Ripper Victim?

[Shelley]

Shelly,
It shows your ignorance when you describe soldiers as you did.Still,it's about an a par with the ignorance you show in every thing else.

Harry,

Oh, Harry i know not every soldier is'nt like that, but i was only describing one, you know after what he did to Tabram, i think that's fair given the circumstances. I'm also not ignorant Harry, i educate myself and so i understand Glenn.

[Fisherman]

Shelley writes:

"...it shows the differences in the Killing of Tabram & Nicholls and a different Killer in operation here."

Absolutely, Shelley, there WAS in all probability another killer present. An enraged one. But that does not preclude the possibility that Jack was present too, does it?

Those who dislike the scavenger theory, ask yourselves: If Jack found an incapacitated woman lying in a secluded spot, with nobody about - would he leave that woman alone for the simple reason that he needed to subdue her himself? Was there ever a necessity on his behalf to actually kill - or was the killing a bi-product made necessary to ensure the chance to eviscerate?

At the end of the day, it is the Rippers mindset and motivation we are looking for. If he was bent on doing damage, if he rejoyced in the act of killing, if part/s of his malicious intents were focused on taking lives - then my scavenger theory is rendered very much weaker, if we work from the notion that Tabram would have appeared dead on that landing after the stabbing assault.
If we, on the other hand, accept the possibility that the killing and the throat-slitting were nothing but necessities that must be dealt with to ensure the possibility to get at the abdomen and itīs organs, well then we are facing something quite, quite different. To such a killer, the perfect world would be one in which subdued, unresisting - but still living - women lined the pavements of the streets he walked, ripe and ready for opening up.

I see no reason to disregard such a scenario. In fact, we can be pretty sure that Jack was not the all too common type of serial killer who needs to control his victims by means of intimidating and torturing them. But for the possibility of so-called necrosadism, no element of sadism at all can be attributed to our man in any reasonable way. The quicker and more silent he could snuff out the flame of life in his victims, the better. And if somebody else offered to do it for him, perhaps so much the better.

Itīs anybodys guess: Would he profit from a situation with a prone, subdued woman - or would his intentions and mindset be of a character that disallowed him to do so?

I would also like to add, on the scenario where Shelly suggests a two-soldier killing team with a frenzied stabber who is joined by a comrade, tells him that Tabram was a cow and deserved to die, something that was agreed upon by the friend who pulls out his weapon and stabs her through the heart, that such an affair would probably NOT go down in a silent way - and silence was one of the key elements in this murder. People on that landing were sleeping not many feet from where she died, and nobody heard any commotion , let alone any conversation on cows and such. Moreover, we have to accept either a comrade who stands by and waits as the first 38 wounds are delivered, unparticipating, only to step in at the very last moment with his sturdier blade, or a man who arrives at the scene at the latter stages of the drama, is informed (completly silent) by his friend of what had gone down, and then produces his knife and stabs Tabram through the heart, although she was already as full of holes as a Swiss cheese, and although the normal reaction in such a situation would be to grab the friend by his arm and get the hell out of there as quickly as possible.

I have no problems with people who think my scavenger scenario is an odd one - but maybe we should realize that whichever way we look at this killing, we end up with scenarios that are in some respect just as odd, and that tally very poorly with the silence of the deed, just to mention one thing.

The best,
Fisherman

[harry]

Kelly,
'Only the one after what he did to Tabram'.
There never was a soldier convicted, or accused,or identified, of doing anything to Tabram,except being in her company.
Glen,
There might well have been a soldier seen by PC Barret who's mate had gone off with a girl,but what girl?At least Pearly pol was in a position to name Tabram.As for the wound pattern,the only person to study and report on them,(killeen) distinctly described the number and location of the wounds.Had they been scattered randomly over the torso he would have described them as such.No doubt he too had seen the results of frenzied attacks,and would have been in the best position to have made a comparison,and he doesn't use the word frenzied.
As for trial and error,even a serial criminal has the tendency to change his methods,should a better and more efficient solution present itself,and two slashes acroos the throat instead of nine stabbings,seems a more sensible,and improved solution to me.
Regards.

[Shelley]

Fisherman,
Your theory is only theory i admit as do you, but the likely hood of JTR giving two wounds to Martha and now you say Subdue as well, is a small incident for the tastes he had already developed by the time Nicholls was killed, he had already excersised a taste to mutilate her as well as cutting her throat in a 3 week period! I would at the very least expect some wounding to the throat of Martha, but even if she had and she did not, there are other factors that go beyond any consideration that she was even a practise run for JTR, given the evident developed wounding on Nicholls.
I repeat myself again just on one count not several ( but i could) The relationship of a Killer who disembowells his intent is usually to extract an organ, unless it is complete and utter butchery, this was not butchery of Nicholls, the wounding on her abdomen was precise, not several incisions as in hacking. This is an attempt to extract organs, just merely ' Opening her up '.

[richardnunweek]

Hi,
I believe the Whitechapel killer had a motive for these murders, and that was to shock.
Two explanations.
To shock society.
To shock Mary Jane kelly.
I am going along with the latter, the choice of victim being one that Kelly knew, i would say its a fair bet that she was often in Dorset street , Tabrams friend and confidant Pearly poll , lodged at Crossinghams.
The reason why the killings continued and mutilations kicked in, was the Tabram slaying had no effect with shock value.
My name is not Bruce Paley, but the motive does not have to be of a sexual kind, and the Ripper killings may have been the result of a frustrated mans love for a unfortunate.
Regards Richard.

[Shelley]

Harry,
My name is Shelley, not Shelly or Kelly. SHELLEY.
I have no doubts in my opinion that the soldier was given an alibi by another soldier. No one was ever convicted for the 5 canocial Whitechapel Murders, does that mean there are no victims Harry?

[Shelley]

Harry,

I would say the soldier found loitering around the vicinity of the crime scene at the right time for the murder to occur by PC Barrett (and where his "pal had gone away with a girl") is a much more valid and likely connection rather than the soldiers referred to by Pearly Poll.

There is nothing controlled at all about the wounds om Tabram.
It is pure nonsense to try to construct specified target areas on a body that was pretty much stabbed all over the torso, neck and abdomin with 39 stabs.
The wounds on Tabram does not in any way stand out from any other case I've seen with multiple stabbing; the chest, torso and abdomin are almost among the most common parts to attack and the ones you would expect to get hit by the knife.

Like any other multiple stabbing murder, the wounds are a result of sudden rage and frenzy (I haven't come across a single case where it is NOT a result of frenzie), nothing else, and it is quite obvious considering the vast number of stabs.
It is equally nonsense to claim that the change from Tabram to Nichols was a result of trial and error.

All the best

Hi Glenn,
Good post, there's much common sense here and validity of likelihood, one which i am inclined to agree with.

[Fisherman]

Shelley writes:

"Your theory is only theory i admit as do you, but the likely hood of JTR giving two wounds to Martha and now you say Subdue as well, is a small incident for the tastes he had already developed by the time Nicholls was killed, he had already excersised a taste to mutilate her as well as cutting her throat in a 3 week period! I would at the very least expect some wounding to the throat of Martha, but even if she had and she did not, there are other factors that go beyond any consideration that she was even a practise run for JTR, given the evident developed wounding on Nicholls.
I repeat myself again just on one count not several ( but i could) The relationship of a Killer who disembowells his intent is usually to extract an organ, unless it is complete and utter butchery, this was not butchery of Nicholls, the wounding on her abdomen was precise, not several incisions as in hacking. This is an attempt to extract organs, just merely ' Opening her up '"

A few points:

"now you say Subdue as well"

What I say about subduing is that "my" Ripper would have had no problem with not doing the subduing himself, Shelley.

"the tastes he had already developed by the time Nicholls was killed, he had already excersised a taste to mutilate her as well as cutting her throat in a 3 week period!"

...and if we allow ourselves to theorize that the cut to Tabrams abdomen was a botched or interrupted attempt at opening her up, then whereīs the problem? Then we are faced with something that matches the taste you are speaking of completely.

"The relationship of a Killer who disembowells his intent is usually to extract an organ, unless it is complete and utter butchery, this was not butchery of Nicholls, the wounding on her abdomen was precise, not several incisions as in hacking."

There is no need whatsoever to interpret the cut to Tabrams abdomen as any "hacking". It may just aswell have been a clean cut, and as such it could have been intended to open her up at the very place the Ripper opened the canonicals up. If we accept that Tabram was a sudden opportunity that he stumbled upon, and if she was his first kill, then we should not crave that he went about it with a fixed agenda. The chance arrived, he pounced upon it, and he may suddenly have realized that the woman he thought he could cut up without any commotion was actually alive, representing a collosal risk that he may be given away on the landing. So he interrupts his cutting to the abdomen and stabs her through the heart before he flees, thereby ensuring he left her no chance to survive and give testimony. Next time over, he adds throatslitting, to ensure death and silence.

So the points you raise, Shelley, are not points that my scenario has any problems with.

The best,
Fisherman

[Shelley]

Shelley writes:

"Your theory is only theory i admit as do you, but the likely hood of JTR giving two wounds to Martha and now you say Subdue as well, is a small incident for the tastes he had already developed by the time Nicholls was killed, he had already excersised a taste to mutilate her as well as cutting her throat in a 3 week period! I would at the very least expect some wounding to the throat of Martha, but even if she had and she did not, there are other factors that go beyond any consideration that she was even a practise run for JTR, given the evident developed wounding on Nicholls.
I repeat myself again just on one count not several ( but i could) The relationship of a Killer who disembowells his intent is usually to extract an organ, unless it is complete and utter butchery, this was not butchery of Nicholls, the wounding on her abdomen was precise, not several incisions as in hacking. This is an attempt to extract organs, just merely ' Opening her up '"

A few points:

"now you say Subdue as well"

What I say about subduing is that "my" Ripper would have had no problem with not doing the subduing himself, Shelley.

"the tastes he had already developed by the time Nicholls was killed, he had already excersised a taste to mutilate her as well as cutting her throat in a 3 week period!"

...and if we allow ourselves to theorize that the cut to Tabrams abdomen was a botched or interrupted attempt at opening her up, then whereīs the problem? Then we are faced with something that matches the taste you are speaking of completely.

"The relationship of a Killer who disembowells his intent is usually to extract an organ, unless it is complete and utter butchery, this was not butchery of Nicholls, the wounding on her abdomen was precise, not several incisions as in hacking."

There is no need whatsoever to interpret the cut to Tabrams abdomen as any "hacking". It may just aswell have been a clean cut, and as such it could have been intended to open her up at the very place the Ripper opened the canonicals up. If we accept that Tabram was a sudden opportunity that he stumbled upon, and if she was his first kill, then we should not crave that he went about it with a fixed agenda. The chance arrived, he pounced upon it, and he may suddenly have realized that the woman he thought he could cut up without any commotion was actually alive, representing a collosal risk that he may be given away on the landing. So he interrupts his cutting to the abdomen and stabs her through the heart before he flees, thereby ensuring he left her no chance to survive and give testimony. Next time over, he adds throatslitting, to ensure death and silence.

So the points you raise, Shelley, are not points that my scenario has any problems with.

The best,
Fisherman

Fisherman,

Sorry, i mispelt the word, i meant to say ' Subdued ' not ' subdue ( taken in the wrong context). Also the Hacking i was reffering to Nicholls, not Tabram. It's a little different when you do a cut up the body as to ' open up ' as oppossed to stabbing and just puncturing wounds, no i do not consider that the wounds on Tabram was an attempt to open someone up in a bodged mess-up and failing, anyone passing or buying meat from a marketplace can see a carcass cut up, no doubts that onlookers could see how it is done in any case. I do not buy the attempt at opening up failed evenings on Tabram from the Killer.

[Shelley]

Fisherman,
Also it does not seem plausible for the fight or flight of realising the woman is still alive and shut her up by stabbing her through the heart. The amount of people i have heard say when fight or flight comes into play, is : ' I don't know what came over me , i just knew what to do, i just did it ' it is more plausible to cut the throat and silence the woman, anyone would find cutting a throat easier than stabbing through the heart, there is a rib cage and sternum bone in that area, so to stab away at bone and also a very hard muscle indeed is more work. It is easier and ensures silence and is quick to cut the throat. I just can't see that happening Fisherman, even in a person that has mental illness. Jack was sure well aware enough to get away where Nicholls was concerned, also where Eddowes was concerned, if not to mentio Chapman too. Also how would you explain the little or no blood on Nicholls, Chapman & Eddowes and where they were killed? Tabram still alive with a pool of blood, then your theory creates more blood, the very organ that pumps it. Anyone having seen a buther at work in the market would or could be able to see a carcass cut up, would see blood everywhere from certain ways practised in butchery, i am sure that the Killer would have taken a look at least a butcher in the market knowing full well what he needed to do once he set out looking for a victim.

[Fisherman]

Shelley, you are perfectly welcome to your wiew on Tabram, just as I am welcome to mine.

So when you write:
"It's a little different when you do a cut up the body as to ' open up ' as oppossed to stabbing and just puncturing wounds, no i do not consider that the wounds on Tabram was an attempt to open someone up in a bodged mess-up and failing"

...I have little to add but for what I have already said; the 37 stabs were obviously stabs, but the 38:th wound may just as well have been a clean cut, measuring 3x1 inches. Don Souden has expressed an interesting wiew - that this wound could have been a stab that skidded off the pubic bone, thus creating a cut-like appearance. He may be right, and itīs a good suggestion.
Then again, it can be argued - and I am one who does so - that if the frenzied stabber was to come up with one stab, and one stab only, that hit the bone structure and skidded away, there would be scores of square feet for that skid-stab to end up, and I find it a bit too coincidental that it just happened too end up at the focal point evinced by our man.

When we have a functioning victimology, a perfect geographical hit, a woman who tallies well with the canonicals and a timing that is spot on, then adding the fact that there was a cut to her lower abdomen should ring every alarm bell around the place, the way I see things.

On your point that the Ripper would have chosen to cut the throat instead of piercing the chestbone, given the choice on that landing, I think it amounts to little more than your own sentiments. If my scenario has any merit, you must realize that we may be dealing with a man who killed for the first time in Tabramīs case, a man that had not pondered how to go about it, and who was given the opportunity in a flash. And suddenly that opportunity is taken away from him, and he is forced to abort his deed, realizing that the woman he was cutting was alive and thereby a tremendeous risk. He would have to come up with a very fast decision on how to silence her definitely, and most people know that a pierced heart will do the trick.

As for the amounts of blood, in Tabrams case Jack was never given the choice of a "dry" kill, was he? If he arrived on the scene after the stabber had left, then he arrived on a scene where the woman involved was already bathed in blood. So that really isnīt much of an issue here, I feel.

The best,
Fisherman

[Ben]

Hi Glenn,

No, not at all. I have seen much stranger coincidences. And as has been said before, it's quite possible that it actually may have been the news of the Tabram attack that might have triggered off the Ripper into action.

It's possible, but I'm disinclined to think so. The major problem I have with the minimalist "If in doubt, rule e'm out" theoretical approach is that the more victims we rule out on the basis of them being too different from the really consistent ones is that the more victims you "eliminate" on that basis, the more independent violent killers you end up foisting on the district, all deciding to attack at around the same time time and in the same small locality.

The Tabram murder DID get its fair share of media attention - yes - but in the annals of crime in general multiple stabbing isn't exactly unusual or considered very odd.

But it obviously was odd for that district at that time, or else press and public wouldn't have been so noticeably aghast at it, nor would rumours have abounded at the time that the crime must have been perpetrated by a motiveless madman. Odder still that such a rare and barbaric crime should be followed hot on the heels by another barbaric crime on the same type of victim a short distance away.

The Ripper performed at least three murders where all important elements are displayed - unnaturally deep throat cut, disembowellment or attempts to open up the body, the focus on the abdominal and genital area.

Other serials included two or three murders that were much more consistent with eachother than many others in the same series, but thank goodness we didn't rule out all the slightly less consistent other murders on that basis, or we'd have been erroneously ruling out the majority of their crimes.

These signature aspects are not made up by chance, they are necessary for him and is the main trigger

A signature doesn't refer to acutely specific and robotic behavioural traits that the killer must conform to in order for it not to be eliminated from the "series" by investigators. Far more often, a serial killer will have a generalized idea of what he wants to do, and acquires a taste for specifics once he has the opportunity to experiment, and that opportunity needn't always arrive in the form of the very first victim. There's a strong case to be made that his goal was generalized post-mortem mutilation (which encompasses several of the victims, including Tabram), but a much weaker one that he had designs on specific organs and specific throat cuts from the outset.

That's not true. Regardless of how he escalated, altered or developed his signature, one can easily assume that the elements that occurs repeatedly and all are displayed in several murders naturally has to be the basis for the signature

The trouble with that is that we know for certain that the ripper was responsible for other mutilations that were also, by definition, components of signature, but which were absent from Nichols and Chapman and only appeared from Eddowes onwards (if you include Kelly).

No it doesn't, and I've explained to you at least twice why they don't.

And at least twice I haven't agreed with that explanation, and so remain of the opinion that "time, location, victimology and weapon type" are of great importance.

Best regards,
Ben

[Shelley]

Shelley, you are perfectly welcome to your wiew on Tabram, just as I am welcome to mine.

So when you write:
"It's a little different when you do a cut up the body as to ' open up ' as oppossed to stabbing and just puncturing wounds, no i do not consider that the wounds on Tabram was an attempt to open someone up in a bodged mess-up and failing"

...I have little to add but for what I have already said; the 37 stabs were obviously stabs, but the 38:th wound may just as well have been a clean cut, measuring 3x1 inches. Don Souden has expressed an interesting wiew - that this wound could have been a stab that skidded off the pubic bone, thus creating a cut-like appearance. He may be right, and itīs a good suggestion.
Then again, it can be argued - and I am one who does so - that if the frenzied stabber was to come up with one stab, and one stab only, that hit the bone structure and skidded away, there would be scores of square feet for that skid-stab to end up, and I find it a bit too coincidental that it just happened too end up at the focal point evinced by our man.

When we have a functioning victimology, a perfect geographical hit, a woman who tallies well with the canonicals and a timing that is spot on, then adding the fact that there was a cut to her lower abdomen should ring every alarm bell around the place, the way I see things.

On your point that the Ripper would have chosen to cut the throat instead of piercing the chestbone, given the choice on that landing, I think it amounts to little more than your own sentiments. If my scenario has any merit, you must realize that we may be dealing with a man who killed for the first time in Tabramīs case, a man that had not pondered how to go about it, and who was given the opportunity in a flash. And suddenly that opportunity is taken away from him, and he is forced to abort his deed, realizing that the woman he was cutting was alive and thereby a tremendeous risk. He would have to come up with a very fast decision on how to silence her definitely, and most people know that a pierced heart will do the trick.

As for the amounts of blood, in Tabrams case Jack was never given the choice of a "dry" kill, was he? If he arrived on the scene after the stabber had left, then he arrived on a scene where the woman involved was already bathed in blood. So that really isnīt much of an issue here, I feel.

The best,
Fisherman

Fisherman,

This is poposterous,
I have given a good explaination as to why i consider that, cutting a throat could be seen via a butchers market come abbatior, you call that my sentiments, yet you would have me on a whim that in all whitechapel a man comes accross a body that has been stabbed viciously, the woman left to die and you expect me to side with a version that has a considerable amount of ( if not virtually impossible) less odds into the bargain than my version. The victimology and geographical area you are speaking of, is a well known area for solicitation, and solicitation areas stick for years and years, there are hundreds of prostitutes working the same areas as others and i have no doubts that at least 50-100 knew the same area that Tabram picked, along with many other areas, stairwells, corners, and quiet end-roads, then you mention Pearly poll knowing, tabram ( yes we all know this), however linking Tabram with the other canocials, why did Tabram only know those prostitutes and not any others? What about Kelly knowing Cox, wouldn't cox know Tabram as well perhaps, seems as Cox seemed to be a permanent prostitute, not a part-time prostitute, what about Chapman who has been established as a part-time prostitute, also that of Eddowes only a part-time prostitute, as Eddowes intended going hop picking, the night of Eddowes death she had been drinking all night, spent sometime in a police cell. Liz Stride had been cleaning to earn some money rather than prostitute in full-time. The chances are with part-time prostitutes you are less likely to come into contact with, rather than those that were established full time and more of a chance to come into contact with and engage in solicitations.
It was by chance that the ripper came into contact and chose as his victims those part-time prostitutes, they just happened to be there at the time. Ringing an alarm bell at wounds to the abdomen with pounding and puncturing with the amount of 39 stabbings, i would think he would hardly miss the abdomen, of course i would expect him to hit the abdomen....If i picked a run-dummy and pounded to puncture 37-39 stabbings, i'm sure i wouldn't miss the abdomen, not in the least, however and i can safetly say this:I am most certainly not JTR. The stab to the vagina, or cut should i say, is not any different that the case of Emma and the four men from a whitechapel gang that attacked her, leaving a tear in her vagina by shoving a blunt instrument inside her, does that not ring alarm bells with you as well Fisherman? This has not been unheard of before with other victims i'm sure, both before JTR had been given birth to by his mother and well after his death. Chapman had signs that she had been possibly partially strangled, she had a swollen tongue and it was prodruding, along with clenched fists apart from her cutting of the throat, this is no comparision to that of Tabram in anyway....I wish i hadn't mentioned the partial strangling, as i could not finalise anything evident as in petechiae, no mention of the signs of this in reports and no clear concise photgraph of the victim that could be told apart from dust-particals or obsurities from very old photographs that could mis-lead in showing good evidence of this petechia........In this case i drop petechiae as a finalising and dis-miss and stick with the evident part which is the throat-cutting......Yet, i am bothering to write this post in answer to a man who picks 2 possible stabs from possibly another man who he sees in theory as a scavenger Jack the Ripper, a so called alarming cut to the abdomen and a stab to the heart to tidy the cause of death attributed to the scavenger JTR and have him as her killer, thus a JTR victim is here. However slim an incredible the two minute detail based on what ' Theory '! That these same 2 details could be caused from anything to a slip from a blade or a like minded man the same as the 4 men with Emma other than JTR.
However dismisses at the same time the major points of MO Style and signature which would be developed far more back in time to that of the death of Tabram, in which our JTR adapted and added more signature in the space of 4 weeks from Nicholls to Eddowes. The focus should really be that JTR did develop on top of his already evident MO Style & Signature in 4 weeks all the way to Eddowes, so for at least on average he already had this particular MO style & Signature which is different to that of Tabram, 4 weeks prior to Tabrams death!
P.S: I also drop the belief and any mention of theory of strangulation from JTR on his canocial victims on account of not enough evidence. With the Swollen & prodruding tonuge with clenched Fists these are two counts i drop because there isn't the overall surety of Petechiae, without petechiae being evidently present, i can't and won't use this. Yet, a theory of a per chance stumbling on of a wounded possibly dying woman that doesn't match with the MO style & Signature of JTR, this thread is being battled in defence of the woman Tabram on a theory of 2 men. At least with Chapman we know there was only 1 man had her as his victim.
Again Fisherman for many more realistic reasons i do not buy it.

[Fisherman]

Shelly writes:

"...you expect me to side with a version..."

No. I donīt expect you to side with anything. But I do like posters who refrain from making a mockery of other posters suggestions.
I donīt need any siding on your behalf to realize that my scenario is a viable one, Shelley.

"then you mention Pearly poll knowing, tabram"

Do I? Donīt think so.

"It was by chance that the ripper came into contact and chose as his victims those part-time prostitutes, they just happened to be there at the time."

Very probable, yes. Proven? No. And anyhow, it does not change the fact that Tabram belonged to a collection of women who seemed to be exactly what the Ripper preyed upon. And at any rate, Shelley, I have for a number of post spoken for the possibility that Tabram was attacked by a scavenging Ripper. To my mind, she could have been an American multimillionaire - as she lay on the landing she offered a chance that Jack pounced upon, and it probably had very little to do with how she earned her living.

"If i picked a run-dummy and pounded to puncture 37-39 stabbings, i'm sure i wouldn't miss the abdomen"

Perhaps so, Shelley. But when you stab that dummy 38 times and cut it once - in the lower abdomen - I will start asking questions about the reason for that. And I am not speaking of a stab to the vagina, I am speaking of what Killeen called a wound to the lower part of her body.

"Yet, i am bothering to write this post in answer to a man who picks 2 possible stabs from possibly another man who he sees in theory as a scavenger Jack the Ripper, a so called alarming cut to the abdomen and a stab to the heart to tidy the cause of death attributed to the scavenger JTR and have him as her killer, thus a JTR victim is here. However slim an incredible the two minute detail based on what ' Theory '! That these same 2 details could be caused from anything to a slip from a blade"

...a slip from ANOTHER blade, if Iīm correct. And thereīs the rub. I will once again point you to the fact that I am not as dead certain of things as you are, I am merely making a suggestion that I find both viable and interesting. If you "know" that I am wrong, donīt let it annoy you, and donīt feel inclined to shove your superior knowledge down my throat.

"...MO Style and signature which would be developed far more back in time to that of the death of Tabram..."

Uhum, ehrm...as I was saying...

The best,
Fisherman

[Shelley]

Shelly writes:

"...you expect me to side with a version..."

No. I donīt expect you to side with anything. But I do like posters who refrain from making a mockery of other posters suggestions.
I donīt need any siding on your behalf to realize that my scenario is a viable one, Shelley.

"then you mention Pearly poll knowing, tabram"

Do I? Donīt think so.

"It was by chance that the ripper came into contact and chose as his victims those part-time prostitutes, they just happened to be there at the time."

Very probable, yes. Proven? No. And anyhow, it does not change the fact that Tabram belonged to a collection of women who seemed to be exactly what the Ripper preyed upon. And at any rate, Shelley, I have for a number of post spoken for the possibility that Tabram was attacked by a scavenging Ripper. To my mind, she could have been an American multimillionaire - as she lay on the landing she offered a chance that Jack pounced upon, and it probably had very little to do with how she earned her living.

"If i picked a run-dummy and pounded to puncture 37-39 stabbings, i'm sure i wouldn't miss the abdomen"

Perhaps so, Shelley. But when you stab that dummy 38 times and cut it once - in the lower abdomen - I will start asking questions about the reason for that. And I am not speaking of a stab to the vagina, I am speaking of what Killeen called a wound to the lower part of her body.

"Yet, i am bothering to write this post in answer to a man who picks 2 possible stabs from possibly another man who he sees in theory as a scavenger Jack the Ripper, a so called alarming cut to the abdomen and a stab to the heart to tidy the cause of death attributed to the scavenger JTR and have him as her killer, thus a JTR victim is here. However slim an incredible the two minute detail based on what ' Theory '! That these same 2 details could be caused from anything to a slip from a blade"

...a slip from ANOTHER blade, if Iīm correct. And thereīs the rub. I will once again point you to the fact that I am not as dead certain of things as you are, I am merely making a suggestion that I find both viable and interesting. If you "know" that I am wrong, donīt let it annoy you, and donīt feel inclined to shove your superior knowledge down my throat.

"...MO Style and signature which would be developed far more back in time to that of the death of Tabram..."

Uhum, ehrm...as I was saying...

The best,
Fisherman

Fisherman,
A slip from a blade can almost certainly be attributed to the man who delivered numerous stabbing & puncturing Tabrams body, of over 35 stabbings, come on....Nicholls, Chapman & Eddowes have never been in the position of ' possibly 2 men mutilating them' that's hardly any comparision, including the MO Style & Signature together on top of unquestionably 1 killer
attributed to thier deaths.

Also petechiae surfaces with trauma, however if this is surfaces in particular areas of the body, notably the eyeballs themselves, it indicates without a doubt ' Stragulation '.

What's the uhm ' i was saying bit '......Martha does not have any valid MO Style & Signature from those included in the canocals, and it's a bit of a stab in the dark for me that used to going for the throat and developed 4 weeks before death of Martha in urgency to shut her up he stabs her heart?....This is my point it's inconcievable.