Ripper Victim?

[perrymason]

Thanks Shelley.....so you never go for the light topics huh?

Off to master the universe....catch you later on Shell.

All the best

[Ben]

Hi Mike,

Not only is this nothing like any later Ripper attributed murder

Tabram and Nichols are actually very similar (stabbing a prostitute versus stabbing/slashing a prostitute) when you consider them in the context of most serial cases. In fact, it would appear positively uniform compared to most. Poisoning or bombing is a good example of a method of dispath that is "nothing like" any later Ripper attributed murder.

Best regards,
Ben

[Shelley]

Nothing to see]

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.

NTS,
That's because we are in a different era, London was the capital of the world's wealth and the Whitechapel murders sparked controversy of the poverty and degredation within London, today you may not see such soldier displays within the East-End, as today, well....erm apart from this website and threads on it, the East-End is not so much in the limelight, plus we do have differences, such as no more rat infested slums in the east-end, we have DSS payments, we have more people demonstrating against war rather than seeing it as a ' Glorified Honour ' ( although some people still see a victorious glory in being a soldier along with thier family & friends etc). After all Queen Victoria was the Empress of India and we had an ' Empire ' ( cottoned on from the romans back in history), back then we had an Empire to live up to, so 'Glory & Victory ' was uppermost in peoples minds, also more soldier parades throughout the country, not just London....However, London was a main focus.

[perrymason]

Hi Mike,

Tabram and Nichols are actually very similar (stabbing a prostitute versus stabbing/slashing a prostitute) when you consider them in the context of most serial cases. In fact, it would appear positively uniform compared to most. Poisoning or bombing is a good example of a method of dispath that is "nothing like" any later Ripper attributed murder.

Best regards,
Ben

Hi Ben,

What your example is portraying is highly incompatible methodologies....the subtle differences between only stabbing a woman to death, and only slitting throats to cause death, are far less "polar" if you will.

I wont say that man that kills Martha isnt as cruel, savage or murderous as Jack the Ripper....only that the 2 killers had different styles and preferences...and Marthas killer cared nothing about opening abdomens....he was a killer. Jack....killed to mutilate.

Cheers Ben

[Shelley]

Hi Mike,



Tabram and Nichols are actually very similar (stabbing a prostitute versus stabbing/slashing a prostitute) when you consider them in the context of most serial cases. In fact, it would appear positively uniform compared to most. Poisoning or bombing is a good example of a method of dispath that is "nothing like" any later Ripper attributed murder.

Best regards,
Ben

Ben,
Tabram and Nicholls are in no way similar, you are mistaken in this Ben.................
Stabbing can be done by accident or at a pause on what is going through the killer's mind, it depends on the extent and the amount of stabbing in comparison to cutting and this falls into the band of signature ' Intent ' the amount of stabbing that Tabram recieved is ' intent ' the cutting/slashing on Nicholls is ' Intent ', the only similarity is that a blade was used on both Tabram & Nicholls, the same MO as in respect to Blade, also how those were administered along with what was actually caused the woman's death is MO style. Also i think a chokehold used to cause ' unconciousness' on the victims Nicholls, Chapman & Eddowes.....Although more force applied to Chapman because she was more stocky than the others and probably struggled a bit, her clenched fist and swollen protruding tongue indicates this.
This is why some professionals can make a mistake and accidently say some stabbing and cutting as the same, the body has to be read and the correct boundaries have to be applied, in each individual case. Also it is hard for some professionals to come accross to amatuers, as the delicacy in such issues can be miscommunicated and sometimes MO and intent can cross, but should be explained as an MO Style, which can be forgotten that little word ' Style ', and that all entails the killer's personality.
All the Best
Shelley

[Ben]

Hi Mike,

only that the 2 killers had different styles and preferences...and Marthas killer cared nothing about opening abdomens....he was a killer. Jack....killed to mutilate.

I'd argue that repeatedly puncturing a lifeless corpse is certainly a form of mutilation, and post-mortem mutilation at that. The absence of any indication that Tabram's killer wanted to open her abdomen needn't mean that he wouldn't develop that aspect as he explored and progressed. The early phases of many a serialist's career will include components that are absent from later crimes, but the same offender was certainly responsible for both. Both Bundy and Chikatilo evinced an interest in bodily organs with some victims, at others not.

Best regards,
Ben

[perrymason]

Hi Ben,

Well, I think repeatedly stabbing a woman who is alive and upright is not mutilation at all... but obvious "venting"...theres no reason to suggest that for the vast majority of stabs, she wasnt conscious and alive.

How many Ripper victims with mutilated abdomens were likely conscious and/or upright when their throats are slit?

I understand that some killers change, but Unibombers make and send bombs....people who make lamps of skin take skin from victims, pig farmers who murder women dispose of all of them by chopping them up and spreading the remains around....early Bundy kills were consistent in method..his later ones like his last were signs he had finally completely broken down mentally into a baser animal. Child killers kill children, and have persona's that allow them access to them,....nurses who kill either smother or inject or unplug, few do all,...BTK killed by binding torturing and killing....the actual dispatch tool isnt as important as the methodology used, and injuries inflicted. In other words....if the killer slit Marthas stomach open when she was on the ground dead, even with a bayonet....I probably would have no issues ranking her as a Canonical with an asterix.

3 victims had very similar injuries made under very similar circumstances during a short period of time.

Cheers Ben

[Ben]

Hi Mike,

I'm not sure where you're getting "upright" from. I'd have to say the chances of Tabram remaining upright after 39 blows with the knife were remote to non-existent. It still constitutes post-mortem mutilation irrespective of how much anger he felt at the time, i.e. very easily as much as Nichols' killer felt as he murdered her.

I understand that some killers change

They all do, just to varying degrees, and if Tabram was a "ripper" victim, it would still follow that the ripper hardly changed at all, and was incredibly consistent in contrast to most serial killers, just not robotically so as the "three victims only" theory dictates. In that scenario, JTR would be an incredible rarity.

Child killers kill children

Not just children, Mike. Bundy, Shawcross, Kurten, Rader and Chikatilo all killed children as well as adults, and they didn't all "have persona's that allow them access to them". The last mentioned mutilated and eviscerated some, but not others. JTR at least domonstrated much more consistency in terms of location and victim-type.

Best regards,
Ben

[Shelley]

Hi Mike,



I'd argue that repeatedly puncturing a lifeless corpse is certainly a form of mutilation, and post-mortem mutilation at that. The absence of any indication that Tabram's killer wanted to open her abdomen needn't mean that he wouldn't develop that aspect as he explored and progressed. The early phases of many a serialist's career will include components that are absent from later crimes, but the same offender was certainly responsible for both. Both Bundy and Chikatilo evinced an interest in bodily organs with some victims, at others not.

Best regards,
Ben

Ben,
That is no argument, Tabram's killer intended killing her with repeated stabs, in which he knew that she was still alive when administering these stabbings, that was the killer's style. Even Killeen reported that Martha was still alive when the stabbings were administered, so no, he did not intend mutilations, as he would also have started slashing as well once she was laying on the floor. You are forgetting the way that he intended for her to be killed in his killing of her, i also think that this was a response given his short fuse of emotional anger at the time.
And i agree with Perrymason in his posts.

[Shelley]

Ben

I'm not sure where you're getting "upright" from. I'd have to say the chances of Tabram remaining upright after 39 blows with the knife were remote to non-existent. It still constitutes post-mortem mutilation irrespective of how much anger he felt at the time, i.e. very easily as much as Nichols' killer felt as he murdered her.

Ben, this is possible for a body to remain upright and stabbed several times, however i think to a degree Martha was positioned when she was found in an open & powerless position. Where the heck are you getting this ' constitutes post-mortem mutilation ' theory from, i doubt that the killer was checking to see if she was breathing or not, and she was alive whilst being stabbed,in Dr Killeen's report........Is this an attempt at tossing Killeen's professional opinion at the time ' out of the window ' so that your theory that the killing of Tabram is a killing of mutilation, along with flying in the face of what modern forensics say about mutilation, and toss that out as well?

They all do, just to varying degrees, and if Tabram was a "ripper" victim, it would still follow that the ripper hardly changed at all, and was incredibly consistent in contrast to most serial killers, just not robotically so as the "three victims only" theory dictates. In that scenario, JTR would be an incredible rarity.

Serial killers all do what? Consistentley change an MO ( in MO Ben...the Basic is what Killed them, MO style is how you kill and choice of weapon in order to kill), you mean they change in varying degrees ' Signature '...The ' Intent ' and it takes a while for someone at least to actually change a basic MO, at least 2 months ( knife/Gun etc). JTR was not an incredible rarity amongst serial killers Ben, infact he was a typical serial killer in the category of one who mutilates. Ted Bundy, Andre chikatilo and others still had a steady pattern in thier MO Style. It would be an incredible rarity for a serial Killer to keep changing his basic MO and then MO style along with numerous other signatures of intent in under a month, it would be a historical factor completely in the band of ' An Anomally ', even soldiers who are killing machines don't adapt that quick on the battle fields.

[Ben]

Tabram's killer intended killing her with repeated stabs, in which he knew that she was still alive when administering these stabbings

And you know this how? For all you know, the killer was fully confident that he'd extinguished the life of Martha Tabram after the first few stabs and the rest was just post-mortem stabbing.

Where the heck are you getting this ' constitutes post-mortem mutilation ' theory from, i doubt that the killer was checking to see if she was breathing or not, and she was alive whilst being stabbed,in Dr Killeen's report

Excactly, which is why it makes no sense whatever to assert with unwarranted confidence and no evidence that "he knew that she was still alive when administering these stabbings".

JTR was not an incredible rarity amongst serial killers Ben, infact he was a typical serial killer in the category of one who mutilates

He most certainly would be if you subscribe to the theory that he only killed three victims because they appear to be the most consistent. Most serial killers aren't anywhere near as robotically consistent as that, and most professional non-hobbyist experts in the field of criminal investigation would know better than to fine-tune a serial killer's pattern to too ridiculous an extent.

and it takes a while for someone at least to actually change a basic MO, at least 2 months ( knife/Gun etc).

No, it doesn't.

No elaboration necessary.

Ted Bundy, Andre chikatilo and others still had a steady pattern in thier MO Style.

But both would be consdiered far LESS steady in their pattern in comparison to Jack the Ripper, even if he did kill Tabram.

[Shelley]

Ben,

What you have just written in your post above is absolute nonsense. I would have thought the the first stab he delivered on Martha she was alive!. I mean was she already dead and he carried her to George Yard building for the scene of the crime to be found? Including all these stabs, taking into consideration the ' first ' stab she was already dead for it to be post-mortem?

Ok, in a lot of serial killers, basic MO in killing thier victim is 2 months on average, gangs have been known to use two different weapons at the same time, that's why stabbing and gunshot is found on some victims, and the same victims body. Having said that it depends on which weapon killed, then that is taken as the Basic MO.

But this is a fact a blade was used on Nicholls, Chapman & Eddowes in a 1 month period, No MO basic change there Ben, it's consitent. So much for your adaptions of change of Basic MO. We are also talking about MO style as well.

[Shelley]

Forensic Psychiatry

Ben,
With your above posts on MO & signature as well as MO Style and your theory as to Tabram being a Ripper victim as it sounds to me, i have one question:

Are you intending to re-write the books of Forensic Psychiatry labellings?

[Ben]

What you have just written in your post above is absolute nonsense.

Oh, for crying out loud. You're the one spouting nonsense. You've decided with no evidence that Tabram's killer didn't engage in any post-mortem mutilation because he "knew" that she was still alive with each stab. I say no, we can't make pronouncements like that. For all we know, he could have been stabbing away in the belief that she was already dead.

Ok, in a lot of serial killers, basic MO in killing thier victim is 2 months on average

Evidence for assertion please.

But this is a fact a blade was used on Nicholls, Chapman & Eddowes in a 1 month period, No MO basic change there Ben, it's consitent. So much for your adaptions of change of Basic MO

I have no idea what that means. You haven't remotely invalidated a "change" of MO, least of all on the basis that the three victims you mentioned were killed within a small space of time. He could easily have demonstrated variations on the "killing prostitutes with a knife" theme before then.

Are you intending to re-write the books of Forensic Psychiatry labellings?

No, I'm intending to educate the obstinate and ill-informed. Since when did "MO Style" become a conventionally accepted definition, incidentally?

[Shelley]

Ben

Oh, for crying out loud. You're the one spouting nonsense. You've decided with no evidence that Tabram's killer didn't engage in any post-mortem mutilation because he "knew" that she was still alive with each stab. I say no, we can't make pronouncements like that. For all we know, he could have been stabbing away in the belief that she was already dead.

I didn't say that Ben, i said she was alive at the first stab, it was Dr Killeen that said Martha was still alive when the stabbings were administered ( plural: stabbings = more than 1 stab), so i am not going by theory here, i am going by common sense & evidence from a medical Doctor. What are you going by Ben ' Theory ' against medical evidence from a Doctor?

Evidence for assertion please.

Dr Killeen's report & common sense.

I have no idea what that means. You haven't remotely invalidated a "change" of MO, least of all on the basis that the three victims you mentioned were killed within a small space of time. He could easily have demonstrated variations on the "killing prostitutes with a knife" theme before then.

Oh, i'm not surprised that you get confused as regarding MO Ben....Nicholls, Chapman & Eddowes all killed by a blade/knife and the MO style cutting of the throat, in all, and consistent. These three i use as a basis and from what i know.

No, I'm intending to educate the obstinate and ill-informed. Since when did "MO Style" become a conventionally accepted definition, incidentally?

Oh, and exactly from which books are you educating the ill-informed? Novels are from writers that have picked up a chard here and there and mismashed the explainations together, as this line of argument is confusing to say the least. There is no definition to explain a strict cut and dried precise MO in style, and sometimes Signature, only a basic MO is cut and dried ( i have never heard of killing a person twice....That's impossible) and seems as you spout this ' serial killers are not robotic' trash in the basis of your arguments to sway that Tabram is a possible ripper victim, mutilators do express a style and this gives way to thier personality, an attacker may attack from behind with a knife, he may attack from in front, behind or in front is a way the killer operates, and is a style ( a preference). Having said that i have never said all serial killers are robotic, infact i recall saying to you that wouldn't be how serial killers worked as they are human in form, everything relates to personality in MO, in MO Style & Signature, after all it would only fit that a robotic type serial killer in that sense would have to be a robot.
So i see you've picked up on my word ' robot '...So who's teaching who there Ben.

Also Ben at the same time if you undertand so much, how would it be possible for Martha to remain in an upright position as Chava has said ' Prostitutes would do it upright....As the old knowledge of ' A Knee-Trembler ', they wouldn't lie down on the floor, for Martha obviously was positioned there ( including any spread-eagled stance of the lower half of her body) and i agree with her, as it's logical.
For Martha To show no defence wounds when an attack began on her, how is this possible? Oh and don't forget Dr Killeen is quite right in that she was still alive when the stabbings happened to her.