Ripper Victim?

[Ben]

Oh shut up Ben you Quack!!!! Focus!

I thought you were banned for resorting to precisely this sort of deranged and hysterical behaviour?

i do not know of any killer changing his MO or Signature that quick at the same time with a victim, not in history, not in modern times either.

Then educate yourself on the topic, and you'll find some, but don't reinforce your ignorance as though it somehow constitutes evidence of you being right. That just makes it worse.

[DVV]

Two schools "against" Martha

Interesting to observe that those who discount Tabram as a Ripper victim belong to two distinct categories.

One focuses on the MO.

The other one tends to discount her on the basis of the "soldier suspect".

This is, for example, the case of Evans and Rumbelow.
Quoted from the excellent "JtR. Scotland Yard investigates", p 260:

"Doubt must exist that Tabram was a Ripper victim, the circumstances ostensibly indicating a solder client as her most likely killer."

They could add that the MO was different.
But they did not, knowing that a change in MO hardly proves anything.
Btw, to some extent, the MO was similar: the killer followed his prey to a secluded spot.

Amitiés,
David

[DVV]

Hi Mike, all,

One more thing that can hardly be missed about Tabram: the fact that she's been found legs apart, her clothing being turned up to the centre of her body.
That's why Barrett first thought that intercourse might have taken place.
Isn't that typical of the Ripper?

Amitiés,
David

[Malcolm X]

hi Richard

lets take Fleming for instance

1.......yes, maybe he was trying to shock Kelly, but found he enjoyed it and thus turned into a serial killer and more importantly, started going crazy; thus ending up in a loony bin............

2........but JTR ( if you remove Tabram) had a morbid interest in mutilations right from the word go, it's true that this can grow in the killer's mind; but it would still show with his first murder, but TABRAM reflects none of this at all, she's been killed by a couple of street thugs...but if you substitute her for Alice Mckenzie then yes.

JTR took organs as a trophy of some kind, so he probably had this morbid interest all his life and like many other killers, this originated from childhood.

if this is indeed true, or similar and i do emphasise similar; then maybe M.Kelly noticed these highly disturbing traits.... but on a sub-conscious level only and thus worried too much about JTR..

because if Kelly's boyriend was a future JTR, he would've been seriously disturbed already..... obviously

yes indeed, i'm beginning to wonder if she detected JTR in one of her lovers, be it Fleming or Hutch or someone else, and any one of 3 of these could be Blotchy!

[richardnunweek]

Hello Shelley,
My post was not reflecting on shocking the victims, not even shocking society, but perhaps shocking just one person Mary Kelly.
I am not suggesting that Paleys theory is spot on, but it would not surprise me in the slightest, if the murders ceased with the removal of Kelly, because after her death , no shock waves needed to continue.
Of course it might be just a case of a murderous lunatic roaming the streets of Whitechapel that autumn, and having a field day, but i would say it was proberly more sinister then that.
My opinion , i grant you.
Regards Richard.

[DVV]

Martha's attack was with a knife, and the attack ends when she is dead.

Hi Mike,

I think it's not the first time I hear of this woman, still alive after 38 stabs.

Rest in peace, Martha "Rasputin" Tabram.

Amitiés mon cher,
David

[Chava]

It has always interested me that there are question marks beside the start of the series--was it Nicholls or Tabram? And question marks beside the end of the series--was Kelly a Ripper victim at all?

I think we can only be dead sure of Nicholls, Chapman and Eddowes, although I do think a case can be made for Tabram and a case can be made for Kelly. The stabbing vs ripping is the core of the No Tabram Wasn't case. And I acknowledge that it's strong evidence against. But I don't think she can be ruled out, I really don't. There's too much similar stuff to rule her out in my opinion.

[Shelley]

Rather fundamental points, in this case, Crystal. Namely, that a stab is fundamentally different in execution to a cut; and that whereas Tabram received 39 violent stabs primarily to her upper body (and NO cuts), this is more than can be said (even at a stretch) for the "C5" victims.

Nichols received several lengthy cuts to her lower body, and only two small stabs in her private part(s); Eddowes sustained a long, deep cut to her abdomen, extensive cuts to her face, but only one SMALL stab to her pubic area done with the point of a knife - and this, it seems, in conjunction with a definite cut just below it (suggesting a slip of the knife in the first instance). No stabs at all were reported in respect of the remaining "Canonical 3", and all of the "C5" had their throats deeply cut - three of them almost to the point of beheading. In stark contrast, Tabram's throat was not cut once, but stabbed multiple times.

I'm not saying that I don't believe Tabram might have been a Ripper victim - she might well have been, for all I know. What I am saying is that it is at best quixotic (and at worst disingenuous) to shoehorn her into the series, by playing down the real differences that exist between her injuries and the others. If the Ripper did kill her, then he used a radically, and self-evidently, different technique to do so than that which he employed in later murders.

Good facts put here Sam, and you are entitled to your opinion, it is no secret that i do not see it possible thatTabram could have been killed at the same hand as Polly Nicholls, Chapman & Eddowes, as there is a remarkable difference in the mind at work from Tabram to that of the C3 i've mentioned, and no, i do not know of any killer changing his MO or Signature that quick at the same time with a victim, not in history, not in modern times either.

[Shelley]

Hi,
I would class Tabram as victim number one, and the whole idea was to deliver a shock factor, thus the multiple stab wounds, and the verocity of the attack, the latter murders increased in mutalation, thus increasing the shock value.
This being the case, the question must be asked, what motive did the Ripper have to bring about these murders, who was he intending to shock?
Regards Richard.

Richardnunweek,
How can you possibly come to the conclusion that the murders were due to a factor representing ' Shock '? There are victims where death has not occurred or the intention and shock is still evident in the victim.
Also how do you reach the conclusion that the mutilated victims would sustain shock, the throat-cutting of Polly Nicholls, Annie Chapman and Eddowes would not induce further shock on these victims when mutilation took place, and i am putting aside if you at all mean in your post that the mutilation itself was intended to shock, because of the fact that it is just as well for the value of ' shock ' if the killer had chopped off a finger or two & posted them to comittees, the police or the news agencies. The very act of mutilating a body for the purpose to extract organs is a very ill personality and does not include personalities that intend shock value in it's entirety. The bodies of the victims were left in the street as a matter of neccessity due to personality as well as convience.

[Shelley]

We do, Gareth.

I think I'll just provide a blast from the past rather than risk going round in circles of Toppy-esque diameters.

http://forum.casebook.org/showthread.php?p=69761&highlight=stabs#post69761

Best regards,
Ben

Oh shut up Ben you Quack!!!! Focus!

[Shelley]

We do, Ben?

Whey, hey Go Sam, Go!.........Everyone knows that no-one does, as the same is said in the old words of the fishmaster himself....Care to tell us the identity of Jack the Ripper? Oh and i reckon you'll be repeating yourself again Sam with the ' Don't take on psychobabble ' especially in the face of realism and the likes of Paul Britton perhaps!

Still better focus, not in the case of Tabram.

Hi all,

The acts that were believed perpetrated by Jack the Ripper were almost entirely related to very personal goals, in that acts intended only to shock the general public seem more like anarchy than serial murder. I dont think he minded the public being involved....he leaves 4 of his alleged victims where they will be found quite soon after he has left.

The essence of the question relates as Sam says to the physical acts themselves, and in my opinion, Martha is killed as a result of an attack with a knife and dozens of individual wounds. Annie is killed when she is lying on the ground....the killer then brandishes his knife and she is killed by severe and thorough throat cuts, quickly and efficiently...so much so that he can begin his abdominal mutilations, the ultimate goal of the killer, immediately thereafter.

Polly is attacked before her killer uses his knife, Annie is attacked before the killer uses his knife, Liz is attacked with a knife, Kate was attacked before the killer uses his knife, and Mary is attacked with a knife.

Martha's attack was with a knife, and the attack ends when she is dead.

Best regards all.

[Sam Flynn]

This being the case, the question must be asked... who was he intending to shock?

Himself?

[richardnunweek]

Hi,
I would class Tabram as victim number one, and the whole idea was to deliver a shock factor, thus the multiple stab wounds, and the verocity of the attack, the latter murders increased in mutalation, thus increasing the shock value.
This being the case, the question must be asked, what motive did the Ripper have to bring about these murders, who was he intending to shock?
Regards Richard.

[Sam Flynn]

You mean ever decreasing, until so miniscule that we realise we can't even see them and we suddenly notice we're stuck on a couple of points?

Rather fundamental points, in this case, Crystal. Namely, that a stab is fundamentally different in execution to a cut; and that whereas Tabram received 39 violent stabs primarily to her upper body (and NO cuts), this is more than can be said (even at a stretch) for the "C5" victims.

Nichols received several lengthy cuts to her lower body, and only two small stabs in her private part(s); Eddowes sustained a long, deep cut to her abdomen, extensive cuts to her face, but only one SMALL stab to her pubic area done with the point of a knife - and this, it seems, in conjunction with a definite cut just below it (suggesting a slip of the knife in the first instance). No stabs at all were reported in respect of the remaining "Canonical 3", and all of the "C5" had their throats deeply cut - three of them almost to the point of beheading. In stark contrast, Tabram's throat was not cut once, but stabbed multiple times.

I'm not saying that I don't believe Tabram might have been a Ripper victim - she might well have been, for all I know. What I am saying is that it is at best quixotic (and at worst disingenuous) to shoehorn her into the series, by playing down the real differences that exist between her injuries and the others. If the Ripper did kill her, then he used a radically, and self-evidently, different technique to do so than that which he employed in later murders.