Ripper Victim?

[Chava]

Well, he did that anyway, regardless of which victims we attribute to him, so I fail to see that point, Chava.

All the best

Let's take a walk into the wide blue yonder shall we? Here is a man who might be occasionally or more than occasionally impotent. He might be feeling lonely, and picks up a prostitute. He might not be able to perform. The prostitute says something, er, insensitive. He loses his temper, and has a knife with him. He stabs her multiple times and kills her. And in the course of his actions he discovers that he is impotent no more. The next time he goes out, he expects to kill. He is armed with his knife. And he might go for a more sophisticated exploration of his victim's body in order to enjoy the experience more.

This, of course, is all supposition. However the above is a rough description of Sutcliffe's first murder. Except he had a Philips screwdriver with him rather than a knife. He picked up his victim. Couldn't perform. She said something nasty. He killed her.

Is this what happened in the Tabram murder? We'll never know. But she has many physical similarities to the other victims and was found in a similar location at a similar time of night. I'd always put an asterisk by her name, but the more I think about it, the more I think it's a possible Ripper killing. She spent time with a soldier earlier in the evening. But there's nothing to suggest a soldier killed her. I've read that the knife could have been a bayonet. But I doubt off-duty soldiers carried their bayonets with them. They would have been too big and way too cumbersome for that.

[Fisherman]

Hi Shelley!

"What's the uhm ' i was saying bit '"

The uhum, ehrm...as I was saying bit is a pointing out that I think you come across as a bit too certain about things we really cannot be certain of. One such thing is to state that it is inconceivable that a killer who cut necks four weeks later on could have stabbed Tabram through the heart. It is in no way inconceivable, Shelley, not even if you believe that the throatslitting carried a deeper meaning for him than just practicality.

The same goes for your "A slip from a blade can almost certainly be attributed to the man who delivered numerous stabbing & puncturing Tabrams body, of over 35 stabbings"
- of course it can be suggested that the same man made all the stabbing and wounding, but there is not a police force in the world that would not have given the possibility of two perpetrators involved some serious thought once they realized that two blades had been used.

The strangulation/petechiae bit is best left aside, since we have no evidence telling us of any strangulation/suffocation on behalf of Tabram.

In conclusion, I am suggesting that while you add your certainties to an unfallable conclusion and reveal Jacks name to all of us (my congratulations in advance!), you cut me some slack and let me form my own opinion without calling it, what was it...? Poposterous?

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 where´s 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,

in your post above you mention possibly JTR stabbed Tabram in the heart and flees in urgency, to get away, not getting caught etc
Yet you say Uhum giving a little indication to my earlier post of JTR having developed his MO style & signature at least 4 weeks prior to Tabram's death, including his taste for going to the throat and knowing how to render a victim that way.......Yet when he is in need of fleeing, not getting caught, he stabs her through the heart??? With that Flaw, what theory do you have next?

Added: .....If the police force knew of two weapons being used they would be asking for two perbatrators....Killeen said there was two weapons, so they did and had time to see two perbatrators, but i didn't hear of anything like it so perhaps they possibly knew that 1 man can be tooled up with more than the one weapon.

[c.d.]

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.

Hi Richard,

If that is the case, it would seem that it took quite a bit to shock Mary.

c.d.

[Ally]

Hi Shelley,

Some reading for you:

http://forum.casebook.org/showthread.php?t=1303

[Fisherman]

"With that Flaw, what theory do you next?"

With that question, Shelly, my next theory is that I myself flee from what has become a very long chain of misunderstandings, misinterpretations and inability on your behalf to recognize any point or theory as valuable unless it has been made by our own good self.
Maybe we can discuss some other issue in the future. Then again, maybe not. You will know the answer to that better than me...

The best,
Fisherman

[perrymason]

"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."

I was taken by the above comment Richard, because there is a suspect that would match that criteria...he's European, but in London at that time, and with a previous conviction history that included acts that were against the same demographic and were committed with a knife. He even kills the woman who he loved that started his wanting to "save" fallen women.

And he was a "stabber" primarily.

Best regards all.

[perrymason]

Forgot to mention that I agree with Glenn when he supposes the men that met Martha and Poll are likely not the soldiers were are looking for....but they are evidence that soldiers were out looking for some fun, and on Holidays they can wear their bayonets.

I believe the mention of a bayonet in the margin on the notes was not an instrument chosen randomly to suggest, and it points...forgive the pun, to a weapon that is large and wider and longer than a serial killer who steals organs could use effectively. At least based on that one wound.

So you can add weapon that is not suitable for the mutilations here, along with stabs not cuts, standing not lying, no specific targeted area mutilated, and an obvious display of emotion in the form of anger.

Cheers all.

[Shelley]

[QUOTE] Just a little shorter version, i've never tried this before wondered how you all did it........I also happen to agree with Glenn as well, still there have been some very good posts on this thread and worth taking notes upon, i'm just trying to fill in some words as the little box keeps saying my meassage is too short please add 5 more charcters, and when i do, it still won't work, i hope i haven't made such a hash of it all.............

I hope this test works now.....

[Chava]

On the subject of bayonets, they were generally considered too long for hand-to-hand combat in cramped conditions. I can't think of many places more cramped than the landing at the George Yard Dwellings, even given that it was an attack on an unarmed woman. I believe the only reason we look at bayonets is because of evidence that Tabram had spent some time with a soldier.

[perrymason]

On the subject of bayonets, they were generally considered too long for hand-to-hand combat in cramped conditions. I can't think of many places more cramped than the landing at the George Yard Dwellings, even given that it was an attack on an unarmed woman. I believe the only reason we look at bayonets is because of evidence that Tabram had spent some time with a soldier.

I disagree Chava...they are something that can be in a myriad of shapes and sizes, but generally always longer than say a Bowie Knife.. around 13" total length, including the handle.

Ive got a bunch going as far back as the Civil War and I can tell you that some could be used to make that single stab. That was the one intended to finish their death dance wasnt it? She was not resisting by that stage..he could easily have used it in that space without receiving resistance.

In fact some of the ones I have had leather or metal scabbards, and appear very much like a short sword when worn on a belt.

Best regards MR C

[Shelley]

perrymason;68658 Forgot to mention that I agree with Glenn when he supposes the men that met Martha and Poll are likely not the soldiers were are looking for....but they are evidence that soldiers were out looking for some fun, and on Holidays they can wear their bayonets.

I also think that this is a good explaination, one i hadn't thought about before.

I believe the mention of a bayonet in the margin on the notes was not an instrument chosen randomly to suggest, and it points...forgive the pun, to a weapon that is large and wider and longer than a serial killer who steals organs could use effectively. At least based on that one wound.

This is a good point, JTR has always been believed to have used a knife.

So you can add weapon that is not suitable for the mutilations here, along with stabs not cuts, standing not lying, no specific targeted area mutilated, and an obvious display of emotion in the form of anger.

I also believe that the amount of stabbing administerd to Tabram's body, that it was indeed a ferocious attack, must have been from a frenzied attack. Perhaps Rage. Good points

[Shelley]

On the subject of bayonets, they were generally considered too long for hand-to-hand combat in cramped conditions.

A bayonet Chava was just a long blade attached to a sort of handle, the blade could be detached and separated into two parts, the handle was to ' extend ' the blade so that the soldier could, well charge and strike at a distance further away from his close promixety.

I believe the only reason we look at bayonets is because of evidence that Tabram had spent some time with a soldier.

No this is not so, it was a Doctor Killeen that suggested that a weapon such as a bayonet had gone into the bone of the sternum.

[Supe]

Hi all,

A bit late into this, but then I made most of my thoughts known in an article in the August Ripperologist. But no, in my opinion, Martha was not a Ripper victim, one major reason being the nature of the wounds inflicted.

Like Fisherman, I posited a possible two-person scenario, thouigh unlike him I did not involve an evolving Jack in the duo.

And Chava, you make the mistake of many by citing victim similarities among the Canonic Five. That is an error because it presumes that Polly, Annie, etc., were somehow different from the bulk of the vagrant casual prostitutes, when in fact they were quite typical. The loding houses were filled with such women and anyone with an itch to kill and mutilate women would find any of them easy prey.

Don.

[Shelley]

[QUOTE Fisherman;68646][/QUOTE]

The strangulation/petechiae bit is best left aside, since we have no evidence telling us of any strangulation/suffocation on behalf of Tabram.

I didn't make reference to Tabram on this above account So i have no idea what you are talking about leaving it aside in the case of Tabram, it is valid to point to my theory of partial strangulation possibly by JTR on his victims, however, don't want to use this particular theory, but the evidence of JTR having cut the throats of his victims, in any case Tabram did not have her throat cut!

In conclusion, I am suggesting that while you add your certainties to an unfallable conclusion and reveal Jacks name to all of us (my congratulations in advance!), you cut me some slack and let me form my own opinion

Fisherman, there is no need to take that kind of tone, you are entilted to your opinion as everyone else...What's the cut me some slack?

[QUOTE]You do have your own opinion and the evidence is posts on this thread, however, my opinions tend to lean towards, more probable and what is already established. Please answer my question:[/QUOTE}

If the killer who you purport to be JTR having Stabbed the heart of Tabram in a quick flee to get away with his crimes, did so in order to kill her so she cannot report him to the police. Why is it that because you acknowledge that JTR already had an established MO Style & Signature different to that of Tabram at least 4 weeks prior to Tabrams death, in urgency why did he not automatically do what he has aquired a taste in doing, that is cutting the throat, why was this not done to Tabram in a fight or flight situation, as in a flight or flight situation, he would have automatically done, without giving thought behind it what he has already developed a taste for, which is cutting a throat.