'Self inflicted' - seriously?

[Ausgirl]

It IS an unreasonable assumption unless they had some reason to believe that she was either mad or coming down hard off booze and flipped out.

Yep. And the reports are pretty sketchy, but I do find it odd that, were she known for self-harm or had spent time in an asylum, was having the screaming jeebies, or just didn't seem 'right', this might have been mentioned. Nope. There's just that she reported being attacked to police, and the idea that she could have injured herself, and that's that. It's annoying.

I think her case might have been taken more seriously once Tabram was attacked, but I need to read all that material again, really.

Thanks heaps for the info on these other cases. The one about the little girl was really disturbing. I read about a great many crimes against children, and there's very few that are anything like that - stranger abduction + primary attack being sharp force, non-fatal cutting + no rape.... That is very weird indeed. It's worth bolding, hehe, that's how weird it is.

[Ausgirl]

The Thames Mysteries probably need a thread to themselves

Is there one for those listed murders? Surely there is. If not, may we have one?

[Errata]

Yep. And the reports are pretty sketchy, but I do find it odd that, were she known for self-harm or had spent time in an asylum, was having the screaming jeebies, or just didn't seem 'right', this might have been mentioned. Nope. There's just that she reported being attacked to police, and the idea that she could have injured herself, and that's that. It's annoying.

I think her case might have been taken more seriously once Tabram was attacked, but I need to read all that material again, really.

Thanks heaps for the info on these other cases. The one about the little girl was really disturbing. I read about a great many crimes against children, and there's very few that are anything like that - stranger abduction + primary attack being sharp force, non-fatal cutting + no rape.... That is very weird indeed. It's worth bolding, hehe, that's how weird it is.

I figure that there is enough variety in human behavior that it is always okay to ask the question. Did you do this to yourself? Is someone at home hurting you? Do you really not remember? etc. I have never been offended with any question a doctor or a cop has ever asked me, because I know they don't know me, even if they know about my mental illness. It's a pain, but I'm not offended. On the other hand, watch how fast I can get pissed and preachy if you make assumptions. The cops were wrong. They were right to ask the question, wrong to make the assumption.

And fetish attacks are always weird. And varied.

[martin wilson]

Hi all

I've only got a couple of press reports to go on in the Annie Fordham case, and they are pretty much identical. Any more info would be appreciated.
I'll check for missing children, attacks on children etc, although it is grim stuff obviously, the sick b*******.

All the best.

[SirJohnFalstaff]

I hadn't noticed this before.. but in Killeen's comments during the Tabram inquest, he makes a comment regarding the impossibility of the "whole" of the wounds being self-inflicted. It took me a moment to process that what he meant was probably not "none of the wounds" but "she could not have done it all herself".

Just raising a question: is it possible that by "self inflicted", it meant what we call today defensive wounds?

Someone attacks you with a knife, you try to block/grab the knife with your hand, your hand gets cut. A coroner would call those defensive wounds. Maybe they were called self inflicted back in the days, since technically, you did them...

Might be far fetched. Wouldn't be my first time.

[Errata]

Hi all

I've only got a couple of press reports to go on in the Annie Fordham case, and they are pretty much identical. Any more info would be appreciated.
I'll check for missing children, attacks on children etc, although it is grim stuff obviously, the sick b*******.

All the best.

I can't speak to this case in particular, but generally any time a strange adult attacks a child and either stabbing or beating is involved, rape is also involved. It's not a psychology thing, it's the statistics. And there is a slight predominance of that rape being oral, but not enough so that I would speculate. The only exceptions tend to be when children are harmed either for ritualistic purposes, or for pornography. And with the lack of video, there would be no reason to harm her for porn. But nothing ritualistic was described. She was raped. And you can tell by the way it's described. In fact I can think of three other cases, one I actually worked on described the exact same way. There's a method involved. It seems that sick ****s always have tools at their disposal.

But with this attack being in 1882, we would then be looking at a child molester and abuser switching to attacking adults, and that almost never happens. Someone who wants kids wants kids. They will make do with an adult because of either the shame, or being unable to figure out how to get a kid without being spotted by an adult. And if it was the same guy, he knew how to get kids, and his shame certainly didn't prevent him from doing it to this girl. But people don't go from unspeakable crimes as a young adult to less terrible crimes as a 30 year old. Anymore than someone takes less coke after 15 years of heavy use than they did when they first started.

It doesn't make sense that this son of a bitch is Jack. It does however illustrate that the actions of Jack are not so unique as people like to believe.

[martin wilson]

Hi Errata

My fault, I forgot about those delicate Victorian sensibilites, it does say 'after trying to assault her'. so you are right on that.
I don't think this is early Jack, other than the coincidence of the name and the use of a knife. Certainly 'Jack the Ripper' is generally accepted as a fiction created by the press isn't he? so it seems unlikely
I am going to argue that short,middle aged women who had been drinking and in some cases may have been drunk offer a SK the benefit of vulnerability, similair perhaps to a child, but accept your point about victim type.
Still, accepting the premise of vulnerability for the moment, I would also expect attacks on that other vulnerable group, the elderly, so I will do a bit more digging.
Tragically, infanticide was not uncommon in the LVP, although in the vast majority of cases either of the parents were responsible. Stranger Danger appears much rarer but I am looking into another case which I will post as soon as I have checked a few things.
All the best.

[martin wilson]

Hi Sir John.

I don't think it's far fetched, actually I think it's very important, or rather that the lack of defensive wounds may have indicated a suicide rather than a murder, yet IIRC none of the C5 had any defensive wounds?
All the best.

[Errata]

Hi Errata

My fault, I forgot about those delicate Victorian sensibilites, it does say 'after trying to assault her'. so you are right on that.
I don't think this is early Jack, other than the coincidence of the name and the use of a knife. Certainly 'Jack the Ripper' is generally accepted as a fiction created by the press isn't he? so it seems unlikely
I am going to argue that short,middle aged women who had been drinking and in some cases may have been drunk offer a SK the benefit of vulnerability, similair perhaps to a child, but accept your point about victim type.
Still, accepting the premise of vulnerability for the moment, I would also expect attacks on that other vulnerable group, the elderly, so I will do a bit more digging.
Tragically, infanticide was not uncommon in the LVP, although in the vast majority of cases either of the parents were responsible. Stranger Danger appears much rarer but I am looking into another case which I will post as soon as I have checked a few things.
All the best.

I'm not sure that the elderly is going to end up being an alternative victim group, though you are right about the vulnerability.

Anytime you have such a tight victim group, women of a certain age, type, build, profession, whatever, it becomes safe to assume that he is killing his preferred targets, or at least the ones vulnerable enough. So I don't see him branching out of that range unless he's devolving. Bundy's last victim was a kid, Kemper's last victims were middle aged, but they were devolving. So assuming that Jack is still Jack, wasn't caught, didn't end up dead, whatever, he should have stuck with this kind of victim. But it doesn't mean he was sticking with unfortunates. Mary Kelly was indoors, and that could have been the turning point. He may have gotten enough courage to start abducting victims who were less vulnerable, but still that type. Married women. Middle Class women. Working women. But more visible victims with more powerful spouses means he can't leave bodies in the street anymore. But it also means he can bring them into his space, and he has all the time in the world. So I would think he started dumping them. Probably very well, if a slew of corpses didn't keep floating ashore or whatever.

It lends itself into thinking that he could have become the Torso Killer, but the timing isn't right on that. Personally, I would look at Scotland or Ireland, maybe Australia or the US, and look for missing women from shops or the middle class. I think that's the logical progression.

On the other hand, there's no rule that says he has to be logical.

[Ausgirl]

So Martin, it says he was trying to assault her prior to the stabbing?

Still an unusual thing for a pedophile to do. If they kill, it's usually to prevent being identified. If they kill, it's not usually by slicing their victims to ribbons, and then letting them live.

And look at this way - if he was close enough to get a knife on her and slash her up with multiple wounds, he was close enough to rape. Close enough to physically overwhelm her. He didn't -stab- either, he slashed, no fatal wounds.

It's an extremely bizarre crime, for those reasons. Poor kid.

[Errata]

So Martin, it says he was trying to assault her prior to the stabbing?

Still an unusual thing for a pedophile to do. If they kill, it's usually to prevent being identified. If they kill, it's not usually by slicing their victims to ribbons, and then letting them live.

And look at this way - if he was close enough to get a knife on her and slash her up with multiple wounds, he was close enough to rape. Close enough to physically overwhelm her. He didn't -stab- either, he slashed, no fatal wounds.

It's an extremely bizarre crime, for those reasons. Poor kid.

This is one of those crimes that was committed by a sick rapist who hadn't learned to kill yet. And may never have, if he kept his identity as well concealed as he did with this victim. I know this guy. I've worked on the files of a half dozen just like him.

We are used to hearing cases of pedophiles abducting a child, and that child being found strangled a few days later. Strangling is considered a gentler death. It's also the one that gives a killer the most control. Pedophiles tend to strangle or smother their victims because they love them in their own ****ed up way. It's a mercy killing. This was straight sadism in a pedophile. And every time those two go together, you see injuries used as restraints. Today snapping legs is more popular. But this kind of case i not as uncommon as you think. Anytime you see the occasional child assault or murder where the news gives no details, it's because it's one of these cases. At most the news says is that the child was beaten or abused. We don't want to hear things like this. We can't live with this, but we can't do anything about it either. And most of these guys are smart enough to not put themselves in front a jury, so they plead guilty. There usually isn't even a trial to watch.

This kind of case is why I quit my job at the profiler's office. I can come to an intellectual understanding of just about anything. But not this. And I have an almost perfect memory. I have to limit what I'm exposed to.

[martin wilson]

Hi all

Yes, Ausgirl, it took me a while reading through other cases before the penny dropped what assault in this context meant.
I agree this is a very strange man indeed, and like you am puzzled by his actions after he tried to assault the child.
One possibility other than the obvious one is that he was sexually dysfunctional, although that does risk giving Patricia Cornwall conniptions.
Another is that he gained some kind of sexual gratification from the act of cutting, we will never know. however it may explain why he simply didn't kill her, and why it doesn't appear to be a frenzy or rage attack.
File under weird and disturbing?

All the best.

Btw, I've found an unsolved murder thread, so I'll be posting any other cases on there. Cheers.

[Errata]

Hi all

Yes, Ausgirl, it took me a while reading through other cases before the penny dropped what assault in this context meant.
I agree this is a very strange man indeed, and like you am puzzled by his actions after he tried to assault the child.
One possibility other than the obvious one is that he was sexually dysfunctional, although that does risk giving Patricia Cornwall conniptions.
Another is that he gained some kind of sexual gratification from the act of cutting, we will never know. however it may explain why he simply didn't kill her, and why it doesn't appear to be a frenzy or rage attack.
File under weird and disturbing?

All the best.

Btw, I've found an unsolved murder thread, so I'll be posting any other cases on there. Cheers.

Stabbed children don't run when their attacker takes their hands off them for a minute. It also obscures the pain of rape. He wanted to see blood and he wanted the child conscious or he would have beaten her and risked knocking her out. But most likely this was a family friend she didn't know well enough to recognize. And he was smart enough to act in a fashion that ensured he would not be identified. Without there being the chance of him being recognized, the attack would happened differently.

[Pcdunn]

Hi all

I've only got a couple of press reports to go on in the Annie Fordham case, and they are pretty much identical. Any more info would be appreciated.
I'll check for missing children, attacks on children etc, although it is grim stuff obviously, the sick b*******.

All the best.

Martin,

I was browsing in the Library of Congress's Historic Newspaper collection, and found an American story of two children (Lennore Cohn, Charlie Murray) murdered in 1915 with a MO similar to the Fordham attack.They said letters signed "Jack the Ripper" had been sent to the mothers of the two young children.

New York Tribune, May 6, 1915

http://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lccn/sn83030214/1915-05-06/ed-1/seq-14/#date1=1915&index=0&rows=20&words=Charlie+Murray&searchType=basic&sequence=0&state=New+York&date2=1915&proxtext=Charlie+Murray&y=0&x=0&dateFilterType=yearRange&page=1

[Ausgirl]

Stabbed children don't run when their attacker takes their hands off them for a minute. It also obscures the pain of rape. He wanted to see blood and he wanted the child conscious or he would have beaten her and risked knocking her out. But most likely this was a family friend she didn't know well enough to recognize. And he was smart enough to act in a fashion that ensured he would not be identified. Without there being the chance of him being recognized, the attack would happened differently.

The vast majority of sadistic pedophiles I've looked at have no problem whatsoever with attacking kids they don't know. Statistics support that the majority of child rape is committed by non-strangers. But there's the Derek Percys of the world, too, and this looks a lot like something a monster like him would do.

As for it being unlikely there could be age group crossover -- that happens, too. Not often. But people like JtR and the sod who hurt this child are not your average rapist/killer/pedophile either.

Not saying I really think this was JtR who slashed the girl, but vulnerability might play a bigger role in victim choice for someone akin to him, rather than (or as well as) some fixated "type".

I am not arguing it, but it *could be* feasibly argued that JtR started out with attacks like the child one and Annie Millwood with her legs all stabbed but alive, and moved steadily on toward the horror of Mary Kelly's murder. While occasionally interrupting this progress with a 'lesser' crime.

It's not like no-one has ever done such a thing.