Who was Jack's first murder poll!

[Abby Normal]

Certainly at the time Emma Smith was counted as a Ripper victim. The Coroner at Polly Nichols' inquest speaks of four victims:"all four victims were married women", and names them all. It seems to me that the murders progressed in violence, from Emma Smith, who wasn't stabbed but her genitals seemed to be of interest to the murderer. A good deal of violence was used against her - what does it take to almost rip off an ear? (apart from her other injuries). Tabram was stabbed but throttled first (perhaps the need to subdue the victim occurred to her killer after a struggle with Emma Smith). With Nichols came the first "rippings", which became worse with every victim (barring Stride, of course - interrupted?).

I also believe that the killer had at least attempted murder, if not actually murdered before he began his career as the Ripper (conjection).

Best wishes,
C4

Hi C4
I would go with Annie Millwood, just possibly ada Wilson also.

[Ausgirl]

Though I think Annie Millwood is quite possible (way more likely, IMO, than Emma Smith and her multiple assailants, which I think was probably gang related), I voted for Martha Tabram, because of the way her body was found (splayed legs) and her tightly clenched fingers *could* suggest rapid death, so perhaps some/many of the stab wounds were immediately posthumous. Just a theory.

[Pcdunn]

I voted for Polly Nichols, mainly because it was traditional when I first began reading about Jack the Ripper-- and also because some of the entries are not familiar to me.
AND because I've spent most of my time on these boards reading about Poor Polly's expiration (she has died over and over, it seems) and she deserves some reward!

[curious4]

Hi C4
I would go with Annie Millwood, just possibly ada Wilson also.

Hello Abby,

With you all the way there. In my post I was pointing out what the police thought at the time.

Best wishes,
C4

[curious4]

Though I think Annie Millwood is quite possible (way more likely, IMO, than Emma Smith and her multiple assailants, which I think was probably gang related), I voted for Martha Tabram, because of the way her body was found (splayed legs) and her tightly clenched fingers *could* suggest rapid death, so perhaps some/many of the stab wounds were immediately posthumous. Just a theory.

Hello Ausgirl,

Martha's face was very swollen (so as to be almost unrecognisable) and her hands were clenched - both signs of strangulation. I have read that her tongue was protuding but not quite sure of that from the photograph. It would appear that she was at least choked into unconciousness. Possibly these signs were missed/ignored because of the number of stab wounds.

Best wishes
C4

[pinkmoon]

Who ever our killer was what age or race he was or even if he took a shawl to the murder scenes with him we can never be sure but one thing we can be pretty sure of he knew how to kill quickly strangled then throat cut so on this I've always believed poor Polly was the first .

[Harry D]

I still think the transition between Tabram & Nichols is too jarring for Martha to be included into the canon.

[Abby Normal]

I still think the transition between Tabram & Nichols is too jarring for Martha to be included into the canon.

hi harry
what about the Many, Many apparent big differences between victims of serial killers throughout history?

Actually, to me it seems a rather reasonable evolution from perhaps Millwood through Martha and the rest.

[Tom_Wescott]

I still think the transition between Tabram & Nichols is too jarring for Martha to be included into the canon.

Just wait a bit longer.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Ausgirl]

Hello Ausgirl,

Martha's face was very swollen (so as to be almost unrecognisable) and her hands were clenched - both signs of strangulation. I have read that her tongue was protuding but not quite sure of that from the photograph. It would appear that she was at least choked into unconciousness. Possibly these signs were missed/ignored because of the number of stab wounds.

Best wishes
C4

Thank you for those details, most appreciated.

It does seem a stretch between choking and throat-cutting, stabbing and disembowelling. I think there's a chance, though, that if there was 'evolution' of JtR's MO, this would be a reasonable case for it.

I mean, in my mind there's about as much difference between this crime and the murder of Catherine Eddowes, as there is between Eddowes and Mary Kelly - so it seems at least possible there was evolution going on.

[Dane_F]

Just wait a bit longer.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

But I want my cookies now!

[Harry D]

hi harry
what about the Many, Many apparent big differences between victims of serial killers throughout history?

Actually, to me it seems a rather reasonable evolution from perhaps Millwood through Martha and the rest.

Hello, Abby. I think there's a tendency to want to tie the Whitechapel Murders into a neat little bow, unfortunately if you pull too hard the string will break. Tabram is that breaking point.

Three weeks isn't long for a killer to refine his MO if he isn't murdering anyone in-between. Notwithstanding the method, the psychology behind this crime is arguably the crucial factor, and in this case it's not the same as the others. Serial killers are driven by perverted compulsions. It would be reasonable to deduce that whomever stabbed Tabram to death was either someone with an uncontrollable temper or someone with some kind of piquerism fetish. That isn't what we see in the canonical murders. In at least the first two murders the Ripper dispatched his victims cleanly and with precision. We don't see the same kind of indiscriminate and superfluous wounds that we do with Tabram. To him the victims were little more than 'donors', he was interested in what was inside their bodies and took them as trophies. I know people will argue that Tabram was a 'trial run' and that afterwards he opted for a more convenient mode of killing, but I don't believe it works like that. The killer(s) did what they did because they were compelled to fulfil certain fantasies. I don't believe you can divorce that from the murders when attempting to profile our man.

[Abby Normal]

Hello, Abby. I think there's a tendency to want to tie the Whitechapel Murders into a neat little bow, unfortunately if you pull too hard the string will break. Tabram is that breaking point.

Three weeks isn't long for a killer to refine his MO if he isn't murdering anyone in-between. Notwithstanding the method, the psychology behind this crime is arguably the crucial factor, and in this case it's not the same as the others. Serial killers are driven by perverted compulsions. It would be reasonable to deduce that whomever stabbed Tabram to death was either someone with an uncontrollable temper or someone with some kind of piquerism fetish. That isn't what we see in the canonical murders. In at least the first two murders the Ripper dispatched his victims cleanly and with precision. We don't see the same kind of indiscriminate and superfluous wounds that we do with Tabram. To him the victims were little more than 'donors', he was interested in what was inside their bodies and took them as trophies. I know people will argue that Tabram was a 'trial run' and that afterwards he opted for a more convenient mode of killing, but I don't believe it works like that. The killer(s) did what they did because they were compelled to fulfil certain fantasies. I don't believe you can divorce that from the murders when attempting to profile our man.

Hi Harry
Nice response and I see what your saying but..

The ripper apparently subdued his victims by strangling. He did that with Tabram. same MO. no cut throat but maybe he learned from her that he needs to do that next. maybe she came too while he was stabbing her, struggled, and he then killed her with the stab to the heart.
He had something about the abdomen and private parts, so he targeted those with tabram, stabbing, but not ripping. The stabbing did something for him but next time he needed more-ripping, then he wanted trophys.

re your point on "little more than donors". I disagree. later victims had more knife activity than just procuring organs-cuts to the face, arms, legs. removal of breasts etc. And I think that most experts agree that trophys aren't necessarily the end all of the killers desire. just a way to prolong and relive the primary motivation-which in my view is pretty obvious with the ripper-what his knife could do to the female body.

rarely if ever, do serial killers commence with their MO, or even their sigs, full formed. And if Tabram isn't a stepping stone, then who/what was?

And that begs the question, you would have to believe his efficient MO for dispatching victims sprung fully formed (and completely successful) then with Polly, if she was his first.

I highly doubt it.

[gnote]

rarely if ever, do serial killers commence with their MO, or even their sigs, full formed. And if Tabram isn't a stepping stone, then who/what was?

And that begs the question, you would have to believe his efficient MO for dispatching victims sprung fully formed (and completely successful) then with Polly, if she was his first.

I highly doubt it.

That's one of the huge questions. I think it quite unlikely his MO was at that stage with his first kill. Not impossible, but unlikely. The problem is how do we go backwards from Nichols and try to determine what his methods "should" have looked like? If they were much more similar then there wouldn't be much debate, and Nichols might not be considered the first of the canonical victims.

What if we go back a bit further to Annie Millwood? From the same general area, attacked with a knife by a stranger and no apparent motive. Perhaps if this was his first attack it might explain why it took a while before he got back to work. He was still living through the excitement of it all but possibly learned that she survived and that the police could be looking for him. So he takes some time off but in the mean time fantasizes and thinks up other things he'd like to do in the future.

[Ausgirl]

There's a lot more similarity between Millwood and Tabram than there is between Tabram and Nichols.. right? But that focus on the lower body..

Makes me wonder how likely it was that there were there TWO severely violent sole-operating serial killers running about Spitalfields, obsessed with stabbing/mutilating primarily the lower half of their victims after strangling them? It's quite possible. But just as possible that Tabram and possibly Millwood were the run-up to the first canonical murders. I'm sure there must be a bajillion threads dedicated to this very thing, though. Might go look some up.

Great posts, Abby and Harry, you both make excellent arguments.