whitechapel under the modern geoprofile.

    These correspond to:

    • A – Satchell’s lodging House, last addr. Of Martha Tabram.
    • B – Willmott’s lodging House, last addr. Of Mary Anne Nichols.
    • b – White House, Public House, last addr. Of Mary Anne Nichols.
    • I – Frying pan, Public House


    Martha Tabram is a JtR victim
    Martha Tabram was murdered just below this area in George’s Yard. There is no point anymore in considering this all a big coincidence or that Tabram isn’t a JtR victim. This tells us that the C5 should be a C6 and Tabram included.

    Other connections
    Flower & Dean st., was also where Eddowes was supposed to be returning the night she died according to her partner Kelly. Note that Fashion St., where she gave a ‘fake’ address is slightly within the red hot zone and certainly within the green. Not far away to the top left of the area we have the murder of Mary Jane Kelly on Dorset St.

    Murder series in relation to the hot zone
    • JtR “started” murdering close to where he was with Tabram.
    • JtR “finished” murdering close to where he was with Kelly.


    To draw attention away from the hot zone with the murder of Tabram, JtR murdered his other victims in all directions north, south, east and west of the hot zone.

    It can not be excluded that JtR met many of his victims in the hot zone.

    It can not be excluded that JtR may have taken many of his victims from this area.

    Even Catherine Eddowes had time to go back to Flower & Dean to get thrown out and be back in time for Mitre Sq.

    We must also consider that the movement of these unfortunates may not correspond to looking for money in return for sex, but the promise of lodgings. A place to stay the night. JtR may very well have been a lodger out on the street with them or someone running lodgings and taking them elsewhere.

    Focus
    Pubs and Lodging houses in the hot zone, Tabram and Nichols connection with a focus on Tabram appears to be the path to revealing the identity of JtR.

    What else is associated with this hot zone?

  • Herlock Sholmes
    replied
    Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post

    HI HS
    oh yes I remember it well-his diagrams inspired me back then to post my own diagram. lol. I agree a lot with fish but not on this point-and posted it as a bit of fun-I think fish got a little chuckle out of it too.

    Click image for larger version

Name:	fish.JPG
Views:	53
Size:	52.2 KB
ID:	711705
    Hi Abby,

    its a work of genius.

    Leave a comment:


  • Abby Normal
    replied
    Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

    Fish did some diagrams to try and show how Richardson could have missed the corpse (I’m sure that you remember Abby, Sam was in the discussion too) but I just find it close to impossible to believe. You have to have Richardson acting pretty weirdly and sitting in an unlikely position and not looking in certain directions. That particular debate was a chore. Fish was adamant though. And wrong.
    HI HS
    oh yes I remember it well-his diagrams inspired me back then to post my own diagram. lol. I agree a lot with fish but not on this point-and posted it as a bit of fun-I think fish got a little chuckle out of it too.

    Click image for larger version

Name:	fish.JPG
Views:	53
Size:	52.2 KB
ID:	711705

    Leave a comment:


  • Abby Normal
    replied
    Originally posted by APerno View Post

    I agree with all that the body was likely not there . . . but if we state that there was enough light to "cut some leather from his boot" then we need to rethink just how dark it was when the Ripper cut open Annie.

    There seems to be a contradiction regarding light. We say: 'light enough to see the body' but then we say, 'he must have had some anatomic knowledge to remove the uterus in complete darkness.'

    So which is it? The light seems to be relative to the argument being made.

    (Ouch! Sorry, that one slipped out.)
    hi AP
    it was never complete darkness at any of the ripper murder scenes.

    Leave a comment:


  • Herlock Sholmes
    replied
    Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post

    agreed sam, if he could see well enough to see the basement door and cut some leather from his boot-which also he sat on the step and was also looking down at his foot-he would have seen the body-no question IMHO.
    Fish did some diagrams to try and show how Richardson could have missed the corpse (I’m sure that you remember Abby, Sam was in the discussion too) but I just find it close to impossible to believe. You have to have Richardson acting pretty weirdly and sitting in an unlikely position and not looking in certain directions. That particular debate was a chore. Fish was adamant though. And wrong.

    Leave a comment:


  • APerno
    replied
    Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post

    agreed sam, if he could see well enough to see the basement door and cut some leather from his boot-which also he sat on the step and was also looking down at his foot-he would have seen the body-no question IMHO.
    I agree with all that the body was likely not there . . . but if we state that there was enough light to "cut some leather from his boot" then we need to rethink just how dark it was when the Ripper cut open Annie.

    There seems to be a contradiction regarding light. We say: 'light enough to see the body' but then we say, 'he must have had some anatomic knowledge to remove the uterus in complete darkness.'

    So which is it? The light seems to be relative to the argument being made.

    (Ouch! Sorry, that one slipped out.)

    Leave a comment:


  • Sleuth1888
    replied
    Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post

    hi sleuth
    the body wasn't there-he would have seen it.either that or he was the killer and lied.
    Hi I tend to agree that the body wasn't there yet and Chapman was killed later, 5.30am or after.

    Leave a comment:


  • Abby Normal
    replied
    Originally posted by Sam Flynn View Post
    A few people argue that, but I'm not one of them. To my mind, there's no way he could have missed the body.
    agreed sam, if he could see well enough to see the basement door and cut some leather from his boot-which also he sat on the step and was also looking down at his foot-he would have seen the body-no question IMHO.

    Leave a comment:


  • Abby Normal
    replied
    Originally posted by Sleuth1888 View Post
    Well if the body wasn't there then of course he wouldn't see it.
    hi sleuth
    the body wasn't there-he would have seen it.either that or he was the killer and lied.

    Leave a comment:


  • Sleuth1888
    replied
    Well if the body wasn't there then of course he wouldn't see it.

    Leave a comment:


  • Sam Flynn
    replied
    Originally posted by APerno View Post
    Can John Richardson sit on the stoop's top step and miss Annie's body laying (behind the backyard door) to his left.
    A few people argue that, but I'm not one of them. To my mind, there's no way he could have missed the body.

    Leave a comment:


  • APerno
    replied
    Doesn't a 5:30 killing put Dark Annie on the streets alone for over three hours; I wonder what she was doing; where she walked? Evans (Donovan) escorted Annie out of the lodging house around 2 AM, where did she go?

    She had to be circling, Whitechapel isn't that large; how may times did she cross paths with the Ripper before he chose her?

    At any point did she crawl off into an ally and catch some zzzs?

    It is hard to figure, she was up all night, ending her already long day with a three and a half hour walk, and then come pre-dawn she still has the energy to score a trick.

    Can John Richardson sit on the stoop's top step and miss Annie's body laying (behind the backyard door) to his left. If he could, then Annie could have been murdered any time after 2:30 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Sam Flynn
    replied
    Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post
    At 5:30 the sun was beginning to rise...it would have been light out.
    Here's a view of the eastern horizon from London - with a generic, rural background image I hasten to add! - at 5:30 on that morning, using the astronomical software "Stellarium"

    Click image for larger version

Name:	Stellarium 8th Sept 1888.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	49.3 KB
ID:	667681

    Leave a comment:


  • Abby Normal
    replied
    Originally posted by APerno View Post
    Yes, yesterday I was watching Jack the Ripper: The Definitive Story (BTW which had wonderful computer recreations of the streets of Whitechaepl; fun to view) which suggested that Dark Annie may have been murdered with the sun already up. But maybe I misunderstood what they were trying to explain; they were trying to make conflicting testimony work.
    At 5:30 the sun was beginning to rise...it would have been light out.

    Leave a comment:


  • APerno
    replied
    Originally posted by rjpalmer View Post
    Speaking of page six:

    "Suffice to say, Annie Chapman was killed in the darkness of morning."

    Dawn was at 4:51 a.m., sunrise at 5:25 a.m., so I would humbly suggest that this is not a proven 'fact,' and is, indeed, very much in doubt. But we're a tough crowd.
    Yes, yesterday I was watching Jack the Ripper: The Definitive Story (BTW which had wonderful computer recreations of the streets of Whitechaepl; fun to view) which suggested that Dark Annie may have been murdered with the sun already up. But maybe I misunderstood what they were trying to explain; they were trying to make conflicting testimony work.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X