overkill

[Shelley]

Timings

Also Jane, don't forget the time duration of Tabram to Nicholls = 3 weeks
Also Jane don't forget the time durations between Nicholls & Chapman = 1 week. Clearly a case of 1 week time duration that Jack didn't get the womb he wanted from Nicholls, so 1 week later got it from Chapman. JTR still had the ' fantasy ' as you describe it Jane 3 weeks later in the case of Kate, as he took her womb as well.

[Shelley]

Sam, Exactly! Even so, with that ferocious attack her skirts could have got in the way.....anyway! And who knows with unknowledgeable crime scene witness, the first at the crime scene to sound an alarm, in the dark & stumbling upon a body? Who knows, it just maybe a coincidental accident & means nothing at all, after all.


Jane, Well i would say JTR pretty much showed himself with that on Annie Chapman don't you think? And with Nicholls it's perfectly reasonable to conclude with her abdomen ' cut open ' that he had the same idea as that with Annie & Kate. I'm surprised that you skipped the ' overhand ' & ' underhand ' style between Tabram & Nicholls. With Nicholls, Chapman & Eddowes all had the style of ' Underhand ' which are 3 of the canocials that are different from Tabram. Now Jane to me that is a continuance of MO & Signature. An added thought is that JTR wasn't one to draw attention to himself either.

[Sam Flynn]

Why was Tabram's skirts turned upwards? Well, in a struggle ?

More likely, because she had prepared herself for intercourse in the moments before she was killed.

[Jane Welland]

Thanks Shelley..

It doesn't take a Genius to know that if you ' stab & puncture ' it won't provide a way for you to obtain an organ that you need to fulfill the ' fantasy ' as you put it Jane.

I didn't realise we knew what the Ripper's fantasy was when he killed his victims - shows what I know, doesn't it?

Jane x

[Sam Flynn]

But it does, Sam. Both Tabram and Nichols received one, possibly two cuts or stabs to the privates.

True, Jon, but Tabram received no major cuts to speak of, and thirty-eight stabs to her upper body. Unless her killer suffered a momentary lapse that caused him to forget the difference between North and South, it strikes me that his focus was entirely different to the Ripper's - indeed, as one might say, its "polar opposite"

[Lozle]

Hey,


"I agree, that's entirely possible, but many serials are kick-started by such occurances. It isn't always a case of serial killers planning meticulous campaigns which they carry out to the letter. Many serialists will be responsible for both "frenzied" and "controled" murders, as Canter's observations demonstrate. The differences between the two mindsets can be explained away very easily on the basis that the killer was less experienced when the attacks were frenzied."


Note: "the killer was less experienced when the attacks were frenzied" .... and where would he have gained experience between Martha and Polly's murder as there is a dramatic difference between the 2murders. Frenzied to calm - quite a transformation, one which I find hard to grasp. If you know of any other serial murderers who went from inexperienced and frenzied, to "experienced", calm and controlled in ONE murder, then please do share.


I am more than willing to address the possibility that such an incident encountered with the killer and Martha triggered the JTR rampage whether it be the same killer OR someone who seized an opportunity.

However, the matter of Martha being seen with 2soldiers and one lingering in the area of the discovered body saying he was waiting for his mate does provide a convicing arguement if considering the anomolies between the killings and etewitness testimony.

"A frenzied attack can just as easily be reflective of inexperience, or, in my personal view, a high degree of frustration that at least two earlier victims had survived his knife attack."

If the murderer was in fact JTR, why would they have survived? JTR always finsihed his work... unless the 2 you're speaking of and who got away were JTR victims of course...

Many thanks.

[Lozle]

Can't believe that crossed my mind. Good thinking. That could also explain how quickly his technique became so polished (especially from Polly to Annie).

Hi,

Well, that was my thinking... having thought it out to such an extent he didn't need to practise or inflict a frenzied overkill attack on Martha Tabram to decide whether he liked killing that way or not.

Cheers.=oD
Many thanks.

[Ben]

Hi Lozle,

JTR was out for the thrill, if he wasn't then he would have done his acts in a more private place than in the street or where he wouldnt be disturbed

Ah, but this assumes the killer had the luxury of choice in this regard. If he lived in crowded conditions, like many residents in the district, he wouldn't have had the option to dispatch his victim indoors, in private. By killing on the streets, he may well have been making the most of his only option. Fundamentally, there's no compelling evidence that "the thrill" had any impact whatsoever in the consistency of his technique, and history is littered with many more examples of serial killers who alter their methods in response to their public reaction than it is of serial killers who deliberately maintain consistency to impress.

For all we know, the killer may have considered indoor locations to be vastly preferable if only they were available, which they probably weren't. That said, #29 Hanbury Street and #13 Miller's Court were no less secluded than the Tabram location.

You have your own opinion which I admire as too many people conform to anothers ideas. Though I would still argue this murder happened spur of the moment due to something affecting the dynamics of 2 (or more) slightly drunk / merry people going back to an "Unfortunates" room.

I agree, that's entirely possible, but many serials are kick-started by such occurances. It isn't always a case of serial killers planning meticulous campaigns which they carry out to the letter. Many serialists will be responsible for both "frenzied" and "controled" murders, as Canter's observations demonstrate. The differences between the two mindsets can be explained away very easily on the basis that the killer was less experienced when the attacks were frenzied.

I think we need to be a bit careful in attributing Tabram's death to a "personal grudge". A frenzied attack can just as easily be reflective of inexperience, or, in my personal view, a high degree of frustration that at least two earlier victims had survived his knife attack.

the ways the 5canonical were murdered in a specific way. the throat was slit to keep them quiet, they were opened so he could get trophies

But that only occured in three of the five "canonicals", and the attack on one of them was certainly no less frenzied that the bruality exacted on Tabram.

All the best,
Ben

[Ben]

Also to say that killers progress with each kill is not true, there is a time period for further adaptions, but the killers ' fantasies ' remain the same throughout his kills, it doesn't change.

No, that's completely wrong, I'm afraid.

Serial killers have proved perfectly capable of incorporating new fantasies as they progress. If he was fantasizing about mutilating his victims' faces, why didn't he attack the faces of Nichols and Chapman? Answer: because he had not yet inculcated that particular fantasy.

However with Nicholls, the blade was weilded in an ' upperhand ' stroke which shows a different useage & a different killer,

Where's the evidence to support this?

By "upperhand", do you mean that the killer was delivering under-arm cuts?

It doesn't take a Genius to know that if you ' stab & puncture ' it won't provide a way for you to obtain an organ that you need to fulfill the ' fantasy ' as you put it Jane

And yet the killer not only "stabbed and punctured" the corpse of Polly Nichols, he singularly failed to take away an organ.

Some modern serial killers have changed thier MO and attempted to disgusie thier tracks with adaptions to confuse ' forensics

But plenty more "change their MO" because they're bored of their previous one, and want to incorporate new elements (and perhaps reject some old ones). It needn't have anything to do with "forensics" at all.

Why was Tabram's skirts turned upwards? Well, in a struggle ?

I'm not sure how her skirts could have "turned upwards" purely on account of a struggle.

[Mascara & Paranoia]

I believe it is more than likely that he had fantasies of his method before ANY killings

Can't believe that crossed my mind. Good thinking. That could also explain how quickly his technique became so polished (especially from Polly to Annie).

[Lozle]

Hello,

I agree, the murderer's primary concern WAS NOT performing to a crowd, what I'm saying is the crowd, the publicity, the notoriety, was part of the "game", something that happened by chance and which gave him more of a thrill as JTR - at that time - was the first big publicised serial killer, encouraging him to carry on and maintain a signature. JTR was out for the thrill, if he wasn't then he would have done his acts in a more private place than in the street or where he wouldnt be disturbed. Seeming as Marth Tabram was killed in a more secluded area than the 5canonical victims does not correlate with JTR's thrill seeking behaviour.

Nothing about this murder blatantly says to me it was premedatated, it appears to be a situation that happened that night that went wrong. MAYBE it was JTR, though I happen to favour the interesting fact that she was seen with soldiers who "happened" to be lingering around that area when the body was discovered as a more compelling arguement.

You have your own opinion which I admire as too many people conform to anothers ideas. Though I would still argue this murder happened spur of the moment due to something affecting the dynamics of 2 (or more) slightly drunk / merry people going back to an "Unfortunates" room. I can only imagine Martha MAY have done something to trigger a violent streak in the murderer in the time that was allowed between the pub and George Yard.

It is a reasonable statement to suggest that Martha did something to someone - whether JTR, the 2soldiers, her friend Pearly Poll etc - which led to that individual forming a personal vendetta against Martha. The crime scene could have been by chance, and her neighbours probably paid no attention to strange noises going on in the night because if she was an Unfortunate, they would probably prefer to turn a deaf ear, which would eventually become habit.

By you own admission, the attack on Martha Tabram was frenzied, which I completely agree with and perosnally argue there was a personal vendetta towards Martha Tabram that night. If you propose to argue the murderer - I assume you're inclined to believe JTR as Martha Tabram's killer? - evolved in his methods of killing, does this also cover the killers mental state? As there is quite a difference between a frenzied killer in contrast to a cool, calm, collected killer. Martha's killer was emotionally driven in my opinion which led to overkill.

In the 5canonical victims, the incisions were inflicted by a steady hand even under the pressure JTR put himself under. Martha Tabram was, indeed, subject to a frenzied attack. I personally see quite a noticeable difference between the attack inflicted on Martha Tabram (frenzied) to what was delievered to Polly (calmer) and then progressing on to Annie (precise incisions).

The concentration on Martha's throat could explain her saying something offensive to her attacker and the attacker wanting to "erase" it... the deeper wound delivered around the area of the heart means they wanted to make sure she was dead, JTR didn't need to do such a thing. He carried out his procedure the other 38 stab wounds delivered to Martha suggest someone not quite lucid at that moment which led to overkill. JTR was nothing but calm and sophisticated throughout the 5canonical murders. Martha was killed by someone with a personal grudge, the 5canonical victims were murdered because they served a purpose to JTR. The frenzied stabbings were to primarily kill Martha, the ways the 5canonical were murdered in a specific way. the throat was slit to keep them quiet, they were opened so he could get trophies.

Many thanks.

[Jon Guy]

Possibly in a struggle, but these were long skirts, of a heavy material.

Nichols skirt was turned down because one of the guy`s who found her did it to protect her modesty.

[Shelley]

Hi Jon,

Why was Tabram's skirts turned upwards? Well, in a struggle ? what do you think?

Another point , why was Nicholls skirts turned down?

[Shelley]

Historical Serial Killers & Lack of technologies

The fact remains that Jack the Ripper was an Historical serial killer, where lack of DNA evidence and other technologies such as fingerprinting were lacking amongst the many we have today for forensic evidence. Some modern serial killers have changed thier MO and attempted to disgusie thier tracks with adaptions to confuse ' forensics ', JTR's time period had no such priviledges, as there was not any modern techologies towards foresnsic evidence to catch him, so i think it is irrelevant to use some modern serial killers in comparision with JTR.

[Jon Guy]

Hi Shelley

I`ll concede the point that, as you say, the lower wound to Tabram was just a slip during a frenzied attack in the dark.

But, if it were just a slip during an attack on her upper torso and neck why were her skirts turned upwards?