The increasing acceptance of Martha Tabram...

[Wickerman]

Hi Phil,
The other way round ...
The hypothesis is that serial killers kill their first victim close to their home. (Probably because their first killing is the least planned, it often being an accident.)

Ok, then consider this.

With the first murder he does not know he is a serial killer at this point. He is just another murderer, of one.

Therefore, does it also ring true that all single murders are committed near to the killers home? (answer - no, it is not true).

The only difference between a serial killer and a one-off killer being, a serial killer commits more murders and progressively commits them further away from home? (answer - possibly).

However, because we know all single murders are not committed near the killers home, and the killer cannot know he is becoming a serial killer, the premiss cannot true.

.

[K-453]

Hi Phil,

As we do not know where "Jack" lived, how can we even hypothesise that "If it is true serial killers likely kill their first victim close to their home, and if Jack really dropped the piece of Catherine Eddowes' apron on his way home, well, look ..."

The other way round ...
The hypothesis is that serial killers kill their first victim close to their home. (Probably because their first killing is the least planned, it often being an accident.)
According to this hypothesis, Jack would either live in or close to Buck's Row, or in or close to George Yard, depending on whether you regard Polly Nichols or Martha Tabram as his first victim.

I assume that Jonathan and the Druittists would not agree with that argument, just as an example, because they don't believe the kliller lived in the area.

I assume the same, for the same reason.

So you think the killer lived in George Yard?

I think it could be at least possible.

[Fisherman]

Almost all Pen knives, of the period particularly, were folding knives. Thats why one would make a lousy stabbing tool....its possible to slice off some of your own fingers while doing so. They were intended to be used with any pressure being applied to the blade against that locking mechanism, whatever kind it was, but with a stab, one might apply pressure that in effect closes the knife.

Its one very good reason for discounting this murder as a Ripper starter kill....no-one setting out to kill with a knife would opt for a knife of that kind, for stabbing or slicing. A fixed blade would always be preferable and far more effective, like the bayonet or dagger that finishes her. The fact that a small utility knife is used, something like any good soldier would carry in his pocket...like matches, or a compass, and other such items.....seems to indicate that the person who used the knife was not prepared to stab or slice anyone that night. Its the reason he stabs so many times...he knows that its quantity, not the "quality" of the wounds, that will finally kill the woman.

Best regards

I agree that the smallish knife seems an illogical choice for somebody who had set out to kill.
I donīt think, however, that we can conclude that it was a folding knife - we only know that the blade was smallish.
Nor do I think we can discount the murder as a Ripper kill - to strengthen such a bid, we must accept that he had set out to kill on the night. We donīt know that. "The opportunity makes the thief" is something we say here in Sweden. That could well apply to killing too.
I would also say that he may well have stabbed so many times because he enjoyed it, and not necessarily to ensure death. Particularly if he had the larger weapon, the one used to pierce the sternum later, at hand as he stabbed away. And if he DID, then we may not need to worry about the first point I made in my answer!

All the best, Michael!
Fisherman

[Wickerman]

The mutilations are the reason why I think it is possible Martha Tabram was a Ripper victim.

Another thought: If it is true serial killers likely kill their first victim close to their home, and if Jack really dropped the piece of Catherine Eddowes' apron on his way home, well, look ...

Hi.
So you think the killer lived in George Yard?

[Michael W Richards]

Hi Boris!

I donīt know if youīve noticed it yourself, but you are actually saying that it would not have been a pen-knife, since they are too small and fragile. And then you say that Killeen probably had just a pen-knife sized knife in mind.

But if it was pen-knife sized, Boris, then why would it not be a ... pen-knife?

These knives came in many types, some of them sturdy, some more fragile. It is not as if they were all the same. And you must keep in mind that Killeen actually did point the smallish knife out as fragile - he said that it would break if tried at the sternum. And the reason for this was arguably that he had identified the blade as a smallish, frailish one.

The best,
Fisherman

Almost all Pen knives, of the period particularly, were folding knives. Thats why one would make a lousy stabbing tool....its possible to slice off some of your own fingers while doing so. They were intended to be used with any pressure being applied to the blade against that locking mechanism, whatever kind it was, but with a stab, one might apply pressure that in effect closes the knife.

Its one very good reason for discounting this murder as a Ripper starter kill....no-one setting out to kill with a knife would opt for a knife of that kind, for stabbing or slicing. A fixed blade would always be preferable and far more effective, like the bayonet or dagger that finishes her. The fact that a small utility knife is used, something like any good soldier would carry in his pocket...like matches, or a compass, and other such items.....seems to indicate that the person who used the knife was not prepared to stab or slice anyone that night. Its the reason he stabs so many times...he knows that its quantity, not the "quality" of the wounds, that will finally kill the woman.

Best regards

[Phil H]

I am unsure what the RED LINE represents - it cannot be a proposed "route" since it appears to go through brick walls etc.

As we do not know where "Jack" lived, how can we even hypothesise that "If it is true serial killers likely kill their first victim close to their home, and if Jack really dropped the piece of Catherine Eddowes' apron on his way home, well, look ..."

Look at what pray?

I assume that Jonathan and the Druittists would not agree with that argument, just as an example, because they don't believe the kliller lived in the area.

You are also making the assumption that Martha's killer also murdered Eddowes, since you link to the apron-part. That could be perceived as self-sustaining and not true logic.

I have nothing against what you are arguing, K-453, it's the process by which you get there...

Phil

[K-453]

The mutilations are the reason why I think it is possible Martha Tabram was a Ripper victim.

Another thought: If it is true serial killers likely kill their first victim close to their home, and if Jack really dropped the piece of Catherine Eddowes' apron on his way home, well, look ...

[Phil H]

That may be a reasonable surmise based on another killer's experience, and what is possible.

But I do not find it convincing as a reason to link Tabram to the killer of Polly and Annie. IMHO K-453's post is entirely speculative.

What are the links:

a) the locality - close to the locations of later killings (bit so were the Pinchen St torso and Coles and they are not usually linked just on that fact);

b) the over-the-top nature of the murder (with Polly and Annie the abdominal mutilation; with Martha the frenzied 39 stab wounds);

c) the timing and the fact that the women might have been/had been soliciting.

But none of those NEED be more than coincidental.

The point from recent posts that HAVE made me look again at this case is the suggestion that Martha did suffer from some form of abdominal/genital mutilation, but that this was covered by euphemisms in the press. Now, IF Martha was wounded in that way, I would take the linkage MUCH more seriously. I think that could change the whole ball-game.

Phil

[K-453]

Theory

Martha Tabram could have been the drunken accident that started the series. It was Bank Holiday, many people got drunk - why not Jack? Well ... people in that state have one-night-stands, they do all kinds of things they wouldn't when sober, and which they sometimes regret. So what happens when someone who fantasizes about stabbing, slicing, and gutting people since his youth marinates his brain in alcohol?

This could explain why the murder of Martha Tabram differers from the others, and does not look like the work of a planning killer. Because it was not planned. It maybe even was not wanted. But when Jack realized he had finally fallen for his demons, he went on killing, and tried to make the "best" of it.

Inspiration for this theory came from Jeffrey Dahmer, who woke up in a hotel room one morning next to a bleeding corpse and without memory of the night before, because he had gotten so drunk. That man was not Dahmer's first victim, but the one that started his killing spree.

[Fisherman]

Hello all,

I'm convinced that Dr Killeen had a pen-knife-sized knife in mind when he wrote his post mortem report, not necessarily a pen-knife itself. Real pen-knifes used for sharpening quills and pencils are too small and fragile to be used for stabbing, even the comparably inexperienced Killeen must have known that. He also didn't mention a pen-knife during the inquest from what I've read in the JTR Sourcebook.

What's more, I came across a lot of pictures and descriptions of Victorian era-pen-knife types when I did some research a few years ago. Apparently, the term was loosely used for various types of small knifes, from real pen-knifes to lockable pocket-knifes with quite sturdy blades. This leads me to believe that Killeen simply meant "small knife" with his pen-knife comment.

Likewise, the reference to a sword bayonet or dagger seems more like a general description of the size of the blade and the type of wound on Martha's sternum. Usually daggers and sword bayonets have two cutting edges which results in a stab wound that looks different to one inflicted with a single-edged knife, maybe it's this what Killeen wanted to get across.

Regards,

Boris

Hi Boris!

I donīt know if youīve noticed it yourself, but you are actually saying that it would not have been a pen-knife, since they are too small and fragile. And then you say that Killeen probably had just a pen-knife sized knife in mind.

But if it was pen-knife sized, Boris, then why would it not be a ... pen-knife?

These knives came in many types, some of them sturdy, some more fragile. It is not as if they were all the same. And you must keep in mind that Killeen actually did point the smallish knife out as fragile - he said that it would break if tried at the sternum. And the reason for this was arguably that he had identified the blade as a smallish, frailish one.

The best,
Fisherman

[Abby Normal]

Hi Niko.

Well, my own thoughts are that Tabram was murdered by a soldier, or two.

But, if it was JtR, this may have been an early kill, and an even earlier attempt may have been Ada Wilson, where the man used a clasp knife.

Then with Tabram, a clasp knife and a dagger?

Subsequently, with Nichols, the dagger alone.

Progressive?

.

Hi wick

Well, my own thoughts are that Tabram was murdered by a soldier, or two

.
JtR could have been a soldier. I dont know how many times I have seen people discount Tabram as a ripper victim because "she was probably killed by the soldier". They are not mutually exclusive.

But, if it was JtR, this may have been an early kill, and an even earlier attempt may have been Ada Wilson, where the man used a clasp knife.

Then with Tabram, a clasp knife and a dagger?

Subsequently, with Nichols, the dagger alone.

Progressive?

my thoughts exactly.

[robhouse]

Hi Rob,

Very interesting. When I was about nine, in the early 60s, a man in a parked car exposed himself to me and my best friend as we walked up the road. He offered us half a crown (two shillings and sixpence) if we would play with it. We memorised his car registration number before legging it back to my friend's house, where her parents called the police. A WPC then arrived and took a statement from us. My friend's dad had referred to the man's offending appendage as his "John Thomas" (which I had not heard before and it made me giggle) but the WPC suggested that for the purposes of the statement we should say that the man showed us "the lower part of his body".

Howzat?

Love,

Caz
X

Hi Caz,

Seems to be a "real-world" validation of my theory. All this makes me really think that it seems more and more likely that Tabram and Millwood were early Ripper attacks.

Rob

[caz]

Inspector John Spratling wrote a report based on notes he took while Llewellyn examined Nichols' body, indicating “tw[o] small stabs on private parts.” Also, the nature of the cuts, with a knife “which had been used violently and been used downwards” seems to suggest stabbing.

In the case of Tabram, Donald Swanson, in his summary report of the murder, noted that there were “39 wounds on body, and neck, and private part.” Any mention of wounds to the "private part" is omitted from newspaper accounts of the inquest, although a couple papers mentioned wounds in "the legs," which is almost certainly a euphemism for "private part" mentioned by Swanson. Only one newspaper, the East London Observer, noted the existence of an additional wound: “The lower portion of the body was penetrated in one place, the wound being three inches in length and one in depth.” The Observer also noted that “there was a deal of blood between the legs, which were separated.”

A comparison of different newspaper accounts clearly reveals that the mention of this wound was deliberately suppressed in most newspaper accounts. For example:

The Observer wrote:

The lower portion of the body was penetrated in one place, the wound being three inches in length and one in depth. From appearances, there was no reason to suppose that recent intimacy had taken place.

Whereas, the Advertiser wrote (describing the same part of the inquest clearly):

Dr. Keeling then described where the wounds had been made, and in answer to questions stated positively that there were no signs of there having been recent connexion.


The coroner also “thanked Dr. Keeling for the very careful way in which he had given his testimony.”

Annie Millwood was attacked "by a man who she did not know, and who stabbed her with a clasp knife which he took from his pocket.” She was admitted to the Whitechapel Infirmary with numerous stab wounds in the “legs and lower part of the body.” Lower part of the body could very well be a euphemism for genitalia, as I suspect it was in the case of Tabram also.

RH

Hi Rob,

Very interesting. When I was about nine, in the early 60s, a man in a parked car exposed himself to me and my best friend as we walked up the road. He offered us half a crown (two shillings and sixpence) if we would play with it. We memorised his car registration number before legging it back to my friend's house, where her parents called the police. A WPC then arrived and took a statement from us. My friend's dad had referred to the man's offending appendage as his "John Thomas" (which I had not heard before and it made me giggle) but the WPC suggested that for the purposes of the statement we should say that the man showed us "the lower part of his body".

Howzat?

Love,

Caz
X

[bolo]

Hello all,

I'm convinced that Dr Killeen had a pen-knife-sized knife in mind when he wrote his post mortem report, not necessarily a pen-knife itself. Real pen-knifes used for sharpening quills and pencils are too small and fragile to be used for stabbing, even the comparably inexperienced Killeen must have known that. He also didn't mention a pen-knife during the inquest from what I've read in the JTR Sourcebook.

What's more, I came across a lot of pictures and descriptions of Victorian era-pen-knife types when I did some research a few years ago. Apparently, the term was loosely used for various types of small knifes, from real pen-knifes to lockable pocket-knifes with quite sturdy blades. This leads me to believe that Killeen simply meant "small knife" with his pen-knife comment.

Likewise, the reference to a sword bayonet or dagger seems more like a general description of the size of the blade and the type of wound on Martha's sternum. Usually daggers and sword bayonets have two cutting edges which results in a stab wound that looks different to one inflicted with a single-edged knife, maybe it's this what Killeen wanted to get across.

Regards,

Boris

[Wickerman]

Did those knives lock?

That is what 'clasp' refers to, the locking mechanism, if I'm not mistaken.
Thats the difference between a clasp knife and a pen knife. one locks and the other does not.

(Originally, a pen-knife was something different again)