How many women did the ripper kill?

[Harry D]

Definitely - Nichols, Chapman, Eddowes
Probably - Stride, Kelly
Possibly - McKenzie, Coles
Unlikely - Tabram, Pinchin St. Torso
No way - Mylett, Smith

[Sleuth1888]

Definitely - Nichols, Chapman, Eddowes
Probably - Stride, Kelly
Possibly - McKenzie, Coles
Unlikely - Tabram, Pinchin St. Torso
No way - Mylett, Smith

Going against the grain there, Harry, why do you feel that McKenzie and Coles are more likely to be Ripper victims that Tabram, who was murdered nearer in time to the C5?

[Harry D]

Going against the grain there, Harry, why do you feel that McKenzie and Coles are more likely to be Ripper victims that Tabram, who was murdered nearer in time to the C5?

Hello, Sleuth1888.

Simples. Both of their throats were cut from the left (same as Nichols, Chapman, Stride, & Eddowes), both were positioned to avoid blood spray, and one of them suffered abdominal mutilations. Tabram's throat wasn't cut and her body was stabbed frenziedly, with most of the attacks aimed at her top half and not her lower abdomen & genitalia. I wouldn't even call what Tabram's killer did a post-mortem 'signature', but whatever the case I find it difficult to accept that in the space of three weeks the killer would 'refine' his MO to such a consistent level.

[Sleuth1888]

Hello, Sleuth1888.

Simples. Both of their throats were cut from the left (same as Nichols, Chapman, Stride, & Eddowes), both were positioned to avoid blood spray, and one of them suffered abdominal mutilations. Tabram's throat wasn't cut and her body was stabbed frenziedly, with most of the attacks aimed at her top half and not her lower abdomen & genitalia. I wouldn't even call what Tabram's killer did a post-mortem 'signature', but whatever the case I find it difficult to accept that in the space of three weeks the killer would 'refine' his MO to such a consistent level.

How would you explain the Ripper's sudden explosion onto the scene? These sort of serial killers don't just emerge fully formed. They need time to formulate and work on an MO that satisfies them.

I just can't accept that the Ripper sprung into action, fully formed in terms of MO and then went on killing months later after Mary Kelly without any prior murders or attacks than the C5.

And in terms of MO it's not as consistent as you may believe. It took the Ripper up until MJK to feel comfortable with his method of dispatch. And even up until that point his MO changed subtly. How about Elizabeth Stride? Throat was cut but not as deep as his previous victims, and no abdominal mutilations.

[FrankO]

I wouldn't even call what Tabram's killer did a post-mortem 'signature',...

One very important feature was present, though, Harry: her murderer's obvious morbid interest in what was under Tabram's skirts, as displayed by the fact that her skirts were thrown up, leaving the lower abdomen exposed and the 3 inch cut on her lower abdomen (arguably her "private part" as written by Swanson). I find it hard to imagine that this was the result of a/the frenzy.

... but whatever the case I find it difficult to accept that in the space of three weeks the killer would 'refine' his MO to such a consistent level.

What if, on the night of Tabram's murder, the Ripper hadn't thought of acting out his fantasies yet and that he came to kill Tabram in the spur of the moment, as a result of her infuriating him so much that he killed her like he did? And that this murder caused him to want to go out and finally act out his fantasies of mutilation 3 weeks later, much more in control of himself.

All the best,
Frank

[Wickerman]

One very important feature was present, though, Harry: her murderer's obvious morbid interest in what was under Tabram's skirts, as displayed by the fact that her skirts were thrown up,....

Thats true, but this is also where these women kept their personal possessions, in a pocket tied around the waist by strings.
Compare with Chapman, her pocket was under her clothes and had been torn open, and was empty.

The press coverage of Tabram's murder is too sparse to say for sure whether she had a similar pocket hidden away under her dress, but if so, this may have been the objective of throwing up her skirt.

[Trevor Marriott]

Thats true, but this is also where these women kept their personal possessions, in a pocket tied around the waist by strings.
Compare with Chapman, her pocket was under her clothes and had been torn open, and was empty.

The press coverage of Tabram's murder is too sparse to say for sure whether she had a similar pocket hidden away under her dress, but if so, this may have been the objective of throwing up her skirt.

Or she thought that sexual activity was about to take place ?

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Abby Normal]

Thats true, but this is also where these women kept their personal possessions, in a pocket tied around the waist by strings.
Compare with Chapman, her pocket was under her clothes and had been torn open, and was empty.

The press coverage of Tabram's murder is too sparse to say for sure whether she had a similar pocket hidden away under her dress, but if so, this may have been the objective of throwing up her skirt.

That's an interesting point, but doubt that robbery was the objective-why the overkill and stab wounds to private parts?

Like the rest and McKenzie for that matter it rather obvious that the skirt pushed up was part of the rippers MO for gaining access to the abdomen and privates with his knife.

I think if stealing had anything to do with the ripper it was secondary and/or he was just trying to get his money back, if he had given it to them first.

That's how I see it anyway.

[Abby Normal]

Or she thought that sexual activity was about to take place ?

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

when shes dead lying on the ground?

[FrankO]

Thats true, but this is also where these women kept their personal possessions, in a pocket tied around the waist by strings.
Compare with Chapman, her pocket was under her clothes and had been torn open, and was empty.

The press coverage of Tabram's murder is too sparse to say for sure whether she had a similar pocket hidden away under her dress, but if so, this may have been the objective of throwing up her skirt.

I can’t say that I agree with you, Jon. Yes, the Ripper may very well have taken back his money by cutting his victims’ pockets under her skirts, but, quite obviously, this wasn’t the Ripper’s main objective of throwing up their skirts.

We can all find possible motives for Tabram’s killer to have thrown up her skirts, but this doesn’t make the facts go away that:
- Tabram’s murder no everyday murder
- Her skirts were thrown up, leaving the lower part of her body and legs exposed
- There was a 3 inch cut on her lower abdomen/private part

And even though there are obvious differences between Tabram’s murder and the later victims, these 3 facts firmly link Tabram to them, especially since we know that the Ripper was driven by an appetite to cut the lower part of the female body and that, in fact, he risked his very life for it.

Maybe the Ripper hadn’t thought of actually acting out his fantasies yet until after he’d killed Tabram, maybe he didn’t kill Tabram, but was inspired by her murder because of the above facts and maybe Tabram’s murder was even completely unrelated to the Ripper. Whichever the case, the link is there.

All the best,
Frank

[Abby Normal]

I can’t say that I agree with you, Jon. Yes, the Ripper may very well have taken back his money by cutting his victims’ pockets under her skirts, but, quite obviously, this wasn’t the Ripper’s main objective of throwing up their skirts.

We can all find possible motives for Tabram’s killer to have thrown up her skirts, but this doesn’t make the facts go away that:
- Tabram’s murder no everyday murder
- Her skirts were thrown up, leaving the lower part of her body and legs exposed
- There was a 3 inch cut on her lower abdomen/private part

And even though there are obvious differences between Tabram’s murder and the later victims, these 3 facts firmly link Tabram to them, especially since we know that the Ripper was driven by an appetite to cut the lower part of the female body and that, in fact, he risked his very life for it.

Maybe the Ripper hadn’t thought of actually acting out his fantasies yet until after he’d killed Tabram, maybe he didn’t kill Tabram, but was inspired by her murder because of the above facts and maybe Tabram’s murder was even completely unrelated to the Ripper. Whichever the case, the link is there.

All the best,
Frank

Hi Frank
I agree with you re the pushed up skirt and the possibility that the ripper might have tried to get his money back (if he had given them any), and also responded to Wickerman in kind.

But there is obviously something going on with the rippers desire to expose and cut the womans abdomen post mortem-which would explain why they were all found with their skirts pushed up.

Ive recently come to the conclusion that Mckenzie was also a(very) probable ripper victim for the fact that her skirt was also pushed up-again its the clincher for me in both her and Tabram.

The clues are there right in front of us for those who care to see.

[Wickerman]

I agree with you re the pushed up skirt and the possibility that the ripper might have tried to get his money back (if he had given them any), and also responded to Wickerman in kind.

But there is obviously something going on with the rippers desire to expose and cut the womans abdomen post mortem-which would explain why they were all found with their skirts pushed up.

But surely that is the result of viewing the Tabram murder as another Ripper victim?

I didn't mean to suggest that robbery was the motive, and neither do I view the Tabram murder as necessarily by the Ripper.

All the wounds to Tabram, except one small slice to the private area were high up on and above the abdomen.
There doesn't appear to be any reason for the killer to lift her skirts after he has stabbed her some 38? times, unless we are suggesting another interrupted victim?
The one slice (3" x 1") on her pubic area barely constitutes a Ripper-style "mutilation".

Lifting her skirt to get his money back doesn't suggest robbery either.

The stabbing to her chest did form a circular pattern, not seen nor repeated elsewhere.

[Wickerman]

I can’t say that I agree with you, Jon. Yes, the Ripper may very well have taken back his money by cutting his victims’ pockets under her skirts, but, quite obviously, this wasn’t the Ripper’s main objective of throwing up their skirts.

Hi Frank.

Whoever the killer was (or killers), he/they spent time stabbing at her neck and chest when, and in a public stairway and outside a tenants door, he/they didn't appear to have mutilation as their object.
He/they could have been discovered in seconds, yet 39 times he/they stabbed at her prostrate body in near total darkness.

I see the lifting of the skirt as being the final act, now he/they search for her pocket under the skirt to get their coppers back, and leave.

Nothing about this murder screams "Ripper" to me, so anyone who chooses to view it as such has to try justify these wounds in the best way they can. That is all I read here, people trying to justify dissimilar wounds in order to build a theory.

Multiple stabbing is what a soldier is taught to do, it is not consistent with an everyday knifing.

[Harry D]

How would you explain the Ripper's sudden explosion onto the scene? These sort of serial killers don't just emerge fully formed. They need time to formulate and work on an MO that satisfies them.

Why does any serial killer explode onto the scene?

Nichols might not have been the first, but that doesn't demand that Tabram was either. There could well have been similar murders committed before that were under-reported at the time, be it in England or abroad.

Personally, I don't see why we should be so quick to dismiss Nichols as his first kill. I'm not going to say that hand-on-heart I think that she was, because I don't know, but all killers have to start somewhere, don't they? His signature was still developing as it wasn't until Chapman that we have the definitive 'Ripper' murder. However, Nichols' murder still evinced the killer's interest in mutilation and evisceration, something distinctly lacking in Tabram's case.

I just can't accept that the Ripper sprung into action, fully formed in terms of MO and then went on killing months later after Mary Kelly without any prior murders or attacks than the C5.

I'm not sure how accepting Tabram into the canon is supposed to remedy this? You're still left with someone who in the space of three weeks turns into a consummate killer with a whole new focus and signature, all without killing anyone else in between.

And in terms of MO it's not as consistent as you may believe. It took the Ripper up until MJK to feel comfortable with his method of dispatch.

Please elaborate?

And even up until that point his MO changed subtly. How about Elizabeth Stride? Throat was cut but not as deep as his previous victims, and no abdominal mutilations.

First of all, we need to delineate between what we mean by MO & signature so our wires aren't getting crossed. The mutilations are not part of the killer's MO. In technical terms, when referring to the MO, we're talking about the way he dispatched his victims, i.e. the throat slashing and strangulation, whereas the mutilations and organ removal would be the post-mortem signature.

Stride could be ruled in or out, I tend to include her because she was cleanly dispatched, throat cut left to right with the killer preventing arterial spray, and the close proximity to the second violent murder that night. If she had been killed much later into the series then there's every chance she'd find herself with Frances Coles as only a potential victim.

One very important feature was present, though, Harry: her murderer's obvious morbid interest in what was under Tabram's skirts, as displayed by the fact that her skirts were thrown up, leaving the lower abdomen exposed and the 3 inch cut on her lower abdomen (arguably her "private part" as written by Swanson). I find it hard to imagine that this was the result of a/the frenzy.

ONE cut to the lower abdomen. That's a tenuous link to the Nichols murder, in my book, seeing as Tabram's killer focused more of his attacks in the upper body and neck rather than the abdomen and genitalia. You'll note that I haven't dismissed Tabram completely. She does have a few points in her favour but I consider most of them to be circumstantial. Whether Tabram's murder was a frenzied rage-killing or a premeditated one, I don't see enough similarities in the signature elements or enough of a time lapse to connect her to the C5.

What if, on the night of Tabram's murder, the Ripper hadn't thought of acting out his fantasies yet and that he came to kill Tabram in the spur of the moment, as a result of her infuriating him so much that he killed her like he did? And that this murder caused him to want to go out and finally act out his fantasies of mutilation 3 weeks later, much more in control of himself.

Problem with this, FrankO, is that you're starting with the assumption that Tabram was a Ripper victim and working backwards, rather than taking the evidence at face value.

[RockySullivan]

I'm of the opinion that torso murders should be included here as well. With Smith Westcott's theory about Smith possibly not telling the truth or a coverup has some weight I think. I wonder if it's possible that Tabram's murder (since it's different) could have given the torso killer the idea that he could get away with murdering on the street thus giving birth to the ripper murders? But how would smith figure in here I dont know and personally I think its more likely that Tabram IS a victim of the Torso Ripper since the newspaper found with the Whitehall torso were from the day after her inquest verdict (someones keeping a scrap book )

So in my opinion what we have is a serial killer with a large number of kills who realizes he has to switch up his MO/signature a bit in order to evade the authorities and his victims extend before and after the autumn of terror.