Ripper Victim?

[Fisherman]

Nothing to see writes:

"If Jack hadn't appeared, she would never be attributed to him."

Have you actually pondered the meaning of this sentence, NTS...?

The best,
Fisherman

[Glenn Lauritz Andersson]

Hi Nothing to see.
I am absolutely in agreement with you and well put.

The only thing we may disagree on is that I actually believe Nichols was fist first crime of this type, although he may have been resonsible for other crimes such as sexual assaults, arson etc.

All the best

[Nothing to see]

Nothing to see writes:

"If Jack hadn't appeared, she would never be attributed to him."

Have you actually pondered the meaning of this sentence, NTS...?

The best,
Fisherman

OK, tell me what I'm not pondering. 2 different weapons according to Killeen.
Jack used one knife, consistently. If I'm wrong about that I'm sure many people will let me know.

Jack starts his work and it's only logical that Tabram would be considered. I understand that. But I think I'm right in saying this. If Jack hadn't appeared, serial killer using a knife, then Tabram would not be viewed as a potential or possible Jack victim. She would have been a 'one' off.
Don't you think so?

[Nothing to see]

Hi Nothing to see.
I am absolutely in agreement with you and well put.

The only thing we may disagree on is that I actually believe Nichols was fist first crime of this type, although he may have been resonsible for other crimes such as sexual assaults, arson etc.

All the best

Nice to have someone to agree with. Jack must have worked up to Nichols by attacking who? He may not have killed them and I'm not an expert on serial killers or Jack. But from what I understand serial killers start by arson, animal cruelty, then work their way up. Sex attacks, sure. But not Tabram. I'll still go with Killeen. 2 different weapons. I figure, 2 different men.

[Fisherman]

Nothing to see writes:

"OK, tell me what I'm not pondering"

What you are not pondering, my friend, is that when you write ""If Jack hadn't appeared, she would never be attributed to him", you are stating something that pretty much goes without saying...!

All the best,
Fisherman

[Nothing to see]

Nothing to see writes:

"OK, tell me what I'm not pondering"

What you are not pondering, my friend, is that when you write ""If Jack hadn't appeared, she would never be attributed to him", you are stating something that pretty much goes without saying...!

All the best,
Fisherman

I get you. I agree.

[Shelley]

Yes, personally I agree with that possibility.
But as I said, my disbelief in that idea is based on Killeen's very clear statement about two different knives being used.
he may not have had enough forensic experience in estimating what type of weapon(s) but if he says that the same instrument couldn't have inflicted all the wounds, I have no reason to doubt it. After all, he saw the wounds, we don't, and his verbal description of them is not very detailed from am modern forensic point of view.
If he hadn't been so sure about this under oath, I wouldn't have stressed that point.

All the best

Ok Glenn,
Good argument, however i will ask in order to assertain that a different weapon was used to penetrate the heart, as it is a very tough robust muscle & organ, in comparision to other organs, was the depth of the injury in inches say as in comparision to the iches depth of all the other organs penetrated other than the heart?

[Shelley]

Wait, what? They wore their weapons? Or do you mean they wore their dress uniforms. Because if they wore their weapons, the locals would have taken a very dim view of it. I know that soldiers wore their dress uniforms when they went out on the town. That's why girls who..er...went out with soldiers were said to have caught 'scarlet fever'. But that doesn't mean they carried their weapons. However they were issued with military knives, I believe. And they could well have carried them along for protection etc. That may be what the police meant when they asked about 'bayonets'. From what I can gather, the knives were shorter than bayonets, more like a modern clasp knife maybe.

Chava,
Wait a minute, some dress uniform also included weapons display, you still get that today, you know ' The cold stream guards ' ' Trooping the colour ' and they all display swords and bayonets depending on which regiment & dress is being used. Today we have those that demostrate against war, but we still have soldiers on display with weapons, even cannons, and i have been to display's so i know from personal experience and they use them in demonstrations, in the victorian period the majority of people were proud that out soldiers went to war, so no offence in displaying weapons Chava, it's an odd statement to make, it has no place in realistic terms.

[Shelley]

You're correct. Killeen specifically mentions 2 different weapons. He was sure about that and again, there are no photos, nothing except Killeen's observations. If you don't believe him, then where do you go for a second opinion? Nowhere. There's nothing to make me doubt his professional opinion.

Personally, it makes me think that Tabram was killed by 2 murderers and I suspect they were both soldiers but I can't prove that. It just makes sense IMO. As to what Pearly Poll was up to with her behaviour, it's been argued that she was too nasty to want to help the police and tried to dodge them.
Myself, I'd figure she was probably too drunk the night of the murder to have been of any help to anyone, especially identifying men days later.

I'm sure Jack started somewhere and it wasn't his full blown attack on Nichols. But I don't think it was Tabram. She was in the general area before the canon began, she was stabbed, look for Jack. If Jack hadn't appeared, she would never be attributed to him.

NTS,
Good points, However i do not want to dash away a Doctor's statement as we all have to go by what has been written in reports, it's just that if anyone can compare the inches depth with one wound to another i can have this clarified, as FISHERMAN has mentioned in another post 4" in width & 10" in length thrown at me in terms of pen-knife, then moving on to dagger or bayonet, and i automatically assume that Fisherman has some record of inches been taken in account for the wounds, and i do not have in my notes any descriptions of inches of depth of wounds, heck i didn't even have the information privvy of ' Neck ' wounding to Tabram. I am asking for the inches of depth of wounding of organs in the body, in comparision of the depth of wound to the tough robust muscle & organ the 'Heart ' , as it strikes me that Fisherman is privvy to the information of depth in inches of wounds, other than that if no one has the inches in depth of wounding then this is being made up as we go along and it boils down to beggars belief in one direction or another.

[Shelley]

Shelle asks:

"have you taken a look at blades from knives used in the victorian period?"

I have, Shelley - and I have seen many examples. I´m sure that there are lots more to see too. But the fact of the matter is, that if we allow ourselves to speculate that a pen-knife could be of any size and shape, it renders Killeens assertion useless. The only reasonable suggestion is that he offered that resemblance in order to explain what he had seen - and the major part of all pen-knives (Victorian or not) are knives with short, small, narrow blades. Therefore it stands to reason that this was the sort of blade Killeen wanted to lead our thoughts to.

The best,
Fisherman

Ok,
So this could be a play of Killeen's to get the picture that a ' Pen-knife ' could have been used on all other organs than the heart and a different weapon for the heart, which is what i first thought of.
But were do you get 4" width & 10" length from? Pen-knives do come in different shapes and sizes and a 3" and 4" length is pretty standard.

[Shelley]

Nothing to see writes:

"If Jack hadn't appeared, she would never be attributed to him."

Have you actually pondered the meaning of this sentence, NTS...?

The best,
Fisherman

NTS,
This absolutley spot on, when Jack did appear all murders started to be attributed to him, the Emma Smith case, the Tabram case, everyone that was murdered was all attributed to Jack, in Dew's memoires even murders that took place in other parts of the country, as well as far out as Scotland, it was all due to the hand of the ripper!

[Nothing to see]

Chava,
Wait a minute, some dress uniform also included weapons display, you still get that today, you know ' The cold stream guards ' ' Trooping the colour ' and they all display swords and bayonets depending on which regiment & dress is being used. Today we have those that demostrate against war, but we still have soldiers on display with weapons, even cannons, and i have been to display's so i know from personal experience and they use them in demonstrations, in the victorian period the majority of people were proud that out soldiers went to war, so no offence in displaying weapons Chava, it's an odd statement to make, it has no place in realistic terms.

Hi. I was in London in October and I saw all the displays you mention. I also walked around Spitalfields and Whitechapel a lot. Besides the men parading in uniform around Buck Palace I didn't notice anyone in Whitechapel on the streets with knives or bayonets or anything nasty. Yes, I was there at night. Yes, I was probably lucky that I didn't run into anyone less than friendly but I'd like to think that was due to good management.

Killeen did the autopsy and he said that 2 different types of weapons were used. There is no-one else to refer to. No CSI, no photos, no nothing.
He's the only source we have and IMHO we go with him. 2 different weapons.
Not Jack.

[perrymason]

Wait, what? They wore their weapons? Or do you mean they wore their dress uniforms. Because if they wore their weapons, the locals would have taken a very dim view of it. I know that soldiers wore their dress uniforms when they went out on the town. That's why girls who..er...went out with soldiers were said to have caught 'scarlet fever'. But that doesn't mean they carried their weapons. However they were issued with military knives, I believe. And they could well have carried them along for protection etc. That may be what the police meant when they asked about 'bayonets'. From what I can gather, the knives were shorter than bayonets, more like a modern clasp knife maybe.

I think youre missing the point here Chava....they are proudly displaying their accoutrements that signified they defended the values of their native land....and very few battles were won based on fancy dress. Its a known that the Law regarding these Holidays extended the right of ex-military men to wear their uniforms AND bear arms in public.....and it is known that some local shops sold those items including bayonets to even some non-military men.

It wa intended as a priviledge and trust based on service, but could be used by men wanting to pass themselves off as ex-military as well.

Thats why this dismissal of a large dagger in addition to a smaller knife carried by one man, to me.....seems to fly in the very face of the evidence that says some men were wearing both that night.

The amount of circumstantial evidence that is thrown away in favor of less likely and unsupported Ripper speculation all through that Fall boggles the mind. The fact its still being done....even moreso.

Shes stabbed 39 times, once with a larger instrument like a dagger or bayonet....on a night when men wearing daggers or bayonets with perhaps smaller pen or pocket knives on them are probably looking for prostitutes.

Not only is this nothing like any later Ripper attributed murder.......its also a situation where a possible answer is already known.... by information that many military men, or posers, likely wore large and small knives that night....some seeking prostitutes.

Oh yeah....and we already know she was picked up by one earlier that night..and another is seen close to the site and closer to the time of the murder.

Cheers Chava

[Shelley]

OK, tell me what I'm not pondering. 2 different weapons according to Killeen.
Jack used one knife, consistently. If I'm wrong about that I'm sure many people will let me know.

Jack starts his work and it's only logical that Tabram would be considered. I understand that. But I think I'm right in saying this. If Jack hadn't appeared, serial killer using a knife, then Tabram would not be viewed as a potential or possible Jack victim. She would have been a 'one' off.
Don't you think so?

NTS,
There is also this to consider:
Martha Tabram had 39 stab wounds, the killer if using 1 weapon and penetrating a sternum to pierce the heart in a stabbing motion ( not cutting motion) successfully got through bone, as the sternum is ' The Breastbone ' and stab the heart, he had a weapon that was successful against the hardship of ' BONE ', why indeed would he ever wish to use another weapon if this was a success?
The Killer of Nicholls, Chapman & Eddowes used the same knife, and this knife had a jagged edge on one side. The weapons used from Martha to Nicholls are different.
Also in Dew's memoires as a Victorian police Detective/Constable, he says that all the Doctor's dreaded coming out to a Ripper scene, so the Doctor's would want this Ripper caught as quickly as possible, rather than face the horror of yet again another mutilated women.

[Shelley]

Hiya Perrymason,

Darn Good Post Perrymason, i agree............

Yes, i would say that as well, very few battles were won on fancy dress, i think the uniform is a Girl thing, weapons is a guy thing. I've also had to do a bit of study on soldiers, although i have a long way to go yet, plus it doesn't entail uniforms, it is about weapons and war crimes.

EeeeKkkk!!!!