Ripper Victim?

[Shelley]

She don't tick any of the boxes as far as the Ripper is concerned.
Nor were the Ripper victims subjected to a "frenzied" attack in the way Tabram was.

Again - we are not talking about 'change of MO' here, but two killers with very different needs and personalites.

Let's also remember that prostitutes - now and then - always have been vulnerable victims and are daily subjected to many dangerous situations and abnormal characters. And there were thousands of them in East End crammed in a small area.
We also must consider the possibility that the Ripper crimes may have been triggered off by the news of the Emma Smnith and Tabram murders and that these finally made the Ripper turn his fantasies into action with Nichols.

I am prepared to be open-minded about Frances Coles, Stride, McKenzie and even Kelly (although I personally hesitate to include any of them). But I will NEVER accept Tabram as a Ripper victim.

All the best

I have to agree with Glenn here.....Different personalities...You know one that Eddowes was seen placing her hand on his chest and the two talking together without Eddowes being alarmed in any way, to one that hasn't even rendered victim dead with said throat cut, then pile in with said vicious and frenzied attack and face to face as well! I thought JTR had Nicholls, Chapman & Eddowes turn away perhaps lifting thier skirts for him whilst he came from behind, so as not to get blood on him.
If you had a soldier all blood spattered, people thought that he might just as well got into a nasty fight, and partly his own blood about him. Soldiers still get into fights today in streets.

[Shelley]

Yes I do agree that the MO was not identical, although for me this doesn't disqualify JtR.

Haskins,
Opening up ' Disembowelling ' is a Major and main MO. As is taking organs as oppossed not taking organs.

[Ben]

Of course there could be more victims but in all of those we see throat cuts as a main factor, We see none of that in Tabram, nor any special focus on any genital area.

But all of that pales into insignificance when we consider the numerous other serial killers who also boasted a number of victims who were "very consistent", but who were also capable of resorting to a wildly contrasting MO. Many of Peter Sutcliffe's methods of dispatch were "very consistent" but others were markedly less so. If he remained uncaught to this day, I have no doubt that a small minority of those studing the case would make the mistake of restricting his kill tally only to the victims that reflected most consistency, but they'd be ruling out a heck a lot of Sutcliffe's victims in so doing.

It is rubbish to even suggest that this 'craving' would have come up as a brainstorm

Why is that rubbish? He must have "come up" with the idea at some point, so why not between the Tabram and Nichols murders? He clearly "came up" with the idea of facial mutilation at some point between the Chapman and Eddowes murders, and we can't say that this was anymore personal to him than a deep gash to the throat. It is so often underestimated that serial murder and mutilation will often follow an exploratory pattern, as opposed to having a perfectly conceived plan that he will follow to the letter and repeat with robotic exactitude every time.

Best regards,
Ben

[Ben]

If you are going to use the Zodiac killer as a change in MO please specify frame times

Please type in "Zodiac killer" into Google, Shelley for a list of definitely ascertained victims. The time frame between the Lake Berryesa murder and the shooting of Paul Stine is negligible in the extreme. It's a trap a lot of people fall into, so don't feel bad about it, but stabbing to slashing in a preposterously minor change in MO when we consider the "changes" many other serial killers are capable of.

[Shelley]

Please type in "Zodiac killer" into Google, Shelley for a list of definitely ascertained victims. The time frame between the Lake Berryesa murder and the shooting of Paul Stine is negligible in the extreme. It's a trap a lot of people fall into, so don't feel bad about it, but stabbing to slashing in a preposterously minor change in MO when we consider the "changes" many other serial killers are capable of.

How many cases that are the same as the Zodiac Killer? I was also asking on the common amount of times such cases you find with these types of serial killers? Is this 80%, 50% of all serial killers, 30% or even 15% of these types of serial killers. Or is it a case of you've found say 2 or 3 cases out of a multitude of serial killer cases?
How about if i bring up The Yorkshire Ripper ( 1 case) or Jack the Stripper (2 case).
Also what year was The Zodiac Killer, was he aware of modern technology in catching Killers, and that's why they change thier MO so quickly, to hide behind it?
Whitechapel 1888 did not have modern technology plus the killers in thier time did not worry too much about incriminating evidences at scenes, have you also considered that into the equazion?

[Shelley]

Zodiac Killer

Ben,
I just read briefly on Google access to wikipedia. That's it that's your change of MO.......Shot & killed......Shot & Killed......Shot & Killed ....Knifed....Nearly decapitated head....Shot & Killed....Kidnapping ( survivors).

Blimey there are hundreds of ordinary drug dealers that just shoot or knife, but it ain't no Mo. it's just a handy weapon at the time, maybe the gun was being cleaned so he used a knife at the time?

[Ben]

I'm afraid I can't see how any of the above militates against Tabram as a ripper victim, Shelley.

It may be worth you reading up on the difference between MO and signature.

[Shelley]

I'm afraid I can't see how any of the above militates against Tabram as a ripper victim, Shelley.

It may be worth you reading up on the difference between MO and signature.

First of all Ben Tabram was found dead on the 6th August 1888 and Nicholls was found dead on 31st August 1888 that is only a period of 3 weeks and 4 days exactly.
Your Famous Zodiac killer Shot & Killed on these dates:
Dec 20th 1969 2 victims
July 4th 1969 2 victims
And then came stabbings on these dates:
Sept 27th 1969 2 victims stabbed
The a change again to Shot & Killed on this date:
Oct 11th 1969 1 victim

That's hardly a dramatic change of style of killing nor any Mo other than just to kill.
Think about it Ben he was consistent for a period of 2 months from shooting to stabbing, then after Sept he went back to shooting and stuck with it for another 2 months....That's hardly in the scale of Tabram & Nicholls.
Plus the Zodicas claims by letter ( aye up! I did say about discount the boasts!) that he killed 37+ people. This guy is an idiot attention seeker! Modus operandi : Mode of operation = How one is operated.

[Glenn Lauritz Andersson]

Ben, I am afraid it is you who fall into the same trap as many others; trying to link the different method of killing in Tabram's murder to Nichols and the Ripper by comparing it to serial killers who REPEATEDLY change their MO.

This is not what we are dealing with here.
The Ripper was not a killer who changed his MO to alarge extent so therefore he can't be compared to such killers. In at least three murders (four, if we include Kelly) he showed a remarkable consistensy in the MAIN FEATURES of the MO and signature.
They're all there: deep throat cut, disembowelling and focus on the genital area. In three of the victims (if we include Kelly) an organ was taken, in two of those it was the womb. The victims that were totally openend up and had organs taken, the intestines were thrown over their shoulder.

But the main points here are the very deep throat cuts and the disembowelling made post mortem.

Now these are all very specific and extreme features, some would say unusual.
You can't compare them with shooting or changing from shooting to stabbing or vice versa (which are all more commonplace methods used by many killers).

I certainly do not with any stretch of the imagination believe that the idea of performing a very deep throat cut (so deep that the head was almost severed) and opening up a body were whims invented in a flash because "that other stuff didn't work".
And in a period of three weeks.

It is extremely silly to even suggest such a thing and I can't believe that you of all people - whom I consider highly intelligent - would buy into it. It's nonsense.

Looking at the Ripper crimes and the modus operandi and signature performed on the bodies, there can be no doubt that these features meant something to the killer and most likely had thier foundation in a longer time of fantasysing.
The magnitude of the throat cuts in themselves are not at all necessary for the killing, they are way over the top for that and therefore has to be considered having am meaning to him beyond "what works or not".

There is no way that I would believe that he would find the cravings for it during a three week break.
The multiple stabbing found on Tabram, however, are quite common features in many murders and not at all profilic to the same extent.

And them, of course, we had the soldier found loitering by PC Barrett near the crime scene at the right time of the murder (where his pal "had gone off with a girl"). And I don't believe the Ripper was a soldier since none was seen in connection with the other crimes.

Tabram was NOT a Ripper victim!

All the best

[j.r-ahde]

Hello Glenn!

Though serial killers sometimes confess murders the investigators didn't think about and their claims can be proven, I agree with you in this case; if Jack had been caught, he probably wouldn't have mentioned Martha Tabram as his victim!

Also, if Jack had been a soldier, he would probably have been picked right away.

Sometimes the MJK murder is mentioned as a separate one, because she was the only one killed indoors. But I think, there were two reasons for this;

1. JtR may have felt, that The Vigilance Committee was on his heels.

2. JtR may have felt, that the girls on the streets had become too cautious.

All the best
Jukka

[Fisherman]

Glenn writes:

"no attempt to open up the body by post mortem mutilation"

Well, Glenn, then you may perhaps hold the key to why she had a 3x1 inch cut on her lower body - most probably on the lower abdomen? In all fairness, if we are speaking of ticking boxes, that little detail should perhaps not go unnoticed?

And as you well know, I have presented a scenario where we may rule out the 37 "frenzied" wounds, using the very strong argument that they were inflicted by another blade than the one that pierced her heart - and that may well have caused the cut too.

When you state "I will NEVER accept Tabram as a Ripper victim", I think you may be locking onto a stance that may well prove impossible to retain as we go along. I was of the same meaning as you are for many a year, as you know, but things surfaced (John Bennetts pic of George Yard buildings) that lent itself very well to a totally different interpretation, and so I changed my mind. And I for one would not state that I will never change again - Ripperology is not a static science, something I think you will agree on.

The fact that you feel that the evidence existing speaks for Tabram not being a Ripper victim is pretty obvious, and you make a fair case for it. But the good old "never say never" advice may yet apply, Glenn ...!

The best, friend!
Fisherman

[Glenn Lauritz Andersson]

Fisherman,

I have changed my mind on occasion, for example about Stride and kelly.

But I will NEVER accept Tabram!
The simple reason is, that there is absolutely no reason to include her because there are no crime scene or medical evidence to connect her to the Ripper whatsoever.
The Tabram murder was exactly what it was - a multiple stab murder in a prostitute-client relation. And the perpetrator was most likely one or two soldiers.

As for the larger wound, there is no reason at all to even try to interpet that as an attempt to open up the body or even compare it to the wound on Nichols. It's all ridiculous.

All the best

[Fisherman]

Ben writes:

"He must have "come up" with the idea (of cutting the throat, my remark) at some point, so why not between the Tabram and Nichols murders?"

Exactly so. Surely we donīt need to see a progression of a few millmeters deeper per strike?

What we need to realize when it comes to the throatcutting, is that we should be very careful to add it to the list of urges we ascribe to the Ripper. The most obvious take on things was that he held an interest in the abdominal cavity and itīs organs, and it would be slightly odd if he was as interested in tonsills and windpipes. My explanation to why he cut throats is that he simply needed to ensure silence and death before he set about the eviscerations. It was a practicality, nothing else.

That, in itīs turn, means that the reason he cut Nicholls neck before going for the abdomen was that HE HAD LEARNT FROM EXPERIENCE that a woman may well be noisy or apt to wriggle unless you do something about it first. I suggest he learnt that lesson in George Yard; Tabram stirred or moaned or something along those lines, and he was forced to abort his strike, killing her by a clean stab through the heart and fleeing the scene before a door opened on the landing and a tenant may get a look at him.
Such a thing would have given him a scare, plus it would have urged him to think hard and deep about how to ensure that the next victim could not cry out.

The best,
Fisherman

[Fisherman]

Glenn writes:

"As for the larger wound, there is no reason at all to even try to interpet that as an attempt to open up the body or even compare it to the wound on Nichols. It's all ridiculous."

Is it, Glenn? A cut to the abdomen on a prostitute victim, killed three weeks before Polly Nicholls? If I am not allowed to take an active interest in such a thing without being called ridiculous, then I think we may be slightly unattentive and careless about the evidence. But thatīs just me...!

I do however agree that, as you say, the Tabram slaying "was exactly what it was" - itīs what it was I disagree on.

The best!
Fisherman

[Glenn Lauritz Andersson]

Ben writes:

My explanation to why he cut throats is that he simply needed to ensure silence and death before he set about the eviscerations. It was a practicality, nothing else.

For heaven's sake, Fisherman.
Look at the nature of the throat cuts. They go way beyond what is necessary - as I have said a million times.
This is not a feature in the modus operandi that has arisen from trial and error or because something else didn't work.

You are totally wrong about this.

All the best