Tabram and Kelly?

[Philbee]

? Is there a workable brain pathology guide book out ... or should I try e bay

[Philbee]

Totally agree Ben...I think this kill was impulsive but the pattern of signature resonates and amplifies

[Ben]

Can you come up with some sort of workable brain pathology that has him not mutilating Tabram?

Yep, he hadn't fully developed that component of his signature yet, in the same way that the appreciable majority of serial killers don't start out with a fully developed signature. I'd argue that repeatedly puncturing a dead body with a knife certainly constitutes a form of mutilation.

[Philbee]

You are missing the point Christine .. Martha was a trial run ..but that sounds premeditated which I dont think it was

[Christine]

Anyone seen the movie "Henry", the (admittedly) fictionalized story of killer Henry Lee Lucas, in which he metciculously explains to his friend who wants to join him how if you keep deliberately changing your M.O. then you can get away with killing as many people as you want? Creepy.

With Jack though, I think he followed the same M.O. most of the time but not always. Mary's facial mutilations do not take her out of the picture because Catherine Eddowes also had her face slashed, and her bodily mutilations mirrored Annie Chapman's. With Martha, who I do believe was killed by Jack, I think she was his first fatal attack and that the wild stabbing spree Jack inflicted on her left him drenched in blood, making him realize he would have to change his tactics in the future if he wanted to keep that from happening again.

"Henry" is a fine movie, but it's a work of fiction. Henry Lee Lucas confessed to every unsolved murder the police dangled in front of him because they kept him alive while he was confessing. Some people believe he was actually guilty of exactly one killing--his mother. As far as I can tell, all the murders considering probable Lucas killings were stabbings.

The real question is, if the Ripper killed Tabram, why didn't he mutilate her? He went to great lengths to mutilate the other victims, why wouldn't he mutilate Tabram if he had the chance? Can you come up with some sort of workable brain pathology that has him not mutilating Tabram?

[Chava]

I'm just waiting until a couple of people decide that Nichols, Chapman, and Eddowes don't fit the JtR pattern either. Then we can officially close down this website.

Pattern? Wot bleedin' pattern? There is no bleedin' pattern. Tabram wasn't a victim. Stride wasn't a victim. Kelly wasn't a victim. Jus' leaves Chapman an' Eddowes. 2 kills don' make a serial killer!!

(Actually I'm not all that sure that Kelly was a victim. But I'm certain of Nicholls, Chapman, Stride and Eddowes. And I am relatively convinced about Tabram...)

[The Grave Maurice]

I'm just waiting until a couple of people decide that Nichols, Chapman, and Eddowes don't fit the JtR pattern either. Then we can officially close down this website.

[RonnieKray]

I think perhaps even if finger prints, DNA, a perfect idenikit, good witnesses, a plethora of evidence and CCTV footage existed of the Ripper murders some people here would dispute the findings. What it is to be human I suppose!

[Grabbit]

On the bright side, at least we don't have to worry about him striking again while we're trying to work out just who were and were not victims!

[Ben]

Hi Ronnie,

As for the other man in her life there is no eveidence oh him actually being Jack

Although what evidence does exist is probably much stronger than the cases against any other identified suspect named to date.

As you were, chaps...

[Glenn Lauritz Andersson]

OK, although some of this has been discussed many times, now we are getting somewhere and I am glad to se that this thread wasn't "killed"!

I think the Mary Kelly murder is indicitive with a serial killer that just wanted time and space to murder in peace and in private..

The problem is, that the Kelly murder is actually more indictive with what an extreme domestic homicide looks like - with its personal emotional implications - rather than with the works of serial killers. I have never for one moment believed that the nature of the Kelly murder was a result of more time and being committed indoors - that is unfortunately a myth that has been allowed to continue to spread.
There are many indications on the crime scene that the murderer was less efficient than in the Ripper killings, andn that he allowed the victim to fight back. The crux is, that even though the event happened indoors and he didn't have to worry about patrolling PC:s he wouldn't be able to afford to let the victim resist or cry out and therefore there would be no reason for him to change hisn appoach and abandon his "blitz attack" technique. If someone would be drawn to the scene because the victim casued a lot of noise and trouble he would actually be quite trapped and have nowhere to run.

I think that at least one of the suspects in the Kelly murder has a reasonable allibi in that barnett played cards and went to bed after midnight. There are no reports that he left or returned during the night or that he was bloodstained as the killer was most likley to have been. Also the police seemed to be happy with his account.

It's true that Barnett did provide an alibi but since we have no detailed information about this we shouldn't accept it first hand without a critical view. Besides, alibies can be falsified.
That said, Barnett is not my prime suspect.

As for the other man in her life there is no eveidence oh him actually being Jack or having such ferocious jealousy to inflict such grusomeness.

No, there are no evidence of him being Jack, but there are several indications of that he might have been her killer. A quick look at what the witness testimonies from a couple of Kelly's aquaintaces is enough to suspect him. And if he was the same man as the character "John Evans" (which much evidence suggests) and who went into an asylum some years after the murder and displaying abusive and aggressive, paranouid traits, then he most certainly had the mental disposition for committing such a crime. I have seen more normal people than him being guilty of far more hiddeous mutilation murders.

George Hutchinson's account...overhearing Kelly saying something to the effect that he will be comfortable rings very true.

No it doesn't. In fact, it's a complete fairytale from beginning to end (and I think Ben will be with me on this), since not much in his testimony actually hangs together with reason. Furthermore, by studying the tabloids at the time it is quite evident that the character "Astrakhan" he presents to the press and police isnothing but a mere construction created from characters appearing in the press relating to the previous crimes, and containing elements and features from those such as red neckerchief (Lawende) and the newspaper parcel (the man seen by PC Smith in connection with the Stride murder). If anything, Hucthinson reveals himself as a frequent reader of the papers.

Again - there can never be any canon in a 120 year old murder case where the killer is unidentified. A canon means 'generally accepted victims', and those used to be five but today they have been subjected to criticised studium to such an extent that they can no longer be given that priviligue.
personally, I believe we can only be absolutely sure of three, while the others have to remain open to question and debate. But I would never take the word 'canon' into my mouth.

All the best

Michael/Perry,

You speak the words of wisdom as usual. I could kiss you (erhh... scrap that - but you get my drift...).
Not much to add after than one.

All the best

Ill take that as a "manly" pat on the back Glenn...with my thanks.

Cheers my friend.

[RonnieKray]

I would agree with you Ben....according to some people who rule out this and that murder will have us looking for several derranged killers in a very small area that make it implausible. My point exactly. I see there being only one killer of the canon 5 and Tabram.

[Ben]

George Hutchinson's account...overhearing Kelly saying something to the effect that he will be comfortable rings very true.

Not from that distance and in those conditions it didn't, Ronnie!

'Link blindage' can appear both ways.

Absolutely, Glenn.

I only meant that, in the apparent majority of serial cases, investigators have underestimated the kill-tally, rather than overestimated it, most often as a result of fine-tuning a pattern too much. Obviously that doesn't we should attribute every murder in the district to the ripper, but on the other hand, it provides us with a caution against ruling out too many victims, because the more victims we exclude, the more ferocious killers we end up "creating" to the point of implausibility.

Best regards,
Ben

[Glenn Lauritz Andersson]

Michael/Perry,

You speak the words of wisdom as usual. I could kiss you (erhh... scrap that - but you get my drift...).
Not much to add after than one.

All the best