Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Two knives, two people?

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

  • Two knives, two people?

    On the anniversary of the anniversary of the murder of Martha Tabram, I still wonder about whether she was a victim of Jack the ripper. The fact that two knives were used in her murder has always concerned me? If she was a JTR victim why would one person use two knives? Surely the two different types of stab wounds indicate that two people were involved?

    What do you think?

    Tristan

  • #2
    The problem I have with the idea of two people is that all but one of the wounds were apparently inflicted with the same instrument, so - if there was another killer - then he seems to have contented himself with only one blow.
    Kind regards, Sam Flynn

    "Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)

    Comment


    • #3
      I'm sure there are plenty of documented murders where one perpetrator used multiple weapons on the same victim. Humans are very adept tool users and it seems more likely to me that one killer used two weapons rather than two killers did it and didn't get caught or betray each other.

      Now, if you believe that Tabram not only was killed by one person, but was killed by the same person who later killed Polly Nichols, then you do run into the problem of neither of the weapons used on Tabram being the same as the weapon used on Nichols. The traditional explanation for those who believe that Tabram was killed by Jack the Ripper was that he was still experimenting with weapons and mutilation.

      Comment


      • #4
        Good point Sam. Am I correct in thinking that that one wound was the killing strike, which I presume would have come at either the start or end of the attack? Meaning that the second person would have been standing back, whilst the first inflicted all the other wounds. This does seem unlikely, however, I still find it difficult to imagine that a lone attacker would stop to change implements, even if this was at the start or the end of the attack. Equally unlikely that he would used both knives at once. It's a difficult one to get the head around.

        Tristan

        Comment


        • #5
          O[QUOTE]n the anniversary of the anniversary of the murder of Martha Tabram, I still wonder about whether she was a victim of Jack the ripper. The fact that two knives were used in her murder has always concerned me? If she was a JTR victim why would one person use two knives? Surely the two different types of stab wounds indicate that two people were involved?[ QUOTE]


          Its my opinion Losmandris that you are dead right ,i dont think Martha T was a jack the ripper victim at all . Ludicrous that she is even thought of in the same breath as the others. Some here think that jtr was responsible for more that a dozen kills ...... again silly if you ask me . JTR 5 victim only , period . IMO


          Comment


          • #6
            Thanks Fishy! It would be great if you could help to convince me. Why do you think she was definitely not a JtR victim? Just the two knives element or something else, more definitive?

            Tristan

            Comment


            • #7
              I am assuming here that Two knives and Two people mean the soldiers are the prime suspects for Martha's murder. These two soldiers [if they did exist], were drinking in various establishments with the victim and her pal just hours before the murder. Anyone who was in any of these establishments could have noticed and ID them. Not only that but at 2:00 AM: PC Thomas Barrett saw a young Grenadier Guardsman in Wentworth Street, the north end of George Yard. Barrett questioned his reason for being there and was told by the Guardsman that he was waiting for a "chum who went off with a girl." So an hour, maybe two hours later this soldier finds his mate and kills Martha. Hmm why? The noose would almost be upon his neck with the previous events.
              Regards Darryl

              .

              Comment


              • #8

                ,i dont think Martha T was a jack the ripper victim at all . Ludicrous that she is even thought of in the same breath as the others.

                What, apart from the location, the timing, the victimology, the strangulation, the attack with a knife to her torso, I can't think of anything either.

                Regards Darryl


                Comment


                • #9
                  What, apart from the location, the timing, the victimology, the strangulation, the attack with a knife to her torso, I can't think of anything either.

                  Regards Darryl

                  not sure what your implying with that comment, but are you sayin she was a jack the ripper victim ?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Thanks Fishy! It would be great if you could help to convince me. Why do you think she was definitely not a JtR victim? Just the two knives element or something else, more definitive?
                    The fact that her throat wasn't cut would be my number 1 reason she wasn't a ripper victim. of course there are others .

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Darryl Kenyon View Post
                      ,i dont think Martha T was a jack the ripper victim at all . Ludicrous that she is even thought of in the same breath as the others.

                      What, apart from the location, the timing, the victimology, the strangulation, the attack with a knife to her torso, I can't think of anything either
                      All we have is location and timing, really. Strangulation is a somewhat contentious and inconsistent feature of the Ripper murders, the nature of the knife wounds was very different and directed at a totally different part of Tabram's body, and victimology isn't a particularly useful criterion. We know that (a) prostitutes in general are easy and frequent targets of violence, and (b) there was a spate of prostitute murders in Whitechapel, not all of which can be attributed to the Ripper... even assuming that all the victims were engaged in prostitution at the times of their deaths.
                      Kind regards, Sam Flynn

                      "Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Darryl Kenyon View Post
                        I am assuming here that Two knives and Two people mean the soldiers are the prime suspects for Martha's murder. These two soldiers [if they did exist], were drinking in various establishments with the victim and her pal just hours before the murder. Anyone who was in any of these establishments could have noticed and ID them. Not only that but at 2:00 AM: PC Thomas Barrett saw a young Grenadier Guardsman in Wentworth Street, the north end of George Yard. Barrett questioned his reason for being there and was told by the Guardsman that he was waiting for a "chum who went off with a girl." So an hour, maybe two hours later this soldier finds his mate and kills Martha. Hmm why? The noose would almost be upon his neck with the previous events.
                        Regards Darryl

                        .
                        Indeed. There are now some serious doubts surrounding the reliability of Pearly Poll's testimony for the night in question. I think people believing her has led to this idea that Martha was murdered by a soldier.

                        Tristan

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by FISHY1118 View Post

                          The fact that her throat wasn't cut would be my number 1 reason she wasn't a ripper victim. of course there are others .
                          I see your point.

                          However, could this be down to the fact that she was attacked whilst sleeping/passed out from booze, hence a different MO to the others i.e. he didn't need to strangle her?

                          Tristan

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            .. again silly if you ask me . JTR 5 victim only , period . IMO
                            A bit of a contradiction here methinks.
                            Regards

                            Herlock






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

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Sam Flynn View Post
                              The problem I have with the idea of two people is that all but one of the wounds were apparently inflicted with the same instrument, so - if there was another killer - then he seems to have contented himself with only one blow.
                              The final one...the one that ended a stabbing frenzy which did not produce death as effectively or as fast as her killer likely desired.
                              Michael Richards

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X