Ripper Victim?

[Shelley]

Christine,
Your'e entitled to your opinion like everyone else. I don't understand what you mean ' It wouldn't be the norm ' ?........

Also Tabram didn't have any facial mutilations either, or a cut-throat for that matter.

[Shelley]

No, Shelley.

I think he was learning all the time, honing his grisly craft as he progressed, experimenting and expanding on his earlier efforts in the process. I believe there were earlier victims that predated Tabram, which he had to abort on account of the fact that his inexperience had resulted in the victim being allowed to cry out and so survive.

...I missed this one....So practising all the while and honing it, so exactly how many women's bodies left in a trail around the east-end? Or women making complaint of said same man fitting description from the one's that survived?

[Shelley]

Glenn,
All good points, especially the:
A) the throat cut is very extreme in character
b) and more importantly) the throat cut is an exisiting element in all the murders from Nicholls and onwards towards kelly ( only stride has a less extensive wound.

However, with ......the facial wounds seems to be an extension from his basic formula due to experimentation.
It's not experimentation Glenn, it's because anger sparked as a possible memory and he has added ( or your extention) or it can be said ' Adaption ' . personally i believe that this may well be due to the smell of stale alcohol on Eddowes mouth, as she had been in a police station for causing a disturbance & drunk before she met with her death. The Killer could have associated a bad memory with alcohol.Nicholls & Chapman it was reported that they did not smell of alcohol on thier mouths.So Nicholls & Chapman did not get thier faces mutilated, it was just circumstance for Eddowes.
Shelley

[Shelley]

Serial Killers

I wish Ben could give a good explaination to the Whitechapel Murderer in relation to '.....Honing his craft all the while '.......Serial Killers who experiment on Human bodies don't do it with live ones, they do it on a Corpse or corpses....For that they need a cellar or a basement to do said practise....If they don't and pick off live victims in streets to practice whilst rendering them dead in the street, they pick up the dumbest criminal of the year award!
Apart from practicing on human bodies ( corpses), they use animals or pieces of meat as i have mentioned before on posts.

Regards
Shelley

[Ben]

I wish Ben could give a good explaination to the Whitechapel Murderer in relation to '.....Honing his craft all the while '.......Serial Killers who experiment on Human bodies don't do it with live ones, they do it on a Corpse or corpses

Sorry, Shelley, that's simply incorrect.

Yes, a good deal of experimentation can occur during the post-mortem phase, but a serial killer can also learn a great deal from mistakes that result in the victim surviving. For example - and strictly hypothetically speaking - a serial killer may discover that direct knife attacks to the throat fail to kill the victim but instead result in him/her crying out and alerting passers by, so he may resolve to strangle the next victim to prevent such an occurance. That's an example of experimentation.

Best regards,
Ben

[Christine]

Christine,
Your'e entitled to your opinion like everyone else. I don't understand what you mean ' It wouldn't be the norm ' ?........

Also Tabram didn't have any facial mutilations either, or a cut-throat for that matter.

What I mean is that if a man gets some sort of satisfaction out of cutting a woman open and removing things, you can't assume that he would also get satisfaction out of stabbing a woman 39 times. It's not impossible that Jack killed Tabram--many things are at least possible, but if Tabram's killer had had some sort of interest in her insides, he could have indulged that interest, but he didn't.

[Shelley]

What I mean is that if a man gets some sort of satisfaction out of cutting a woman open and removing things, you can't assume that he would also get satisfaction out of stabbing a woman 39 times. It's not impossible that Jack killed Tabram--many things are at least possible, but if Tabram's killer had had some sort of interest in her insides, he could have indulged that interest, but he didn't.

Well, i can see your point Christine, however satisfaction can be fleeting, but needs are not always in the same box as a satisfaction. So i'm inclined to separate the Two with Tabram & Nicholls. However if you class it all in the area of satisfaction that's entirely up to you, but i wouldn't say it was all the norm, besides what's normal in this case.

[Shelley]

Sorry, Shelley, that's simply incorrect.

Yes, a good deal of experimentation can occur during the post-mortem phase, but a serial killer can also learn a great deal from mistakes that result in the victim surviving. For example - and strictly hypothetically speaking - a serial killer may discover that direct knife attacks to the throat fail to kill the victim but instead result in him/her crying out and alerting passers by, so he may resolve to strangle the next victim to prevent such an occurance. That's an example of experimentation.

Best regards,
Ben

I can see a point to a degree on this Ben, However strangling, cutting a throat is different than opening a body up to extracting organs, i also fail to see that puncturing said organs and leaving them in a body is a form of experimentation of ' Oops that didn't work, i'll try this differently '......This is going around in circles stretching a piece of so called experimentation into the depths of mutilation and organ extraction, it just doesn't work and as far as i can see you miss the boundary in this section of hypothesis. There is a different mind at work when extracting organs, not an experimentation and as Glenn has pointed out MO does not change drastically, it takes a period of time. It is the same when a person suffers with depression it takes time enough to develop the loss in order to get the depressed state it causes.

However Ben, this point:
I take your point on Strangling and going then to try cutting a throat.... But at cutting - throat i stop there, there is no experimentation in throat-cutting.

And it is not incorrect Ben to say that serial killers that use human bodies don't practice on corpses in mutilation, it is not also incorrect that they use dead animals or pieces of butchers meat either for that matter.

[Shelley]

Sorry, Shelley, that's simply incorrect.

Yes, a good deal of experimentation can occur during the post-mortem phase, but a serial killer can also learn a great deal from mistakes that result in the victim surviving. For example - and strictly hypothetically speaking - a serial killer may discover that direct knife attacks to the throat fail to kill the victim but instead result in him/her crying out and alerting passers by, so he may resolve to strangle the next victim to prevent such an occurance. That's an example of experimentation.

Best regards,
Ben

Ben,
I also asked you where the trail of bodies or survived victims with reports of a description matching JTR from the police, if mutilation is to occur on live victims in streets. Where are they? Also Don't use Tabram with me because i have given good and valid reasons to her not being a ripper victim to explain this stretching of experimentation you mention.

[Shelley]

Shelley writes:

"So Tabram was a bit like the possible two men theory with Stride, to you that is.
Funny, i heard of more than 1 man were rape is concerned but Killing and stabbing, Sorry i find it a bit far fetched, unless our JTR is with a Gang of course such as Emma Smith case."

Every case should be taken on itīs own, Shelley. And if Tabram was a one-killer-case, it was a case where the killer for some reason changed weapons in the midst of stabbing away in a frenzy.
That should give anybody looking at the case a pause, I feel.

The best,
Fisherman

Fisherman,
JSchmidt, pointed out that a man with two weapons with one weapon he could have used on Tabram, the handle broke off etc, so produced another weapon and proceeded to use that.....That's a good sensible realistic answer...Don't you think Fisherman?

I myself said on a post that a soldier could have used two weapons on Martha Tabram...Same theory as JSchmidt, but JSchmidt explained it a little better.
Also I don't think Emma Smith was a ripper victim either.

[Shelley]

Shelley asks:
"How do you not know that some macho type soldier wasn't showing off his blade to someone other than Tabram?"

I donīt know much at all, Shelly, and in that respect I am much the same as everybody else out here; we donītknow, so we work with theoretical scenarios and try to find viable solutions to the deeds. And to my mind, two weapons point to two perpetrators. But two perpetrators, one victim and an inclusion of rage has a tendency to be a loud affair, which is why I opt for the scavenger theory - the soldier stabbed Tabram 37 times and left her for dead, and Jack only entered the stage AFTER the soldier had left.
It explains the silence, it explains why two blades were used, it explains why she had a cut to her abdomen, just as it explains why it was followed by a stab through the heart - for she was not dead as he cut her, as asserted by Killeen. And when he has to abort his cutting into her stomach, he is fforced to find a way to ensure that his next victim is not alive and able to cry out.

It is the best explanation I have been able to come up with, and I genuinely feel it covers many aspects that have hitherto not been covered. But that is a far cry from "knowing" anything...!

The best,
Fisherman

Fisherman,
Who ever Killed and mutilated Nicholls was going to display this behaviour in any case, i think it is unrealistic that our JTR would be scavenging on wounded bodies by per chance of stumbling on said bodies, that are possibly still alive as well and testing/experimenting, the Killer of Nicholls would ensure he got his own supply, not trip up on accident on a punctured wounded body, and for some of those that support the theory of Tabram, they seemed to have used the hypothosis the wrong way around as you put it forth ' on scavenging ' also to include senario's of practicing throat-cutting as also an experimentation into the bargain, even though Martha's throat was not cut!!!
Fisherman, this is far fetched including the time period of 3 weeks. Also a scavenging theory is way far fetched for a killer who already needs to mutilate and extract organs, in itself!

[Glenn Lauritz Andersson]

Hi Glenn,

I'm not sure why the facial mutilations are of more extreme character than the throat cut. Both are a components of signature, and it logically follows that he must have come up with the ideas for both at some point in time. My guess is that he alighted on both as a result of experimentation, the throat cuts simply being decided upon earlier than the facial gashes, and the organ-extractions coming into play some time between Nichols and Tabram.

Best regards,
Ben

Hi Ben,

I said that the throat cuts were of extreme nature, since they go a long way beyond what is necessary to kill someone, they indicate something esle, and I certainly don't think they were made up on chance.

Furthermore, I disagree when it comes to the facial mutialtions, There are absolutely no indication whatsoever that the Ripepr had any idea about facial mutilations until Eddowes. Mitre Square was an even riskier crime scene (with PC:s patroling frequently) but still he suddenly started to inflict them. yet we see none of this on Chapman.
There can be no doubt that the facial mutilations were a later addition (while he still managed to include all other important features in his signature) while the throat cuts were an important element right from the start!

I am sorry, but if Tabram was a Ripper victim I would expect to see such a throat cut on her as well. In spite of the multiple stabbing I would be willing to consider her in the line-up as a sheer possibility, if she had dispalyed such a throat cut.
But as it stands now, there is absolutely nothing that ties her to a Ripper crime.

All evidence points at a prostitute-client conflict and an ordinary multiple stabbing murder and the perpetrator being one of two soldiers. That is what the facts say. Everything else is far-fetched over-interpretation and wishful thinking.

All the best

[harry]

It is certainly a fact that Tabram's killing was,at the time,considered in many quarters,to be one of a number committed by the same hand.There seems to be no consideration at that time,that more than one person was responsible for Tabram's injuries,and no lasting suspicion that a member of the armed forces was responsible.Except for Kileens report of a difference in appearance of one of the wounds,that to the sternum,no evidence of a different weapon or of more than one offender,or of that offenders calling.One can argue Killeen could not be wrong,but that would only show ignorance,of what he could not be wrong about.We do not know the difference of the sternum wound because it was not given,but a considered guess would be that any wound to the sternum would be markedly different than one to the abdomen,breast or throat,even allowing for the same weapon being used.

[Ben]

Hi Glenn,

Furthermore, I disagree when it comes to the facial mutialtions, There are absolutely no indication whatsoever that the Ripepr had any idea about facial mutilations until Eddowes.

Quite possibly, but it can be argued just as pursuasively that he there was "absolutely no indication whatsoever" that the ripper had any idea about deep throat cuts until Nichols. I just don't feel comfortable prioritizing some elements of his signature over others, since both were clearly supererogatory to pulling off an efficient time - the facial mutilations perhaps more obviously so. We can only decide which elements were in place right from the start if we know when the "start" was, and since the first offences of the majority of serial killers will often bear little resemblence to later murders on account of inexperience, I'd be very surprised if Nichols was the very start.

Best regards,
Ben

[Shelley]

Hi Ben,

I said that the throat cuts were of extreme nature, since they go a long way beyond what is necessary to kill someone, they indicate something esle, and I certainly don't think they were made up on chance.

Furthermore, I disagree when it comes to the facial mutialtions, There are absolutely no indication whatsoever that the Ripepr had any idea about facial mutilations until Eddowes. Mitre Square was an even riskier crime scene (with PC:s patroling frequently) but still he suddenly started to inflict them. yet we see none of this on Chapman.
There can be no doubt that the facial mutilations were a later addition (while he still managed to include all other important features in his signature) while the throat cuts were an important element right from the start!

I am sorry, but if Tabram was a Ripper victim I would expect to see such a throat cut on her as well. In spite of the multiple stabbing I would be willing to consider her in the line-up as a sheer possibility, if she had dispalyed such a throat cut.
But as it stands now, there is absolutely nothing that ties her to a Ripper crime.

All evidence points at a prostitute-client conflict and an ordinary multiple stabbing murder and the perpetrator being one of two soldiers. That is what the facts say. Everything else is far-fetched over-interpretation and wishful thinking.

All the best

Ben.......And Glenn's valid point here is that The extreme throat-cuts are a mix of both MO & Signature Ben ( see what i mean about the true value of MO & Signature especially in this case....My message to you Ben remember?). Glenn makes other very good points and i agree with him that a ' scavenger ' senario as with Tabram is pie in the sky, because of need from this killer.

Also, Glenn, where i made mention of an adaption with the facial mutilations on Eddowes....Considering the extent of cutting on her nose, it is more than likely he had been practising on perhaps a corpse in a basement/cellar somewhere...If not the facial mutilations would be less severe.