Did Jack kill more than three?

[Fisherman]

Hi Mike!

I can only see one page of the article. Was that all you posted? If so, all it says is that manufacturers may produce knives that vary a lot in point impact, albeit they are supposed to be the same type of knife. Since I fail to see how this applies in the discussion, I suspect I need to see the full article.

"Why did these folks run these tests?"

Hard to say, given that I have not seen the full article.

"... maybe because the science of knife forensics is so friggin' inexact?"

It is anything but "friggin inexact", Mike. At the very least, it does not mistake daggers for pen-knives. Some slack will always be there - it invariably is, no matter what science we deal with - but letīs not confuse a discussion of nano-seconds with one of years.

"thanks for that scientific info on the 999 times of of 1000 with victims who have been stabbed 39 times."

Youīre welcome!

"I take it Swedish mortuaries aren't happy with your experiments?"

In times of rising unemployment, they couldnīt be happier, Mike.

I donīt know if you recall, Mike, that I once posted a Swedish case, where a woman was found killed by 39 stabs, quite recently? I did so since there was an ongoing discussion on the boards, saying that 39 stabs never had been, never was and never would be exploratory. It turned out that the killer in this case was a satanist, who had carefully planned each and every stab beforehand! The case was quite unique, and those who had spoken up against the possibility of such a case made an effort to laugh it of the boards as something that was a one-in-a-zillion exception to the rule. Goes to show how people cannot swallow truths that donīt appeal to them.

But the gist of the matter remains - although things like these can happen, not only in theory, but actually also in real life, they are incredibly and extremely rare. If you search the net for "exploratory stabbings", involving dozens or more stabs, you will arguably come up empty-handed - and there is a reason for it. And even if you DO find such a case or two, or something along the lines in question, I stand by my assertion that I can find you 999 frenzies to match them.

It may prove a very time-absorbing task, though ... for both of us!

The best,
Fisherman

[The Good Michael]

http://www.maths.nuigalway.ie/~destrade/publications/destrade_39.pdf

Another good article testing household knives, a butcher's knife, a utility knife, a cook's knife, and... something or other.

It is interesting that different blades, with similar pressure can produce similar results. The can also vary of course. And identical blades, because of manufacturing methods, can produce results that vary up to 100%.

Why did these folks run these tests? maybe because the science of knife forensics is so friggin' inexact? Yep. You would be right if you guessed that.

Fish, thanks for that scientific info on the 999 times of of 1000 with victims who have been stabbed 39 times. I take it Swedish mortuaries aren't happy with your experiments?

Mike the Knife

[Fisherman]

Mike:

"The blade need not have been tapered aside from an inch or so from the tip if we are looking at blades that I mentioned before. "

But an inch would not be enough to penetrate the rather voluminous Tabram, piercing the inner organs, Mike. We are speaking of a good deal more than that (although not as much as one may have thought, owing to the fact that the fatty layers are not as thick as one may suspect, plus she was compressed, lying on her back). At the very least somewhere around three inches, I would say, and quite possibly more.

"If you had read my post before this one..."

Believe it or not, I did. I always do, since you always provide thought-evoking posts, and - almost - always very well considered ones, too. Save for the subjects horses and Tabram, that is ...

"... you would see that I mentioned the possibility of more than two blades as well, and that makes more sense to me than two blades. If he was trying smaller blades out, he could have had an entire collection with him and it would make as much sense as a pair of mismatched utensils."

Of course he could have had more blades. There may have been 39 or them, for all we know. But if there were, then 37 of them made holes that had Killeen opting for a verdict of quite possibly the same blade. And I fail to see why he would have used 37 more or less similar blades, if he was, as you put it, of an exploratory mind.
It must also be added that when you find somebody with 39 punctured wounds, 999 times out of a thousand, the wounds are not exploratory, but the result of a frenzy. So statistically, you are on very thin ice here, Mike, and thatīs fine by me (I have much experience of thin ice myself!), long as we donīt loose track of this.

The best, Mike!

Fisherman

[The Good Michael]

Fish,

The blade need not have been tapered aside from an inch or so from the tip if we are looking at blades that I mentioned before.

If you had read my post before this one, you would see that I mentioned the possibility of more than two blades as well, and that makes more sense to me than two blades. If he was trying smaller blades out, he could have had an entire collection with him and it would make as much sense as a pair of mismatched utensils.

Mike

[Fisherman]

Mike writes:

"Article talks about stab wounds. Any attempt (by experts) to determine blade measurements by examining the wounds is fraught with inaccuracies. (or something like that).
He says that one cannot tell the breadth of a blade from superficial wounds."

Hmm, Mike. I realize that this is what the article told you, and I can see itīs appeal!
But letīs dig a bit deeper, and find out what more insights we may gain from all of this!

"When examining a stab wound, the length of the wound should be measured to the nearest mm. The wound should be measured and documented again following apposition of its edges, as this may provide additional information about the wound profile..."

This is interesting in relation to the point I made earlier - that Killeen would have been very exact in measuring the wounds on Tabramīs body. Of course, Tabram died 122 years ago, but the gist of things would have been more or less the same back then.

"It should be noted, however, that any attempt to determine the dimensions of a knife from the wound are fraught with inaccuracies, due to the effect of elasticity of skin shrinking slightly on withdrawal of the knife (by up to 2mm)."

Aha - so a maximum of two millimeters are what we possibly have to worry about. Then again, if the wound on the sternum of Tabram shrunk by two millimeters, then so would all the others have too, as far as I understand. At least if Tabrams skin was elastic all over.

"In addition, where the blade has entered the skin at an oblique angle, the length of the entry slit may be longer than expected."

Absolutely - but the travelling direction of the blade INSIDE the body will give away what has happened.

"Solid organs, such as the liver may retain the characteristics of a knife causing a wound, and at autopsy, for example, these wounds can add to the information obtained from an examination of the surface characteristics of the stab wound."

The heart, Mike! The heart is a very solid organ. And inside it, Killeen would have been able to read the traces of the blade that pierced it, just like I said from the outset. Any wiggling would have been given away, just as it would have retained an impression of the blade that was very exact if no wiggling was applied.

"A knife that has not fully entered the skin will only produce a wound of a size corresponding to that part of the blade that has penetrated – this will not necessarily represent the maximum dimensions of the knife, and any interpretation of knife wounds must take this into account."

Exactly so.

"Where there are several wounds, measurements taken from each wound may go some way towards building up a composite picture of the true dimensions of the weapon."

U-huh. And Tabram did display a whole bunch of wounds. What the author tells us here, is that if the blade was not of the exact same width throughout itīs length - and no knife blades are - then we may, once we have numerous stabs - create a collected impression from them, telling us just about how the blade looked that made them. If Tabramīs killer succeded to shove the blade in to the exact same depth at all 37 thrusts, then this could not be done. But since we know that he pierced liver, spleen, stomach, lungs etc., we can be reasonably sure that the depth of the stabs varied quite a lot - if, that is to say, your theory holds any water, Mike, and he did not stab it in to the hilt over and over again, something I believe was what happened. But if we give you the benefit of a doubt, we will still be faced with the authors assertion that Killen would have been able to form an impression of the tapering of the blade, and if that blade was shoved in one inch sometimes, two inches other times and three inches at occasion, then the only typ of blade that could have served to corroborate your take on things, would have been a blade that copied a pen knife blade at the three or four inches closest to the tip, whereas it took the shape of a sturdy dagger below that point. And the killer must have taken great care not to use any more than the top three or four inches at the 37 small holes. Plus - and this is important - when he finally decided to shove the blade through Tabrams breastbone, he must have done so in a manner that did not leave a typical imprint of the narrow top inches in Tabrams heart, for some unfathomable reason ...? Instead, it would have left the imprint of the tip of what Killeen read as a powerful dagger? Mysterious, is it not - especially since the author tells us that the one place to go looking for the true character of the blade is inside solid organs.

I can go on repeating this for years on end - there is no way that Killen could have been mistaken about the two blades. He was millimeter sure, he was imprint sure, he spoke of pen-knife and dagger, he spoke of a blade so frail that it would break at the sternum, and one blade that was forceful and broad enough to justify a comparison with a sword bayonet. And he was completely clear - the blades COULD NOT be one and the same.

With no interntion whatsoever to sound sarcastic, Mike, I think the text you just posted serves very well to further underline why we need to once and for all ditch the one-blade theory. And letīs be happy about it - it makes the Tabram slaying so very much more interesting!

Please also note the picture accompanied by the text:

"Single edged blade inserted into modelling clay (note square edge, and sharp cutting edge, profiles at different depths of penetration)".

Have a look at the very pedagogical images in the clay, produced by different stab depths. No doctor would take a look at a collection like this and opt for a pen-knife, Mike!

The best, Mike!
Fisherman

[The Good Michael]

http://www.forensicmed.co.uk/wounds/sharp-force-trauma/stab-wounds/

Article talks about stab wounds. Any attempt (by experts) to determine blade measurements by examining the wounds is fraught with inaccuracies. (or something like that).

He says that one cannot tell the breadth of a blade from superficial wounds.

Interesting article.


Mike

[The Good Michael]

The thread is about JTR having more than 3 victims. I'm on the fence with Tabram. It looks like some sort of exploratory murder to me if I can visualize the smaller wounds being not wounds of rage, but of practice, seeing what he can do with a longer blade; trying to gain some control over something that has been used for the first time on human flesh. With that thinking, I can make a connection to the C5 for I believe in the C5 as being all JTR's. If I try and make a case for two weapons, I'm at a loss to connect an enraged, dual-blade wielding Jack with a calculating, quick, methodical Jack as we see in the later murders, unless he used a long one to incapacitate and a shorter one to try out, having no intention of using the longer, incapacitating one in the first place. If I go with the latter idea, why just two blades? Why not 3 or 4 or more? One blade to take her out, and while she's lying there, and him maybe thinking she's already dead, others to test on the expiring woman.

Mike

[TomTomKent]

Hello Tom,

No one is assuming he had a toolkit. Rather, if Martha was killed with two seperate knives this would indicate that A) She was already dead when the Ripper found her B)He had an accomplace or C) she wasn't murdered by Jack the Ripper.

No, not assuming.

It would suggest those were three possibilities, but not the only possibilities. Nor does it mean they are certain, unless there is further evidence I have not stumbled on yet. As Jack simply using more than one knife could also be suggested. Taking point B, would we not assume that a second person would not only have a second knife, they would have a seperate angle of cut, power of cut, maybe even method of attack, and this would not always discount the fact that the attacker would have to change his angle, method and force while using a different knife, due to different knives being gripped differently.

Reading through this thread a number of very interesting possibilities have been raised, by a number of smarter folks than little old me, but to my eye there isnn't enough to move away from null hypothosis, in this case that the murder was by a single assailant (if that is Jack or not). Most are very real possibilities, but I personally need more evidence while there are some reasonable explanations to fit the null.

[Abby Normal]

Do we have to assume that the Ripper had a particular "toolkit" for his crimes and kept to the same knife or knives as part of a ritual or MO? Discrepencies between a dagger used here and a bayonette there or pocket knife should not immediately mean that it was not the same man because he didn't happen to have "Old Rusty" with him that night. Nor does multiple knives in the same killing mean multiple killings to my mind.

Now, I have no doubt whatsoever that if my ideas here are straying towards the stupid then nobody will hold back from slapping me down with cold hard facts. But I can't help but think if there actually was two weapons used it might be from a purely practical need: If on an early killing the Ripper had found one knife getting blunted, or too slick with blood to hold, or knocked out of his hands in a struggle, or incapable of cutting through some bone or other, he might have taken a second knife that he assumed would be better at a part of the savagery, or as a spare, or because it made sense in his swiss-cheese mind.

Hi TTK
I agree.
i don't see why it is so hard to beleive that martha's killer would have 2 different knives. In my mind it seems the most likely scenario, especially if one considers the possibility that either smith, wilson or millwood may have been attacked by the same man as attacked tabram and the culprit had found that perhaps (as you said)he needed another one to bring along for whatever reason

[corey123]

Hello Tom,

No one is assuming he had a toolkit. Rather, if Martha was killed with two seperate knives this would indicate that A) She was already dead when the Ripper found her B)He had an accomplace or C) she wasn't murdered by Jack the Ripper.

No, not assuming.

[TomTomKent]

Lodging houses perhaps, or place of work? If jack was a tailor, or member of another production line style workhouse he could have slipped away with a knife or knives, then returned them the next morning.

[corey123]

Hello Fish,

Perhaps. Still, the change in opinion is telling. My opinion only however.

[Mascara & Paranoia]

Would lodging houses have long enough and sharp enough knives and/or blades that the Ripper could've used? Maybe he nicked or borrowed one for a night before washing it and putting it back with all the other utensils once he was done with it (which is a bit of a disgusting thought when you think of the other lodgers then using the implement(s) for their food).

That's assuming they didn't take count of all the knives et cetera in case of people potentially stealing them for whatever reasons.

[TomTomKent]

Do we have to assume that the Ripper had a particular "toolkit" for his crimes and kept to the same knife or knives as part of a ritual or MO? Discrepencies between a dagger used here and a bayonette there or pocket knife should not immediately mean that it was not the same man because he didn't happen to have "Old Rusty" with him that night. Nor does multiple knives in the same killing mean multiple killings to my mind.

Now, I have no doubt whatsoever that if my ideas here are straying towards the stupid then nobody will hold back from slapping me down with cold hard facts. But I can't help but think if there actually was two weapons used it might be from a purely practical need: If on an early killing the Ripper had found one knife getting blunted, or too slick with blood to hold, or knocked out of his hands in a struggle, or incapable of cutting through some bone or other, he might have taken a second knife that he assumed would be better at a part of the savagery, or as a spare, or because it made sense in his swiss-cheese mind.

[Fisherman]

Corey:

"You are still forgetting the home office jotting.

The point of if means they had thought something other that Killeens opinion of two blades.

Meaning that, quite as they said it, it was first believed to be a bayonett wound that they were quite unmistakable. So perhaps, Killeen had made a mistake? Perhaps.

...and, from your former post:

"... the home office added a connatation that read "The wound which was first thought to be done by a bayonet". "

Now, letīs first establish that this does not affect Killeens assertion of two blades. The only wound this relates to is the one in the sternum. And it was NOT first assumed to have been made by a bayonet. Killeen made it clear at the inquest that his belief was that something like a dagger had been used.

From the inquest:

"His opinion was that one of the wounds was inflicted by some kind of dagger, and that all of them were caused during life."

AFTER that, this is morphed, as can be seen in the the Manchester Guardian of the 12:th:

"The large wound could have been caused by a sword bayonet or dagger."

...and from there, guess where it goes? East London Advertiser, August 18:

"It would seem that the suggestion of Dr. Keeling, who made the post mortem examination, that a sword bayonet might have inflicted the wound in the poor woman's chest, sent the detectives inquiring as to any soldiers being about the neighbourhood on the night in question."

So, suddenly the bayonet becomes Killeens own suggestion! Alacazam!

The suggestion was of course made after Killeen had had his say, and he agreed that yes, maybe it had been a bayonet. It was NOT, however, his original stance. Likewise, if we are to choose inbetween the post-mortem doctor and the Home Office when trying to understand what weapon had been used, I would go with the doc ten times out of ten. The bayonet business was lead on by the fact that it was known that Tabram had consorted with soldiers on the night she died.

The best,
Fisherman