The increasing acceptance of Martha Tabram...

[Defective Detective]

Right, I get that 'Jack' could have started out with disjointing women, then switched to a more frenzied, less precise modus operandi. If there were only Torso killings in 1889, after the Ripper slayings, I would have no problem suggesting they were the same man: that he began to realize that taking apart a woman's limbs did nothing for him and he looked to more intimate forms of murder to get his kicks.

But there was also the Rainham mystery in 1887 and the Whitehall Mystery in September of 1888, right in the middle of the Ripper killings.

My problem with it is that there's no logical progression, from [Torso murder]/[Torso murder]/[Ripper murder]/[Ripper murder][Ripper murder] or the inverse. You begin with a torso killing, then you get a series of rippings with a torso in betwixt them, then you conclude with torso killings in 1889.

Again, I get a killer can vary up his MO. But will he switch back and forth between different MOs seemingly at will?

[RockySullivan]

Right, I get that 'Jack' could have started out with disjointing women, then switched to a more frenzied, less precise modus operandi. If there were only Torso killings in 1889, after the Ripper slayings, I would have no problem suggesting they were the same man: that he began to realize that taking apart a woman's limbs did nothing for him and he looked to more intimate forms of murder to get his kicks.

But there was also the Rainham mystery in 1887 and the Whitehall Mystery in September of 1888, right in the middle of the Ripper killings.

My problem with it is that there's no logical progression, from [Torso murder]/[Torso murder]/[Ripper murder]/[Ripper murder][Ripper murder] or the inverse. You begin with a torso killing, then you get a series of rippings with a torso in betwixt them, then you conclude with torso killings in 1889.

Again, I get a killer can vary up his MO. But will he switch back and forth between different MOs seemingly at will?

Yes he will switch back and forth because the dismemberment likely has to do with availability of setting to dismember/hiding id

[RockySullivan]

Also the pinchin st torso was in 89. I'm not sure if you were saying that or not I'm not so sharp with the dates myself. However for me personally I see no problem with dismembering happening alongside rippings. For me it says some of the torsos might be high end gals from brothels or girls who were willing to go to torsos residence. The fact that uterus was removed from torso victim says to me torso is jack but again it's my opinion and prediction for the future of how ripper case will be viewed

[RockySullivan]

I need to study up on the 70s torsos tho because I don't know the details of those cases and that's the one thing that strikes me as odd is the gap so maybe torso is locked up or somewhere else. I'm no longer so sure ripper is a butcher although I think it's likely he could have learned how to remove organs from his torsos.

[Ghost]

For some reason, there have been a couple of threads in the past few days suggesting links to the Torso killer. I just read up a little on the case just now, so forgive my suggestion if it's naive. But it seems like you might be able to develop a suspect for the torso killer doing the following:

Assume the 70s Torso killings have the same killer as the ones in the late 80s, and assume that he is a doctor or medical student. Check arrest or other incarceration records for such a person shortly after the 70s murders. I can't imagine there would be a lot of medical students/doctors placed under arrest in that timeframe. If you find one, see if he was released not too long before the 80s killings. Then see if he also has links to Whitechapel.

I guess what I'm saying is that you have to ask the classic question, why did he stop? And if there's a gap of 10-15 years, it seems to me that incarceration or institutionalization is the most likely answer.

Like I said, maybe totally naive. I'm no expert. But if you think Torso is also Jack, then that seems to me to be as logical of a place to start as any.

[RockySullivan]

For some reason, there have been a couple of threads in the past few days suggesting links to the Torso killer. I just read up a little on the case just now, so forgive my suggestion if it's naive. But it seems like you might be able to develop a suspect for the torso killer doing the following:

Assume the 70s Torso killings have the same killer as the ones in the late 80s, and assume that he is a doctor or medical student. Check arrest or other incarceration records for such a person shortly after the 70s murders. I can't imagine there would be a lot of medical students/doctors placed under arrest in that timeframe. If you find one, see if he was released not too long before the 80s killings. Then see if he also has links to Whitechapel.

I guess what I'm saying is that you have to ask the classic question, why did he stop? And if there's a gap of 10-15 years, it seems to me that incarceration or institutionalization is the most likely answer.

Like I said, maybe totally naive. I'm no expert. But if you think Torso is also Jack, then that seems to me to be as logical of a place to start as any.

Ghost that's a pretty good idea. I'm sorry to hijack so many threads and talk about torso. The one thing is....i'm not sure there's anything to indicate that torso was a medical student/dr/surgeon. It's of course possible just like the ripper being medical profession is a well accepted theory. I personally wonder if torso wasnt some kind of construction worker or someone who wouldve had access to new scotland yard vaults since the building was in construction phase.

[Michael W Richards]

An excellent post, Mike, but I don't quite agree with you on this point. Surely, motive can surely only truly determined if the perpetrator is captured? Even then, even in the best-documented case studies, motives remain open to speculation and debate.

MO, on the other hand, is a different kettle of fish. One can at least have the semblance of an objective analysis based on MO, where the details of the crimes, wounds etc, are documented. With many of the Whitechapel Murders, we are in a reasonably good position in that regard.

Thanks Sam, but I am sticking with my comment about Motive. I believe you can very often deduce probable motives for crimes based on the physical and circumstantial evidence, although I would add that physical evidence can be manipulated to mislead.

An example would be the discovery of someone who has been killed and clearly robbed. The motive would probably have been to get the money and goods, not to kill, and the kill is just probably a result of an on the spot decision made by the criminal.

I believe we can deduce probable Motives for Polly and Annie, because we can eliminate some of the most common causes. There was no money to get, there is no indication that the parties knew each other, and there is the commonality of post mortem abdominal wounds, along with the double throat cuts of course. Ergo, they were likely killed by someone seeking to kill and then cut.

That cannot be so easily said about any other Canonical murder.

Cheers Sam

[Michael W Richards]

Nichols - multiple deep abdominal slashes

Chapman - abdominal flesh removed in three flaps; uterus and part of bladder removed from scene; colon accidentally cut

Eddowes - single deep abdominal slash; uterus and kidney removed from scene; colon (initially accidentally?) cut and removed, but left at scene; face badly slashed

Kelly - abdominal flesh removed in three flaps; heart removed from scene; all abdominal and some thoracic organs removed, but left at scene; face extensively slashed; limbs excoriated

I see clear patterns and a progressive escalation here.

What is there Sam is a group of women that had injuries inflicted on them by knife or knives, and new activities performed that are not limited to killing them then cutting their abdomens. The disfigurement of Kates face, and the attempt to take Mary apart are not actions that we see any indication of interest in by the killer of Polly and Annie.

The fact that somethings are repeated with Kate and Mary might just mean that their killer read newspapers, not that the same individual felt a need to add new and unrelated actions to his repertoire.

Cheers

[c.d.]

So are we to believe that a killer who had no problem cutting a woman's abdomen would never dream of cutting her face because that would be off limits and just downright icky?

c.d.

[Trevor Marriott]

What is there Sam is a group of women that had injuries inflicted on them by knife or knives, and new activities performed that are not limited to killing them then cutting their abdomens. The disfigurement of Kates face, and the attempt to take Mary apart are not actions that we see any indication of interest in by the killer of Polly and Annie.

The fact that somethings are repeated with Kate and Mary might just mean that their killer read newspapers, not that the same individual felt a need to add new and unrelated actions to his repertoire.

Cheers

Another thing with regards to linking all of these murders is that many people always assume that just because all except Tabram had their throats cut, this automatically links then to the same killer. It does not, the majority of murders involving knives back then was by throat cutting.

Today very few knife related murders involve throat cutting.

[John G]

Once very 2,000 years

Hello,

Following the Tabram murder the East London Advertiser opined that "The statistics or returns of criminal offences show that, in proportion, there is really no more crime, either of a greater or lesser degree, in East London than in any other part of the metropolis or, for that matter, Great Britain."

In fact, at the time murder in Whitechapel was very uncommon. The Annual Report of the Sanitary Conditions of Whitechapel listed no murders at all in 1886 or 1887. And only one murder was listed for the entire Whitechapel area in 1889 and one in 1890: see Keppel and Birnes (2009).

Moreover, modern analysis suggests that murders involving trauma to the genital area are incredibly rare, amounting to just 0.1% of all murder cases. And characteristics of both posing and mutilation occur in just 0.05% of cases: see Keppel et al. (2005).

Therefore, taking into account the overall Whitechapel murder rate of the period, it can be estimated that you would expect a Tabram-style murder to occur in Whitechapel once every 2,000 years and a MJK- style murder once every 4,000 years!

To my mind it is a serious mistake to focus on direct similarities of MO. That is just the sort of mistake that was initially made by the police in relation to the Jean Jordan murder. They refused to confirm that she was a Yorkshire Ripper victim because, they argued, there was nothing to suggest she was a prostitute, she had not been sexually assaulted, the mutilations were more extensive than other YR victims and, unlike any other confirmed YR killings, she had been decapitated.

Of course, it was subsequently determined that she was killed by the Yorkshire Ripper. Sutcliffe later explained variations in Mo by revealing that he became frustrated that he couldn't find an incriminating £5 note, leading him to give vent to his frustrations by extensively slashing the body, something that made even him vomit. He also explained that he decapitated the victim because it was his intention to "create a mystery about the body."

In other words, he didn't want the police to realize that he had crossed the Pennines into Lancashire.

In conclusion, Martha Tabram was a very rare type of a murder and, considering what was to happen in Whitechapel, a small geographical district of London, as 1888 progressed results, to my mind, in the conclusion that the odds are overwhelming that she was, indeed, a JTR victim.

Best wishes,

John

[Defective Detective]

John G:

You'd think. On the other hand, the late-1880s seem to have been mad season in Victorian Britain for killers of women. Students of the case can name quite a few who were related to the area in some way: Kelly, Bury, Klosowski, and so on. I'm not sure you can make a direct statistical comparison on matters like these.

[RockySullivan]

Hello,

Following the Tabram murder the East London Advertiser opined that "The statistics or returns of criminal offences show that, in proportion, there is really no more crime, either of a greater or lesser degree, in East London than in any other part of the metropolis or, for that matter, Great Britain."

In fact, at the time murder in Whitechapel was very uncommon. The Annual Report of the Sanitary Conditions of Whitechapel listed no murders at all in 1886 or 1887. And only one murder was listed for the entire Whitechapel area in 1889 and one in 1890: see Keppel and Birnes (2009).

Moreover, modern analysis suggests that murders involving trauma to the genital area are incredibly rare, amounting to just 0.1% of all murder cases. And characteristics of both posing and mutilation occur in just 0.05% of cases: see Keppel et al. (2005).

Therefore, taking into account the overall Whitechapel murder rate of the period, it can be estimated that you would expect a Tabram-style murder to occur in Whitechapel once every 2,000 years and a MJK- style murder once every 4,000 years!

To my mind it is a serious mistake to focus on direct similarities of MO. That is just the sort of mistake that was initially made by the police in relation to the Jean Jordan murder. They refused to confirm that she was a Yorkshire Ripper victim because, they argued, there was nothing to suggest she was a prostitute, she had not been sexually assaulted, the mutilations were more extensive than other YR victims and, unlike any other confirmed YR killings, she had been decapitated.

Of course, it was subsequently determined that she was killed by the Yorkshire Ripper. Sutcliffe later explained variations in Mo by revealing that he became frustrated that he couldn't find an incriminating £5 note, leading him to give vent to his frustrations by extensively slashing the body, something that made even him vomit. He also explained that he decapitated the victim because it was his intention to "create a mystery about the body."

In other words, he didn't want the police to realize that he had crossed the Pennines into Lancashire.

In conclusion, Martha Tabram was a very rare type of a murder and, considering what was to happen in Whitechapel, a small geographical district of London, as 1888 progressed results, to my mind, in the conclusion that the odds are overwhelming that she was, indeed, a JTR victim.

Best wishes,

John

What are the statistics for uteri removing killers...cuz according to the general consensus there were 2 seperate killers removing that organ from victims in 1888.

[John G]

John G:

You'd think. On the other hand, the late-1880s seem to have been mad season in Victorian Britain for killers of women. Students of the case can name quite a few who were related to the area in some way: Kelly, Bury, Klosowski, and so on. I'm not sure you can make a direct statistical comparison on matters like these.

Hi,

Jams Kelly killed his own wife in 1883 targeting her neck; she was not mutilated. The crime did not take place in Whitechapel, was a domestic killing and therefore, on the whole, far more common than that of a killer who murderers strangers, and who targets the genitals and inflicts abdominal injuries- outside of 1888 I'm not aware of a single example of a murder in the history of Whitechapel bearing such characteristics.

George Chapman's was a poisoner, again a far more common type of murderer (Harold Shipman, for instance, may have killed 300 of his own patients by this method). Moreover, all of his murders took place between 1895 and 1901 and were domestic killings- again far more common than a killer targeting prostitutes out in the open.

William Bury's interesting, though. Although this was another domestic killing, which took place in Dundee, Ellen Bury was mutilated, although not severely. However, I wouldn't rule him out as JTR and Euan Macpherson certainly make a strong case.

Cheers,

John

[John G]

What are the statistics for uteri removing killers...cuz according to the general consensus there were 2 seperate killers removing that organ from victims in 1888.

Of hand I'm not aware of any similar crimes, i.e. involving the removal of uteri, occurring anywhere in the UK post 1888. The possibility, therefore, of two such killers operating in the same small geographical area, and in the same year, must be incredibly small. Frankly, its probably a million times more likely that Russell Edwards and Dr Jari will be completely vindicated!