Martha Tabram--First In The Series

[Chava]

Guys. with great respect, please, please take this to the proper thread. This is a duplication of arguments we've got going on here!

[Ben]

Ok, Hold on for a moment here......anyone else find that a very offensive remark

No more offensive that calling my views "illogical and unreasonable", despite the fact that they are vindicated by history and expert opinion. Yes, I'm sorry to say there are professional experts on serial crime, and they do not rule out Tabram. They know a good deal better from experience.

Honestly, Mike, I wouldn't have a problem if you simply disagreed, but calling my views "illogical, unreasonable" despite the fact that they tie in what the experts know happens in the real world is quite irritating.

You have no serial killer experts saying that Martha Tabram was Jacks first victim and he rapidly evolves into a methodical one performing actions completely unlike those performed on Martha for possibly his next three consecutive kills....which IS what youre claiming

Yes. In fact I do.

It's absolutely no such thing. It's the viewpoint most vindicated by experience and expert insight on the topic of serial crimes. The above description is much better applied to any insistence to the contrary.

Best regards,
Ben

Ok, Hold on for a moment here......anyone else find that a very offensive remark,... like you have some superior position based on so called "expert" sources on Jack the Rippers likely starting point?

.....you can site your modern era interview statistics about serial killers that have been caught, convicted and interviewed all you want Ben as support for your statements....but there is no such "expert" platform from which you base your opinion on Marthas inclusion into the Canonical Group. Youre making a guess and citing studies of serial killers to back it or opinions of various authority figures of the times....but you know full well there is no official "expert opinion" on who he was, who exactly he killed, why he killed, how long he killed, whether he was a local or an outsider...or when he started.

Your not offering anything like "expert" opinion that supports your guess that Martha should be considered his first or early victim. Its completely unwarranted and a self serving statement....intending to add "oomph" to your opinion, and disparage mine.

You have no "expert" consensus by "experts" studying and commenting on only Ripper crimes and Martha Tabram. You have no serial killer experts saying that Martha Tabram was Jacks first victim and he rapidly evolves into a methodical one performing actions completely unlike those performed on Martha for possibly his next three consecutive kills....which IS what youre claiming.

There is no such "Expert Opinion" soapbox on which you can stand.

I dont like when people argue with me like they have information that is somehow superior and sacrosanct and been "expert" approved.....particularly when that clearly is a false claim.

Best regards.

[Ben]

Martha Tabram has 2 distinct wound types and evidence that suggests she was choked or kept quiet while being stabbed...ok.....

It needn't be "while", Mike.

It could easily have been "before". In fact, I'd go with the latter option. Far less clumsy.

but she was not obviously on the ground when she first bleeds heavily...as the 3 mentioned were

She could easily have been on the ground when she first bleeds heavily, and probably was considering the absence of any blood-staining on the walls.

Its illogical, unreasonable and unprovable

It's absolutely no such thing. It's the viewpoint most vindicated by experience and expert insight on the topic of serial crimes. The above description is much better applied to any insistence to the contrary.

Best regards,
Ben

Hey Ben,

Martha Tabram has 2 distinct wound types and evidence that suggests she was choked or kept quiet while being stabbed...ok.....that could so very easily represent a man choking and another man stabbing....quite similar in fact to having some men hold a woman while a man inserts a blunt object into her like Emma.....but she was not obviously on the ground when she first bleeds heavily...as the 3 mentioned were....nor was she killed by a throat cut...with postmortem injuries then being inflicted.

I wont belabor the point any longer...to me its very obvious that the required elements of an actual "Ripped" victim are not present. You agree...you just say that 3 almost identical and perhaps consecutive murders that follow immediately after this one were by the same guy....after his speedy evolution.

Its illogical, unreasonable and unprovable....but as you insist....within the realm of possibility somehow, someway.

All the best granite head. .....a friendly nudge not an insult Ben.

[Mascara & Paranoia]

I'm on the fence regarding Tabram; I mostly think she was killed by the soldier she serviced or another client who was pissed off (who wasn't Jack). In fact, that seems the most likeliest scenario for her death and Jack being her killer is a little bit of a reach. But... I doubt Polly was Jack's first kill. And out of the non-canonical victims of JtR prior to the Autum of Terror, Tabram seem's the likeliest candidate to be his work when looking at her murder that way. But her murder is so completely different from Polly etc. that if he did kill Tabram then it was only as a way of plucking up the courage to kill someone; he wouldn't have killed her to satisfy the fantasies he had.

[Ben]

Hi Mike,

In Martha' case, those kinds of answers would be the result of simple guesswork and without any substantiation in evidence that is known.

Except the article in the Illustrated Police News which stated that her face became heavily swollen on account of her being throttled, as borne out by pictorial evidence. Then there's the couple who lived on the landing closest to the murder scene. They heard nothing, which would be nigh on impossible if the attacker had taken the plunge directly with the knife. She'd scream bloody murder. So no, I'd heavily dispute that my views are "based on guesswork". On the contrary.

Even ones that will become the core of his signature, and the cause for his nickname...and be repetitive. Why doesnt he just stab again?

He did, but he could easily have decided for forgo the stabbing in preference to slashing, which would amount to a pretty bog-standard example of a serial killer taking his curiosity to the next level.

How did he become sophisticated without practice between Martha and Polly

What more practice did he need? If he'd killed Tabram and attacked other women in the district - as I strongly believe he did - prior to attacking Polly, he would have been discovering his preferences as he went along, trying new things out in the process. For example, direct stabs to the abdomen didn't work - the victim cried out and escaped, so he targetted the throat next time around; same problem, then he tried suffocation, then escalted to slashing. That's all totally unproblematic. Once he alighted on his preference, he simply stuck with that and improved upon it kill after kill. Polly wasn't all that "sophisticated" by any means. It would be considered so for a serial killer's first offense, but it's not as though any organs were extracted from her, as was the case with later victims.

None of the above is a "stetch" and its certainly "based on evidence" from this and other comparable murder series. Identify the consistent ones, yes, but don't use that identification as an excuse to rule out all others. History says we can't, and shouldn't.

Best regards,
Ben

I think your missing or denying a point here Ben.....there is indeed authoritative opinion that in the case of Polly, Annie and Kate, it most likely a specific sequenced technique was used on all three. That included an attack stage that did not involve a knife. He cant subdue the women seemingly silently and lower them to the ground with one hand....and their throats were not cut until that time.

In Martha' case, those kinds of answers would be the result of simple guesswork and without any substantiation in evidence that is known.

It means he clearly shows signatures/techniques/methods/choices in the 2 women immediately following Martha Tabram...then its repeated in the death of Kate Eddowes.

Your saying that he would easily discard stabbing and just move on to more time conscious meticulous styles and methods arbitrarily. Even ones that will become the core of his signature, and the cause for his nickname...and be repetitive. Why doesnt he just stab again? How did he become sophisticated without practice between Martha and Polly...so good a system he uses it at least 2 times more after Polly? How does stabbing go from the only use of the knife on Martha to the source of the least amount of wounds inflicted on subsequent victims?

I think its a stretch Ben....and not based on evidence. A killer repeated a style and acts almost to the letter 3 times within 5 assumed murders......and since youve neglected to address this......quite possibly 3 consecutive victims.... Neither of the 2 Canonicals remaining have the vast majority of those factors present in evidence..neither does an earlier stabbing murder.

Im no expert nor do I know the correct terminology....but I would think 3 consecutive almost identical murders represents a stablized MO. Does that just appear after he floudered around on Martha?

Cheers mate.

[Ben]

Hi Mike,

There is no report that suggests medicos thought she was either unconscious or lying down when she was attacked.

It was observed in the Illustrated Police News that the victim was throttled, resulting in the swollen appearance of her face, as born out by pictorial evidence. At least we have a report to that effect, whis is more than can be said for a hypothetical killer stabbing Tabram repeatedly in an upright position. From a physiological perspective, that is highly improbable. It can't be proven that she was stabbed when in a supine position, but it's surely the most reasonable explanation.

The point I was trying to make now that the incidentals are clearer is that there is an effective method to get the victims on the ground quietly without fuss....before a knife is even used

Which could easily have been true of Tabram, for all we know.

How did he get from Martha's unclear methodology to such specificity in 4 weeks without intervening victims as his evolutionary learning tools.

Why would he need one? He would have stabbed one victim to death, and decided afterwards that he would try tearing abdomens next time around, hence Mary Ann Nichols. It would take minutes to make such a decision.

Best regards,
Ben

But where does this come from, Mike?

Where does a "wall" enter into the equation, let alone "slumping from blood loss"? There's no evidence of blood on the walls, as far as I'm aware. How do we know she wasn't stabbed on the ground?

Regards,
Ben

I was simply drawing a logical conclusion from these facts Ben....it may not have been a "wall" at all as you suggest, it could also be another man;

There is no report that suggests medicos thought she was either unconscious or lying down when she was attacked.

She has signs of some struggle evident

She could easily have been choked by one man while being stabbed by another by the evidence

A single stab wound of the 38 non-lethal ones would not cause her to die immediately, not necessarily pass out...and due to the fact that the wounds vary in depth, location and type it seems the killer could well have stabbed her many, many times before she would lose consciousness, or even slump to the ground. If her killer has an assitant, he might have even held her up somewhat during the rage venting....while choking her.

The point I was trying to make now that the incidentals are clearer is that there is an effective method to get the victims on the ground quietly without fuss....before a knife is even used, shown in the next 2 unsolved murders in the area following Martha death.

How did he get from Martha's unclear methodology to such specificity in 4 weeks without intervening victims as his evolutionary learning tools.

Sure....man evolved from apes, but not in one generation.

Cheers Ben

[Ben]

and frantically stabbing a woman who is between the killer and a wall and slumping from blood loss isnt by necessity stabbing a dead woman

But where does this come from, Mike?

Where does a "wall" enter into the equation, let alone "slumping from blood loss"? There's no evidence of blood on the walls, as far as I'm aware. How do we know she wasn't stabbed on the ground?

Regards,
Ben

I must admit you still have me very confused on this point, Mike. There's no proof that she was stabbed on the ground, but there's certainly no evidence to the contrary, and it must be considered the more logical explanation. Even if the first stab took place in an upright position, she wouldn't have remained there for very long at all - two stabs, tops.

Best regards,
Ben

There is proof that suggests the next two women killed were in that position Ben, and frantically stabbing a woman who is between the killer and a wall and slumping from blood loss isnt by necessity stabbing a dead woman. She didnt die when he stabbed her....she died as a result of dozens of stabs to muscle, tissue and vital organs, and a single death inducing larger bladed stab.

Cheers mate

(plaintive little voice)

The thing is, I started this thread more as a place where people who do think she may have been the start of the series could talk about what could be learned from her. The other thread could be used to discuss whether he is a victim at all.

Having looked at the descriptions of men seen with victims before their deaths, it seems to me that Ada Wilson's guy could well be the Ripper on an early and unfocussed foray. Because her description of her attacker matches horribly well with descriptions of a man seen with Stride, Eddowes and Kelly. If the Wilson case is a possible Ripper attack, then he was out and about previous to the Nicholls killing. And also he was stabbing rather than cutting. Wilson shows up with stab wounds to her torso and legs.

Hi Chava,

Sorry if we went astray from your intended route... but Im sure you can understand people questioning why we would be entertaining such a scenario as even plausible as well.

Its akin to opening a thread called..."Assume Lewis Carroll was the Ripper".....everyone first needs a soapbox of facts and foundation to be heard above all others.

All the best

[Ben]

If its just an evolved desire or need Ben, then how does he evolve in a month to the point where we have him committing 2 very similar, ...strikingly similar murders with consecutive victims within a months time?

Pretty easily to be honest, Mike. He simply contemplates how he might improve on his latest murder, and how he might take his highly morbid curiosity even further. Opening up an abdomen is an eminently plausible step-upwards in that regard, just as organ-extractions are a steb up from abdominal ripping. He didn't need a month to consider such an escalation. He didn't even need five minutes.

There is no evidence uncovered in the investigation of Martha Tabrams death that led the police or medical authorities to conclude she was stabbed while on the ground.

I must admit you still have me very confused on this point, Mike. There's no proof that she was stabbed on the ground, but there's certainly no evidence to the contrary, and it must be considered the more logical explanation. Even if the first stab took place in an upright position, she wouldn't have remained there for very long at all - two stabs, tops.

Best regards,
Ben

Hi..

I dont anything about anyone standing while being attacked so I dont understand your first statement. Sorry.

From what I can see of the scant "evidence" left behind in these cases JTR didnt spend as much time as he did with AC or MJK. Both Philips and Bond describe the three flaps of skin removed in both these cases. I surmise that it takes more time to do that than what was done to Eddowes. I would suppose JTRs ultimate goal was what he did to MJK and that included mutitudes of skin cutting.

I dont know if JTR knew that much about stabbing to be able to tell what kind of an act it was beyond unlawful.

Cheers

Hi Mitch,

There is no evidence uncovered in the investigation of Martha Tabrams death that led the police or medical authorities to conclude she was stabbed while on the ground. There is no mention of lividity revealing that fact.

There is cause for that assumption in other alledged Ripper murders. It quite conceivable she stood as long as he could.

Supposing Mary Kelly was the fruition of all his efforts is palatable for many students based on that assumption about his ultimate objectives, but not for myself.

Cheers Mitch.