overkill

[Lozle]

Hi,

Well thats certainly a reasonable idea and something which I have also pondered over. Especially as the attack seems to suggest someone in a rage or in an emotional state. I doubt it would take much for a soldier to flip at something like that. I don't think men who are not soldiers and are quite fixed in themselves would take ridicule too well by an "unfortunate" or by someone they believe to be in the trade.

Many thanks

[halomanuk]

If a soldier is already highly-strung due to duty or whatever reason or just a feeling of guilt or lack of self-respect because he has gone with an 'unfortunate' then all it may take is a comment from Tabram about the size of his manhood or something and that would push him over the edge and all that frustration and pent up anger would be vented on her.

Could be something as simple as that maybe...

[Lozle]

Hello again,
Hi Michael, you're going to have enough of me soon .
Interesting point, and yes I noticed she was in the company of soldiers and soldiers were sighted around George Yard which initially got me thinking it could quite easily have been them. Furthermore, the fact they would have weapons on them and known how to use them more than skillfully persuaded that line of thinking for me.

Though the attack on Martha Tabram with - in my opinion - personal/emotional, frenzied numerous stabbings is where I wavered on the soldiers a little.

Though I still feel the strongest arguement for who the killers were would be the soldiers. But the emotional attachment which appears quite blatantly present - to me - confuses me a little, unless something happened at the time which Martha Tabram could have been responsible for, such as; ridiculing, being aggressive or threatening etc. Unfortunately, we'll never know what happened there and then.
Many thanks.

Hello again,
I agree the most logical explanation for the wounds inflicted would have been made with 2different weapons, and perhaps 2different people.

Though why would someone carry 2different types of blade on them? Unless the murderer was carrying one blade and found another weapon Martha Tabram was carrying? And it doesn't make sense that someone would stab a woman numerous times driven by strong emotional arousal -my personal view-, pause, rumage for something, find another weapon and give her a few more stabs. Whether that single deep wound was the first or whether it was the numerous shallower stabs that came first, it's still ambiguous.

Unless there was more than one individual. If there was more than one individual you could interpret the stabbings as...
1) the shallow, numerous stabs made by someone with an intense emotional connection to Martha Tabram
2) the single deep wound made by someone more controlled then the individuals who inflicted shallow frenzied stabbings.

Though, the matter of one individual or more than one possessing more than one weapon does tend to suggest a premedated act... Perhaps?

Many thanks.

Ill let Fisherman tell you why two men is plausible but that they may not have been working together Lauren...but on the issue of the weapons themselves, it is said of the times that on Public or Bank Holidays, current or ex-military men were permitted to wear their dress uniforms complete with short sword or bayonets.

A pen knife is by definition a "pocket knife", in that it folds and can be carried around daily....so yes.....men coulod have worn 2 or more weapons and had yet another in their pocket.

Interesting when we note who was last seen in her company and who is seen near her murder site.....1 of 2 soldiers went with her after she left Pearly Poll, and 1 of 2 soldiers was seen by a PC waiting for another in George Yard.

2 soldiers could easily equal 4 bladed weapons on a Bank Holiday.

All the best L.

[Lozle]

Hello again,
I agree the most logical explanation for the wounds inflicted would have been made with 2different weapons, and perhaps 2different people.

Though why would someone carry 2different types of blade on them? Unless the murderer was carrying one blade and found another weapon Martha Tabram was carrying? And it doesn't make sense that someone would stab a woman numerous times driven by strong emotional arousal -my personal view-, pause, rumage for something, find another weapon and give her a few more stabs. Whether that single deep wound was the first or whether it was the numerous shallower stabs that came first, it's still ambiguous.

Unless there was more than one individual. If there was more than one individual you could interpret the stabbings as...
1) the shallow, numerous stabs made by someone with an intense emotional connection to Martha Tabram
2) the single deep wound made by someone more controlled then the individuals who inflicted shallow frenzied stabbings.

Though, the matter of one individual or more than one possessing more than one weapon does tend to suggest a premedated act... Perhaps?

Many thanks.

[Fisherman]

Michael writes:

"Im inclined to extend Killeen the benefit on that point."

Good on you, Michael - and as you know, I agree fully. As for Lozles question whether there was any evidence to suggest it was in fact the same weapon jabbed in to Martha Tabram with not so much force as what that deep stab, I think that we may need to realize that we have no evidence telling us that the smaller blade was used with less force; instead we do know that it was sunk deeply into Tabramīs body, piercing the internal organs time and time again.
Of course, coupled with extreme stabbing violence we often have bruising on the areas that are hit by hilt and hand, and no such report is at hand. That, though, does not necessarily mean that there was no such bruising to the body, only that Killeen did not mention it at the inquest.

The best,
Fisherman

Hi Mike (hope you don't mind me calling you Mike?),....

Not at all Lauren, although the Good Michael uses Mike and myself Michael usually when we are on the same threads.

Is there any evidence to suggest it was in fact the same weapon jabbed in to Martha Tabram with not so much force as what that deep stab?

On that second point, if youre asking whether the pen knife... described as being the instrument for every stab except one.....would or could have made the larger wound, my guess would be no.

It was distinctive enough to warrant the exception, and Im inclined to extend Killeen the benefit on that point.

All the best

Michael writes:

"Id be inclined to say that curiosity is one of the predominant features of the Kelly murder"

I wouldnīt know about that, Michael. But if you are correct, then an interesting parallel is that of Robert Ackerman, who would also fit in quite well with some of the thinking offered by our own Capīn Jack.
Ackermans exploits can be traced via:

http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/serial_killers/weird/robert_ackermann/1.html

The best, Michael!
Fisherman

Hi Fisherman,

Nice to see you mate. Thats a really interesting case there, and for me personally it struck on a few chords I feel are related to actual "Jack" crimes.

I think one thing is his ability to charm. Like Bundy. Disarming them enough to ge a hold of them for just a moment, thats all he needed.

There is no finesse at all in Martha Tabrams murder. If Jack was in a military analogy a "sharpshooter", then the man that made 99.9 % of the stabs into Martha was a front line "infantryman".

All the best Fish.

[halomanuk]

The 39 times she was stabbed generally was with a pen-knife or small blade,although a 'bayonet type' weapon was used also.

But she was strangled first,at least to unconciousness, hence there was no noise for the neighbours in the building to hear.

So the frenzy wasn't a typical JtR killing (until MJK) but the strangulation prior to mutilation was - a very hard one to tell,if she was a JtR victim or not.

[Lozle]

Hello,
Hi Mike (hope you don't mind me calling you Mike?), there being more then one persons and more than one weapon used in the killing of Martha Tabram crossed my mind. But then I thought if there was most than one person, a potential victim is much more inclined to fight back - unless unconscious - and if it were more than one person, the potential victim believes these people put together can do an awful lot more damage than one person. One person could easily sneak up on a woman who may have been a bit "merry", 2people may be a little more difficult. but then, if someone is in an intoxicated state, they wouldn't be expecting someone to jump them and murder them... they'd be concerned about bugger all and walking in a straight line to get home. So, i'm a bit conflicted there. Is there any evidence to suggest it was in fact the same weapon jabbed in to Martha Tabram with not so much force as what that deep stab? But then, if someone is in a rage or in a bit of a state themselves they're not worried about holding back... hmmm, not made much progress there lol, but i'm interested in anyones thoughts.
Many thanks.

[Fisherman]

Michael writes:

"Id be inclined to say that curiosity is one of the predominant features of the Kelly murder"

I wouldnīt know about that, Michael. But if you are correct, then an interesting parallel is that of Robert Ackerman, who would also fit in quite well with some of the thinking offered by our own Capīn Jack.
Ackermans exploits can be traced via:

http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/serial_killers/weird/robert_ackermann/1.html

The best, Michael!
Fisherman

I too agree that Martha Tabram's murder was in fact driven by emotion.

Stabbing someone is a much more personal act than what is demonstrated in the apparent interrelated murders.

The 5 canonical victims' throats were cut... to me thats not so much interest in them, its more about silencing them so he can have his bit of dysfunctional fun, deliever their message, and not get found out. Whereas stabbing someone seems much more personal and motions to someone in a rage - not worrying about being caught at that moment. Indeed the stabbings seem frenzied and manic, but nothing - with the exception of Mary Kelly - appears in the other canonical victims... And I'm inclined to believe the mutilation of Mary Kelly was motivated by emotion... which goes back to the same story.

Though, I'm conflicted as to whether Martha Tabram was amongst the Ripper killings. In some ways it makes sense, but the protocol demonstrates drastic differences which can't particularly be interlinked with the 5canonical victims. Maybe Martha Tabram was his beginning, jumping in unprepared... then began his rampage...

Many thanks.

Hi Lozle,

I think the part I put in bold is a key here, and I agree fully.

The one thing that does bode well for including Martha Tabram, as far as this premise goes, is that it would be hard to argue that the Canonical Throat cuts werent just as much "overkill" as 39 stabs were, they were far more brutal than he needed to slit an artery....the differences in my opinion are primarily the basic use of the knife, and that there were 2 weapons used.

All the best L.

[Lozle]

I too agree that Martha Tabram's murder was in fact driven by emotion.

Stabbing someone is a much more personal act than what is demonstrated in the apparent interrelated murders.

The 5canonical victims' throats were cut... to me thats not so much interest in them, its more about silencing them so he can have his bit of dysfunctional fun, deliever their message, and not get found out. Whereas stabbing someone seems much more personal and motions to someone in a rage - not worrying about being caught at that moment. Indeed the stabbings seem frenzied and manic, but nothing - with the exception of Mary Kelly - appears in the other canonical victims... And I'm inclined to believe the mutilation of Mary Kelly was motivated by emotion... which goes back to the same story.

Though, I'm conflicted as to whether Martha Tabram was amongst the Ripper killings. In some ways it makes sense, but the protocol demonstrates drastic differences which can't particularly be interlinked with the 5canonical victims. Maybe Martha Tabram was his beginning, jumping in unprepared... then began his rampage...

Many thanks.

It's funny that you mention this Michael, because the last 5 years or so I've been thinking that, besides anger, curiosity for the female body may have driven the Ripper to do what he did to his victims.

All the best, Mike,
Frank

Hi again Frank.

I dont share the opinion that there was anger present in other than the facial wounds, but its nice to agree on curiosity evident by the acts in room 13.

Where I depart from your thinking is that curiosity is present in the case of Annie Chapman or Polly Nichols. Seems to me, and the respective coroners said it first, that in those two murders there is anatomical knowledge and knife skill exhibited, and that the organ the killer desired may have prompted the slayings in the first place.

They thought he knew where what he wanted was, and how to get it....based on what he did. Theres nothing "curious" about that.... unless its that kind of skill being exhibited by a street person without any training or practice.

All the best Frank.

[Sam Flynn]

I would describe what happens to Mary as emptying her, not opening her. He doesnt even take an abdominal organ yet her empties that cavity....he peels flesh from bone,....he does some weird things in there

All entirely explicable by the indoor location and the extra time he had, Mike.

but I dont think that saying Marys killer opened her body in the way that was seen done in the case of Polly and Annie is correct.

He emphatically did open Mary's body in the same way as Annie Chapman - in both cases, three flaps of flesh were cut from the abdomen.

Anyhow... back to Tabram.