Ripper Victim?

[Ben]

No whale blubber or harpoonery needed to bridge that particular gap, I feel, Gareth.

Although, to be fair, both Ahab and Jack uttered the same exclamation when spotting a suitable victim:

"There, she blows!"

[Jeff Leahy]

I’m sorry Sam but if we follow your logic to its natural conclusion then we wouldn’t see any development in any of the murders. But clearly there is development in all of the murders.

If Jack had time to cut Tabrams face, Why didn’t he do that? If Jack had time to cut Nichols face, why not start then? He had time and opportunity and by your logic he should have done so..

He should have done so at he Chapman scene..but he didn’t.

Perhaps his voices just weren’t demanding that of him at the time?

The FACT remains is that we have a cut at the the Tabram murder scene. And to argue that it isn’t very large, or like the gashes at the Nichol scene is like comparing the cuts to faces, or rather lack of them until Eddowes and Kelly (Which incidentally show escalation).

Jack is simply learning as he goes. Taking dictation from God.

Pirate

[Chava]

If Jack had time to cut Tabrams face, Why didn’t he do that? If Jack had time to cut Nichols face, why not start then? He had time and opportunity and by your logic he should have done so..

He should have done so at he Chapman scene..but he didn’t.

And that is an excellent point. All we see at the Nicholls killing is ripping and gashing around the abdomen. In the Chapman killing, he hoiks the intestines out and takes a trophy organ or two. In Eddowes, hoiks the intestines out, takes a trophy or two and starts in on the face. In Kelly, he hoiks the whole shebang out, takes a trophy, has fun with the face, and then decorates the room. The stabbing to ripping could have been part of the progression.

[Sam Flynn]

The problem with dissing 'interruption theories' is that occasionally they have merit.

Quite how one gets interrupted to the extent of inflicting a 3x1 inch wound is beyond me, Chava.

The Ripper was clearly interrupted when he killed Stride.

Not in my book - I think he was done and dusted long before Diemschutz appeared on the scene. Speaking of which... who was the Diemschutz equivalent of George Yard?

[Sam Flynn]

I’m sorry Sam but if we follow your logic to its natural conclusion then we wouldn’t see any development in any of the murders.

It's a bit of a leap from stab-stab-stab-stab-stab-stab-stab-stab-stab-stab... stab-stab-stab-stab-cut to slashing the belly open, Jeff. That's not "development" - that's a complete gear-change.

If Jack had time to cut Tabrams face, Why didn’t he do that?

Never mind the face, Jeff. What about the throat? Or the belly? Or cuts (plural) instead of stabs, for that matter.

[Sam Flynn]

The FACT remains is that we have a cut at the the Tabram murder scene.

Not a fact, Jeff - a supposition. It could quite easily have been a stab from an obtuse angle. Not to mention the FACT that, whatever it was, it was titchy in comparison with not just the abdominal wounds of subsequent Ripper murders, but also in comparison with the throat-wounds of those victims - indeed, whether Ripper victim or not, they barely merit comparison with the gashes on Mary Kelly's arm. Was her killer, too, interrupted as he inflicted them?

[Chava]

Quite how one gets interrupted to the extent of inflicting a 3x1 inch wound is beyond me, Chava.Not in my book - I think he was done and dusted long before Diemschutz appeared on the scene. Speaking of which... who was the Diemschutz equivalent of George Yard?

I'm not sure why you think that about the Stride killing but I'm not going into it here. As to who was the Diemschutz equivalent, it could have been George Crowe going back up the yard after his shift. Or it could have been someone else. Or he may never have been interrupted. We don't know. But by the same token we can't say he wasn't.

As for your comment about the 3 by 1" wound, that isn't a stab. If it was 3" deep by 1" wide, then it would be. That is a cut, not a stab. And for all we know, the start of a rip. Until he was interrupted...

[harry]

Sam,
Interesting photo of the fallen soldiers,but tell me this,is it possible that some may not have been killed outright,and that the postures in death may have been after some suffering and movement,resulting in a different position than when first hit,shot,stabbed etc.
Glen,
Whenever have I given the impression I do not give credence to the soldier being investigated.The fact is,The army went out of it's way to assist the police in identification.They didn't have to,and the police had no power themselves to order the army to line up.The result was nil.In addition I am positive that the army would have conducted checks of clothing and weapons,and conducted extensive questioning of personnel,to which there would have been no right of silence or refusal to comply.
The comparison of a middle east veteran of today,with a garrison type soldier of 1888 is ludicrous.It's obvious you have no idea of military matters.Murders by military personnel in the 1880 was rare indeed,and the idea that a trained soldier of that era would suddenly erupt into a murderous and frenzied individual,laughable.As is the notion that a soldier would refer to a 40 year old hag as a girl.
And please no more of that,'Iv'e seen hundreds of bodies'.What are you ,a morgue attendant?

[Fisherman]

Sam writes:

"Suffice to say that in subsequent murders the Ripper slashed open the abdomen with evident resolve and purpose. Quite how one gets from a superficial wound to the "private part" to slicing through great slabs of belly-flesh is a mystery. Perhaps he'd read Moby Dick in the intervening three weeks, and this inspired him?"

Nobody read Moby Dick at that time, Sam. Melville once said that even if he had written the Bible, nobody would have read him.

On the issue of a possible interruption, the Tabram case is much different from the Stride ditto, since Killeen provides us with a very good reason as to why the man who cut Tabrams lower body would have been interrupted - because she was still alive throughout the stabbing!
We can also take into account two other things:
1. It may well have been his first strike, and as such there is every reason to believe that he would have spooked easily.
2. If it indeed WAS his first strike, he may have cut at a place that did not give access to the abdominal cavity; he may have been hindered by bone structure and such.

As for the size of the wound, I have said before and I say again that every cut wound in the world, throughout history, has commenced as a small wound, only to grow bigger as the time and effort was there on the cutters behalf to achieve this. And every interrupted cut wound may end up at every possible percentage of the intended size of the cut. Therefore, we should not spend all our time measuring the cut, but instead take notice of the fact that there WAS a cut to Tabrams abdomen. And it was NOT accompanied by a swarm of other stabs - it was an isolated damage. In fact, it would seem that the ONLY wound out of 39 that was a cut was this specific one, and if that does not evoke your interest, you are being slightly careless to my mind.
If we crave the same length and depth of a wound as the Ripper victims had before we are allowed to offer the wiew that it may be Ripper-inflicted, we are discarding the one type of evidence that should evoke the greatest interest on our behalf: cut wounds to the abdomen. It would be a foolish thing to do.

Oh, and incidentally, when Jeff says that it is a fact that we have a cut to Tabram, he is absolutely correct. As long as we do not speak of intents, but only of appearance and outcome, that cannot be challenged, I feel.

The best,
Fisherman

[Jeff Leahy]

Not a fact, Jeff - a supposition. It could quite easily have been a stab from an obtuse angle. Not to mention the FACT that, whatever it was, it was titchy in comparison with not just the abdominal wounds of subsequent Ripper murders, but also in comparison with the throat-wounds of those victims - indeed, whether Ripper victim or not, they barely merit comparison with the gashes on Mary Kelly's arm. Was her killer, too, interrupted as he inflicted them?

Your trying to have your cake and eat it here Sam. Yes it is supposition but as we don’t have the original autopsy report we are dependent as a whole on supposition.

And saying that it might have been a stab from an obtuse angle simply demonstrates how difficult it is to draw a line between SLASHING and STABBING. Because slashing by its nature requires a Stabbing movement and a pulling movement.

They can quite easily be part and parcel of the same undertaking. Remember Slashing at someone through several layers of clothing would be next to useless, the slasher would be forced by necessity to Stab if his intention was to target areas like the breast or heart, unless he could firstly convince his client to take her clothes off.

With regard’s to the throat wounds we simply don’t know. If you look at the photo of Tabram there could be cuts below her chins.

With reguard’s to interruption it’s my opinion that he was only interrupted by Schwartz.

A better explanation for only going so far at each attack is that GOD had only instructed him to do so to that point. A little thought, fantasy and masturbation later, God give him new thrills to carry out.

But that also is only supposition.

Pirate

[perrymason]

Hello all,

The wound everyone seems to call either a cut or a stab is actually more like a gash if you read the description, and could easily been caused by withdrawing a blade on a different plane than it entered on.

A question...since we know two blades were involved....it is almost certain....why doesnt he use the larger blade first? One well placed stab would save a ton of energy... My thinking is that he wasnt thinking at the time...because he was evidently pissed off at Martha or Unfortunates or women in general. If he only wants to kill her, why doesnt he just do that?

Martha Tabram was an Unfortunate who after midnight on the night of her death, a Bank Holiday, was stabbed 39 times.. without noise, by witnesses very nearby at the time, and she was perhaps choked or throttled before, or during her attack.

Those are the similarities that exist between her and Ripper crimes, excluding the method of dispatch.

Not included are include knife use only after the victim is unconscious...we know that because he cuts his abdominally mutilated victims while they are on the ground, ..a throat slitting,.....abdominal cuts penetrating the levels of skin and muscle,..... there are no parts taken from Martha, and she is killed with 2 different length and breadth weapons....the larger blade being used once and identified by the medical official as perhaps being made by a dagger or bayonet. She is not obviously "cut" using the knife at all.

When you consider that the similarities are based on circumstantial evidence, and the opposing characteristics are based on examination of the body itself, there is little, aside from some circumstantial synchronicity, to do with "Ripping" women open in this case.

The author of Dear Boss chose the name Ripper because he sent it after 3 women were murdered in very similar circumstances and with similar wounds inflicted, all being "ripped" open with a knife. Ripping is what this particular killer does, so if you have a victim that exhibits that she can be questioned as a probable victim.....just like has been done with Mary Kelly, cause there is no evidence she was killed by the same man as the others present in circumstances or by wounds inflicted ...but she was "ripped", so she has a place in the queue.

Martha was not, and does not.

Best regards all

[Ben]

Hi Mike,

A wound that is three inches long but only one inch deep ought to qualify as a cut in anyone's book.

just like has been done with Mary Kelly, cause there is no evidence she was killed by the same man as the others present in circumstances or by wounds inflicted ...but she was "ripped", so she has a place in the queue

If the queue in question refers to possible precursers to a more polished MO and signature on the part of the same killer, then Tabram is a very prime contender for that queue.

I wouldn't worry much about what the Dear Boss author says. They called Peter Sutcliffe the "Yorkshire Ripper" despite the fact that many of his crimes didn't involved "ripping" at all.

Best regards,
Ben

[Fisherman]

Michael asks:

"A question...since we know two blades were involved....it is almost certain....why doesnt he use the larger blade first?"

How about pondering that there were TWO men involved? Takes care of that detail nicely.

"she is killed with 2 different length and breadth weapons....the larger blade being used once"

Once - or TWICE, Michael! We cannot exclude the possibility that the cut was made by the larger blade, since cut surfaces don´t give away blade size in the same manner as stabs do. As for the differing lengths you speak of, I would not put my signature on such a proposal - there is no reason not to believe that the smaller blade was still quite a long one.

"She is not obviously "cut" using the knife at all."

Yes, she is, and the cut came out 3x1 inches.

The best, Michael!
Fisherman

[perrymason]

Hi Mike,

A wound that is three inches long but only one inch deep ought to qualify as a cut in anyone's book.



If the queue in question refers to possible precursers to a more polished MO and signature on the part of the same killer, then Tabram is a very prime contender for that queue.

I wouldn't worry much about what the Dear Boss author says. They called Peter Sutcliffe the "Yorkshire Ripper" despite the fact that many of his crimes didn't involved "ripping" at all.

Best regards,
Ben

I disagree obviously Ben....and you know why Sutcliffe got his moniker....it was based on this Jack guys name, a killer of prostitutes.

Cheers Ben.

[Chava]

According to the PM there were 39 stab wounds all delivered 'during life'. I assume he means 'perimortem'. I very much doubt that poor woman was responsive after the first 10 or so. Which means that for the next 29 blows, he would have been stabbing a basically dead body. He's probably crouched over and stabbing a woman on the ground for a considerable period of time. It would have taken quite a while to stab like that into muscle, and at one point into bone, through the clothes she was wearing. Maybe that's why he tore the bodice away. But if that's the case, we have the image of a man crouched over and for all intents and purposes defacing and mutilating the body of a murdered middle-aged destitute prostitute in an area central to the Ripper scare three weeks before the first canonical victim was killed.