Ripper Victim?

[DVV]

David, I really don´t think we should try and dub each other naive - it serves no good purpose.


My wording on the shape of the hole produced in bone still stands, by the way: If you shove a blade through bone at a ninety-degree angle, you will get a very good "imprint" of what the blade looked like. Fisherman

Hi Fish,
No offense meant. I simply call "naive" the idea that an ordinary knife can't pierce a chestbone. The weapon that killed Martha wasn't a toy, nor made in China. It could therefore go through the chestbone.

Now, we don't know why Killeen did suggest a second weapon.
If he believed that an ordinary knife wasn't strong enough, he was simply wrong.
If, as you think, he got a "very good imprint of what the blade looked like"...that's another matter.
But as far as I know, daggers can have different blades, just as knives.
The distinction between a knife and a "dagger" has little to do with their blades.

Amitiés mon cher,
David

[perrymason]

Hi all,

Note to Sam.....it was not my intention to exclude or include Mary Kelly in the conversation. I mentioned the three victims that we can easily see were likely by the same killer(s). Mary Kelly was dissected and de-engineered, the three I mentioned had their abdomens opened.

On the issue with the knives,....it appears people dont believe me when I say a "pen-knife" or anything resembling one that Killeen used to characterize the vast majority of Marthas wounds could not....definitively....penetrate a bone. A knife that would be described as such would be a FOLDING KNIFE.....and would never be used to try and punch through a solid object by anyone who liked having their fingers.

Its not a question of whether the steel would stand up to the pressure, its the locking mechanism that allows the blade to fold that would buckle.

A dull table knife can be stabbed through bone. A really sharp folding "pen-knife", cannot. You may carve that in stone.....unless you happen to have some 170 odd bladed instruments ranging from 1810 to 2008...like I do...in which case you already have done so.

That is the reality, if you believe differently, thats a shame after all this discussion,...but that would mean that the evidence here had zero influence on your own thinking....and therefore you would be diverting from the evidence based solely on your opinion and nothing else.

2 blades were used....thats the official prognosis and as far as Im concerned, its not refutable by mere opinion 120 years after the fact.

Time to stop shaping what you choose to believe based on who or what you think was called Jack the Ripper. Evidence is evidence,...its frozen in time as such, and not about to be tossed aside based on contrary opinion.

When you have some evidence that Killeen was wrong, that folding blades can pierce chest bones, and only one type of wound was actually noted....then we can address this again. Until then....please stop debating the facts regarding the knife evidence. It was... and still is....2 weapons...the smaller one that caused 98% of the wounds could not penetrate bone, and the larger one was like a dagger in length and breadth.

How anyone expects to actually discern the truth about Martha when ignoring the known facts is beyond me.

Best regards all.

[DVV]

How anyone expects to actually discern the truth about Martha when ignoring the known facts is beyond me.

Hi Mike,

what is beyond me is the notion of "known facts" regarding Martha's murder.
We even don't possess a precise list of the wounds.
Who said "pen-knife" ?
Not me.
Killeen.
He said also: "ordinary knife", or something like that.
And true - for once - it was a knife. And not a folding one, most probably.
And imho, it could have stabbed Martha 39 times.

Amitiés,
David

[perrymason]

Hi Mike,

what is beyond me is the notion of "known facts" regarding Martha's murder.
We even don't possess a precise list of the wounds.
Who said "pen-knife" ?
Not me.
Killeen.
He said also: "ordinary knife", or something like that.
And true - for once - it was a knife. And not a folding one, most probably.
And imho, it could have stabbed Martha 39 times.

Amitiés,
David

David I apologize...that was a snip at your remarks.

A knife like the one characterized as a "pen-knife" or ordinary knife, unless described as a common table utensil for example, would almost certainly be a folding blade. Carried in pockets for as long as we have had pockets, and used for any cutting requirements one might have in everyday life. Trimming thread from a jacket....Richardson could have used one rather than a table knife to trim his boot, carving,...a hundred common everyday issues that can be solved by having a "pen-knife", ( a term in part coined due to the overall size when folded of approximately a "pen")....thats the vast majority of general use common or "pen-knives" that would be around at that time.

There were tons of blades type available in London, from around the world, but the term "pen-knife", or its variants is what would be common. The others are fixed length pieces, usually quite heavy, and very sharp...and could not be carried safely in a pocket.

So the odds are definitely in favour of a folding knife if Killeen's approximate characterization was sound. A folding knife could not pierce bone, for one, because no-one in their right mind would attempt to do so and risk amputating their own fingers.

Killeen stressed that one wound was made by a larger weapon....FM thinks it may have been 2 strokes, but never the less, there was obvious difference in at least one wound made.

My "steam" was because I know that a knife like described that made the majority of the stabs almost certainly folded...by its characterization alone....and that knife could not pierce the breast bone nor would it be attempted by anyone with knowledge of the knife.

And under no circumstances would that "pen-knife" leave wounds that were described as being made with a substantial size knife.

Again....I shouldnt have blown off steam about it at you, Im sorry....but this is the baseline, I think its time to take what we have here....and not be selective when it comes to the first hand inspection of the murdered woman.

Best regards my friend.

[DVV]

So the odds are definitely in favour of a folding knife if Killeen's approximate characterization was sound. A folding knife could not pierce bone, for one, because no-one in their right mind would attempt to do so and risk amputating their own fingers.

Best regards my friend.

Hi Mike,

I don't know what types of folding knives were available in 1888 London.
But if, for example, you use a basic folding knife such as the French "Opinel", you'll never amputate your fingers. Impossible (thanks to the mechanism).
The blade is thin and very sharp. Country men can even use it to cut and skin out a sheep. Seems abit unbelievable, when you see such a little and familiar object.

Amitiés, Mike, and no problem at all
David

[perrymason]

Hi David,

There were actually lots of type of folding or "pocket" knives available at the time. Including the type you describe which are akin to early straight razors, which fold.

I can say for fact that we know of table knives being used as a "common" knife at that time...the kind that Killeen seemed to be asserting, Richardson trimmed his boot with a table knife, and Kate has one in her pocket. But the majority of "pocket style knives that would be commonly available and inexpensive were folding knives. As I said, you could get knives of all sorts...at all sorts of prices. We are talking about a Victorian Ghetto here. Killeen could have said table knife.....but didnt.

Heres a snippet from the period, The Times on November 27th mentions the type of knife used in an attack...

"The knife is an ordinary back handle pocket knife. The little blade, which was shut, was broken in two, and the large blade, which was open, was stained with blood from one end to the other."

Its a two bladed knife, one small, one larger, but neither "substantial". And it folds.

This is the type that was likely what a "pen-knife" was alluding to....cheap and readily available in the East End at that time.

Whats pivotal in this case is the use of that kind of knife to stab,...not cut or skin as you illustrated in your usage example,.. and how large the resulting wound could be.

All the best David and Bon Soir.

[Fisherman]

Shelley asks:

"why do you think that JTR would change his MO from Tabram ( stab through the heart to finish her off) to that of throat-cutting of Nicholls? Seems as both the MO on Tabram and the MO on Nicholls both worked in killing these women, did it not?"

It did NOT work on Tabram, Shelley. He did not want to kill, he wanted to eviscerate. That was priority one. And that was something he was not allowed to to in Tabrams case. He was forced to abort it, if I am correct, and that would be due to the fact that he found out that Tabram was alive as he cut to her abdomen. At that stage she would have made some sound or stirred or something. So he finished her off and fled the scene before somebody came out on the landing to see what was going on.
And that is why he needed a method that worked well enough to ensure silence and death from the outset; no surprises on the wishlist, thankyou! And cutting the throat would have given him the best possibilities to have a minute or two with a guaranteed silent and dead victim.
The rest of the kills were premeditated ones, where care had been taken to optimize his chances of going through with the eviscerations. In Tabrams case, the stage was set by another knife-man from the outset, if my scenario is the correct one.

The best,
Fisherman

[Fisherman]

David writes:

"If he believed that an ordinary knife wasn't strong enough, he was simply wrong.
If, as you think, he got a "very good imprint of what the blade looked like"...that's another matter.
But as far as I know, daggers can have different blades, just as knives.
The distinction between a knife and a "dagger" has little to do with their blades."

Killeen, David, formed his opinion from what he SAW - and that was things that we have not seen. We cannot just throw forward an image of an oridinary knife and say that Killeen was wrong. We simply must accept that he KNEW the width and thickness of the "pen-knife" blade, whereas we do not. He was able to draw conclusions from his combined knowledge of the apparition of the blade and the density of a breast-plate, whereas we are left with only the latter - we do not know what exact type of blade was given away by the wounds in Tabram.
After that, it is all fine with me if somebody claims that he can pierce the scull-bone of an elephant with a toothpick - we are still dealing in such a case with entities where we can make a fair assesment about strength and durability and such things. Of the pen-knife we know nothing more than that it would have been too frail to pierce Tabrams chest-bone.
Killeen knew. We don´t. It´s a nuisance, but a nuisance that we will have to live with.

The best,
Fisherman

[DVV]

After that, it is all fine with me if somebody claims that he can pierce the scull-bone of an elephant with a toothpick
Fisherman

Hi Fish,

I'll never attack an elephant with a toothpick.
I love them too much.

Amitiés,
David

[Fisherman]

To tell you the truth, David, it would not have done you any good anyway - the toothpick would have broken. Sure thing!

Stay well! And hug the elephants from me (I´ve only ever seen one wild specimen, in Asia - Sri Lanka - and since that elephant had a very ugly reputation, as per the jeep driver I was going with, I somehow felt that I was the one in danger to be toothpicked to death ...

The best,
Fisherman

[Shelley]

Shelley asks:

"why do you think that JTR would change his MO from Tabram ( stab through the heart to finish her off) to that of throat-cutting of Nicholls? Seems as both the MO on Tabram and the MO on Nicholls both worked in killing these women, did it not?"

It did NOT work on Tabram, Shelley. He did not want to kill, he wanted to eviscerate. That was priority one. And that was something he was not allowed to to in Tabrams case. He was forced to abort it, if I am correct, and that would be due to the fact that he found out that Tabram was alive as he cut to her abdomen. At that stage she would have made some sound or stirred or something. So he finished her off and fled the scene before somebody came out on the landing to see what was going on.
And that is why he needed a method that worked well enough to ensure silence and death from the outset; no surprises on the wishlist, thankyou! And cutting the throat would have given him the best possibilities to have a minute or two with a guaranteed silent and dead victim.
The rest of the kills were premeditated ones, where care had been taken to optimize his chances of going through with the eviscerations. In Tabrams case, the stage was set by another knife-man from the outset, if my scenario is the correct one.

The best,
Fisherman

Hi Fisherman,

I can understand what you are saying, however i would have thought that if it was JTR he would have just been just surprised that she was still alive after all that stabbing from his pal, it is safer to say that JTR could have delivered the clumsy chokehold and did perhaps 2 injuries to Tabram. It is possible with the inital thoughts on Tabram going off with a soldier or sailor, that the Soldier or sailor left the scene after being serviced by Tabram, then 2 guys and 1 being JTR came and held up Tabram in the building ( they could have been entering or leaving the building at the time for one reason or another), Tabram could have been a bit quiet anyway if she knew that these guys were going to give her a bit of trouble, after they cottoned on that she had serviced a sailor or soldier and was engaged in prostitution. I read that the Doctor said that Tabram was well nourished, so that doesn't explain the bloatedness in her face, maybe onset of illness, but that isn't noted anyway, but with the stabs to the neck this could have been the reason for the bloatedness and a clumsy chokehold too, along with possibly the splayed legs but that can be reflexes as well. It's possible that a clumsy ' Chokehold ' could have been administered to Tabram, i know she hasn't had anything documented enough to suggest this, but it is possible along with a blow to the head as well, that sure would have silenced her. JTR could have learned a ' chokehold ' from watching a violent criminal being apprehended by an Officer sometime in his life. After all the sailor description ( with Victorian language in consideration) could have been a lot of guys, one of which could also have been JTR.
So it could be possible that the 2 weapon and 2 guy stance, was one of the guys could have been JTR. With that, it just could have been that 1 of the guys, our man JTR hung around a little longer whilst his pal scarpered off down the staircase ( hoping JTR would catch him up & not get caught after what they had done), but the majority of stabbings was done by JTR's pal and JTR did a little of what was on his mind before fleeing, then catching up with his mate. It isn't impossible that these 2 guys that attacked Tabram were together and both together with her attack, with both doing thier bit, it's not impossible to be attacked by two men at the same time, Emma Smith i believe was attacked with a gang of men, i also believe she was telling the truth & not hiding anything. Possible, theory i grant you, but not impossible.

All the Best Fisherman

Shelley

[Fisherman]

The possibility of Jack having been teamed up with another man and killing Tabram in some sort of sequence is of course a possibility.
I still think that Jack was a loner, and I still say that three persons are more likely to make sounds than two - but I would not rule the possibility you suggest out. Not in any way.

The best,
Fisherman

[Shelley]

Hi Fisherman,
Yes, i think Jack was a loner too, but it's not impossible that he could have been with a gang, like the description of Ada Wilson's attacker can fit the description of a man seen with Eddowes, it's just Jack went off as a lone ranger from the gang after his intentions developed somewhere after being involved with violence, and he went off on his own, he would have also known a general scale of which beats from coppers came around too, as well as the vice trades. It is not also an impossiblity that he may well have practised with a hunters knife and also adapting crudley for his own taste, thus the bone covering Tabram's heart could have been JTR's knife. As with the attacker of Ada he struck me as a gang type member. Possible.

P.S. As for the sounds heared in the building, it might just be that people did not hear anything, because they were asleep or busy, it is hard to tell if someone can hear or not, or even draw that conclusion sometimes. As with Emma Smith no one heard her being attacked, everything was purley on what she said, also what of other high rip gangs, they must have attacked but not always heard by other members of the public.

[Veritas]

There is no doubt in mymind that Tabram waa a Ripper victim. The neighborhood, the victim, the sudden ferocity of the attack - all Jack's type of handiwork.

[Shelley]

Fisherman,

I have had a look on casebook and i have found that George yard Buildings, George yard had a lodging house. However i cannot find a census for it, or where exactly where this Lodging actually was situated, also i am wondering where the loding house corresponds to where Martha's body was found. Any answers to where i may find it?, i'm wondering if i may have missed a corner somewhere.

All the Best
Shelley