'Self inflicted' - seriously?

[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.

[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]

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.

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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?

[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.

[Errata]

Self inflicted knife wounds actually are pretty common in some circles. As is blaming it on a mysterious attacker. Mentally ill people do it, and addicts in withdrawal do it. There's a reason people coming off drugs don't get sharp objects. When they start feeling the bugs under their skin, they will inflict an enormous amount of damage to themselves just with their fingernails. Imagine if they could get a knife to cut out the bugs.

When they come around they are embarrassed and afraid. They don't want to get locked up, so they say they were attacked.

It's estimated that 10% or more of knife injuries are purposefully self inflicted. Some do it for attention, some botched suicide attempts, some to relieve some kind of internal pressure. One guy skinned his own chest because he was bored. They were sure he was crazy, but no, just bored with a high pain threshold. It's not an unreasonable question.

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.

[martin wilson]

Hi all

SHOCKING OUTRAGE UPON A LITTLE CHILD. 29TH December 1882.

'Uncle Jack'?

At 8.p.m on the 20th December 1882, 5 year old Annie Fordham went missing from the gateway of her house in Bawcott street New Kent Road.
She was found on the doorstep of a publicans in Walworth at 1.am, exhausted and with bloodmarks about her.
She was taken indoors where her wife examined her and found she was cut about the body as with a knife (sic)
The parents had informed the police the child was missing, and when the publicans went to the police at Rodney road Walworth, they realised it was the missing child.
She was examined by Dr Evans, divisional surgeon who said the cuts were very severe, although not enough to endanger life.
Annie said a man took her hand and said he was her uncle Jack, after wandering about for a long time he took her down a dark turning, threw her down and hacked her about. After he left her she managed to crawl to the publcans.
She had never seen the man before.

All the best.

[martin wilson]

The Thames Mysteries probably need a thread to themselves, and extra bandwith I think, but I did a list of initial press reports.

10/5/1890 Unknown female.
28/3/1892 Elizabeth Emma Rogers 26.
15/12/1893 Kate Dungy
27/7/95 Agnes Norcutt/ unknown (Agnes turned up safe and well!)
13/3/1897 Lydia Smith 53.
12/6/1897 Unknown female, described as an unfortunate.
21/9/1897 Emma Johnson.
9/10/1897 Lily Cheeseman.
3/10/1903 Kate Eliza Rule.

As I say, initial press reports only at the moment.
All the best.

[martin wilson]

Hi all

THAMES MYSTERY 17/11/1888.

This is the death by drowning of Florence Annie Hancock 26 of Pulross street Brixton found in the Thames of Wapping by William Wood, boatman on Friday 9th November.
She was identified by her husband George Hancock, a carpenter who she had left 2 years previous, and photographs by her friend Beatrice Williams, widow.
Last seen on October 22nd 1888 at 11.35p.m in the Northumberland at Charing Cross, where she was having a drink with Beatrice.
She was in the company of a man described as tall, fair. with a heavy moustache.

Mr Pain.
Friend of Florence, according to Williams, allowed her £5 a week, denied by Pain at the inquest, although he did call on her regularly..
He saw her on October 22nd at Broad St station. Florence told Beatrice she had 'had words with her gentleman, but still got her money'.
Pain left for a tour of the Lake District, Isle Of Man and Ireland, returning on 7th of November, Alice Land, servant of the deceased told him she had drowned and he seemed 'much upset'

All the best.