How did he do it?

[DVV]

it doesn't really matter who killed Tabram

I beg your pardon ?

[Malcolm X]

I beg your pardon ?

You heard, find out who killed MJK, because this is all you need to know...all these other murders? not a hope in hell, we've nothing on these lot.

Tabram? sorry she looks nothing like A.Chapman or any of the others, she's different in every way, it's a frenzied stabbing, she hasn't had her throat cut or been gutted; finally, it also looks suspiciously like two people at once.

JTR is quiet, careful, subdues his victim quickly..... OR HE TRIES TO, but Tabram has been killed in a vicious and very careless/crude knife attack, she just doesn't look like a Ripper victim at all, not even starting to get close.

[Tom_Wescott]

You're a true scholar, Malcolm.

Yes, and Macnaghten's "5 victims only" being a consequence of a misguided theory, it has little value as such.
In 1888, Tabram and Stride were considered Ripper victims

Well, Stride was, is, and will always be considered a Ripper victim, Deevs, because she in fact was one. By the time of the double event, Tabram had been dismissed by most investigators as a Ripper victim. Hindsight has led to her now being considered by about half the Ripper community as a Ripper victim, or possible Ripper victim. Macnaghten was of course correct in naming his 5 as victims of the same killer. The question is, who else was a Ripper victim? Keep in mind that Macnaghten had a political motive for establishing this particular victim list, and that agenda was to limit the amount of time the Ripper was at work. It was very face-saving for the police to say the killer was only at large for 'weeks' instead of months or years. I would be careful to accept what's written in the memoranda or his memoir as Mac's actual personal opinion.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Rubyretro]

Tabram? sorry she looks nothing like A.Chapman or any of the others, she's different in every way, it's a frenzied stabbing, she hasn't had her throat cut or been gutted; finally, it also looks suspiciously like two people at once.

JTR is quiet, careful, subdues his victim quickly..... OR HE TRIES TO, but Tabram has been killed in a vicious and very careless/crude knife attack, she just doesn't look like a Ripper victim at all, not even starting to get close.

[/QUOTE]
Given the local murder statistics for 1888 compared to other years, there has to be the biggest suspicion that Tabram was a Ripper victim.

The location of the building where she was found, makes it even more likely.

Noone in the building either heard nor saw the murderer (as far as we know),
and he got away with it....so even more likely..

she was subdued without her being able to kick up a racket

She was butchered with a knife (as opposed to being bludgeoned or poisened), killed by a stranger, stabbed in the vagina (?)

Why do you think that she was killed by two people ? Whether the doctor
made a mistake or not about two knives having been used makes no difference; Danilo Restivo (a murderer with lots in common with JTR) did use two weapons to stab his first victim (scissors and a knife) -if he did, then Jack could.

[DVV]

Hi Tom

You're a true scholar, Malcolm.

Ditto.

Well, Stride was, is, and will always be considered a Ripper victim, Deevs, because she in fact was one.

Agreed.

By the time of the double event, Tabram had been dismissed by most investigators as a Ripper victim.

I'm not sure, although there were early signs of the future canon here and there (Dr Bond, the paper I've alluded to, etc). Police memoirs and various recollections are often of opinion that she was a Ripper victim.

The question is, who else was a Ripper victim? Keep in mind that Macnaghten had a political motive for establishing this particular victim list, and that agenda was to limit the amount of time the Ripper was at work.

Exactly, that's why I said his canonical group was valueless. It's a theorical bias.
Imo, the canon means : those killed beyond boubt by JtR, while Tabram is most probably a Ripper victim - "only" most probably, should I say.

It was very face-saving for the police to say the killer was only at large for 'weeks' instead of months or years. I would be careful to accept what's written in the memoranda or his memoir as Mac's actual personal opinion.

Agreed again.

[Ben]

Ruby and David are quite right, Mal. In terms of the criminal diversity displayed by the vast majority of serial killers, stabbing to slashing is a very minor alteration indeed. Even the most MO-consistent serial killers have shown more susceptibility to change than that, and in almost all cases, the killer's earliest offences will bear little resemblance to their later, more "sophisticated" ones.

The preponderance of opinion amongst contemporary police officials was to the effect that Tabram was a ripper victim, with Abberline, Anderson, and Reid all subscribing to it. Indeed, as Philip Sugden observed, it "seems to have been a general police view in 1888".

All the best,
Ben

[Errata]

I think Ripperology is as much about gut as it is about logic. I never particularly considered Tabram a Ripper victim. And I certainly understand that the evidence leans towards her being one, I see the argument. The Tabram murder just doesn't "feel" the same to me. It feels enraged and personal.

Victim selection in this biz is about as individual a process as there are individuals. It depends on what you think the motive was, what you think his priorities were, what you think his learning curve is. All kinds of things. So I would never say that Tabram was not a Ripper victim (I don't think we'll ever know), but I don't look consider that crime when I am looking for things in Jack's "body of work".

[Tom_Wescott]

As proof that the police as a whole had removed Tabram from the Ripper's tally as early as the double event, here's the Met police notice from Sept. 30th.

Police Notice. - To the occupier. - On the mornings of Friday, 31st August, Saturday, 8th, and Sunday, 30th Sept., 1888, women were murdered in Whitechapel, it is supposed by someone residing in the immediate neighbourhood. Should you know of any person to whom suspicion is attached, you are earnestly requested to communicate at once with the nearest police-station. - Metropolitan Police Office, 30th Sept., 1888

Tabram and Smith (considered killed by the same gang) were taken from the list.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Ben]

Hi Tom,

Thanks for that. It is interesting to note, however, that some of the Chapman murder suspects were quizzed about their movements on the night of the Tabram murder, and also, that the Home Secretary was sent details of the Tabram through to Eddowes murders when he requested a report on the ripper murders. And with such senior investigators and officials as Anderson and Abberline accepting Tabram as a ripper victim, the omission of her murder from the "Police Notice" is inexplicable.

Regards,
Ben

[Phil Carter]

Hello Ben,

Happy New Year young man!

It is also interesting (for me) that the Home Secretary asking for the stuff he did was at difference with the presented official police view (as Tom pointed out) which may(I use the word and link carefully) indicate that other departments (the Special Branch) were involved at an early stage- as they were not answerable to anyone...especially politicians. Anderson and Monro had a tight grip over what they were up to at any time in any case.


Hope you are well!

Kind regards

Phil

[Hunter]

Thanks for that. It is interesting to note, however, that some of the Chapman murder suspects were quizzed about their movements on the night of the Tabram murder, and also, that the Home Secretary was sent details of the Tabram through to Eddowes murders when he requested a report on the ripper murders. And with such senior investigators and officials as Anderson and Abberline accepting Tabram as a ripper victim, the omission of her murder from the "Police Notice" is inexplicable.

The answer probably lies with Supt. Arnold, where it was in H Division's jurisdiction that the notices were distributed and such an action he would have been responsible for. He later commented that he believed only 4 murders were by the same hand, excluding Tabram. That certainly was not the opinion of the two top ground level investigators at the time, Abberline and Reid. Consequently, the police as a whole had varying opinions.

[Tom_Wescott]

Ben and Hunter,

Thanks for those important insights.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[DVV]

Hi Tom

As proof that the police as a whole had removed Tabram from the Ripper's tally as early as the double event, here's the Met police notice from Sept. 30th.

Police Notice. - To the occupier. - On the mornings of Friday, 31st August, Saturday, 8th, and Sunday, 30th Sept., 1888, women were murdered in Whitechapel, it is supposed by someone residing in the immediate neighbourhood. Should you know of any person to whom suspicion is attached, you are earnestly requested to communicate at once with the nearest police-station. - Metropolitan Police Office, 30th Sept., 1888

Tabram and Smith (considered killed by the same gang) were taken from the list.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

That is just another early sign of the canon, but certainly not a proof that the police "as awhole" dismissed Smith and Tabram. They simply listed the murders that were both recent and undispubly committed by the same hand. Since no other witness than Pearly Poll and Barrett could be found in August in spite of their endeavours, and since it was too late to get more clues about Smith's murder, their addition to the list would just have been useless, or worse, confusing.

[RedBundy13]

In Tabrams case imo, its harder to prove she wasnt a Ripper victim than was. The simplest explanation is always the best and this is 'almost' a perfect case to prove that. i.e. time of murder, date of murder, weapon used, vagina targeted, victims occupation, victims age and class, motive(or lack of-robbery doesnt seem likely-), location of murder, ect, ect... There are many more examples. If it walks like a duck, talks like duck... Its a duck.

[DVV]

Exactly so. And you can add the position of the body.