Ripper Victim?

[Sam Flynn]

I don't accept for a moment that facial mutilations versus no facial mutilations is more of a change than stabbing to stabbing/slashing.

The facial mutilations were still cuts, though, Ben - not stabs. Whoever killed Eddowes appeared to be a man who liked cutting into flesh quite a bit. Tabram was practically pummelled by the point of the knife a ridiculous number of times. Whoever killed her appeared to have liked punching into flesh with a blade.

PS: I still don't recognise "stabbing/slashing" as a valid construct in relation to any of the C5. If we're not careful, I shall be forced to get my fonts out for the lads again.

[Fisherman]

Monty writes:

"...with contemporary news reports indicate stabbings are far more common than throat cuts. A fair few being stabbings to the throat. Just felt the need to share."

This is of interest. Let´s venture into some psychological "mumbo-jumbo", shall we?
I think that it can be argued that most people who feel a wish to kill somebody else, actually does so because they either have a grudge against their victims, or have something to gain from their death. Those who actually NEED to kill are very few - and I don´t think Jack belonged to that group, to be honest.
People who revel in the act of killing generally crave an intimacy in their methods of dispatching people - they need to be physically involved, get the feel of the killing, if you like. They want to inflict damage, and see their victims suffer.
Now, the ordinary killer does not have this need - he just wants to rid himself of somebody. For such a killer, the less intimate the dispatching method, the better. If he can use a gun, he will normally prefer that to using a knife, since he does not need to come in contact with his victim with a gun. Similarly, I think an ordinary killer will prefer stabbing to throat-cutting, since it will allow him to administer his stabs from some sort of distance; if he is to cut the throat, that will call for closer contact with his victim.

This, by the way, has a almighty bearing on the subject of our old friend Klosowski, who used a very "distanced" method of killing - poisoning. But that is a sidetrack.
Moving back to the type of killer who kills for the joy of it, such a man would, to my mind, be more likely to choose cutting than stabbing.
Jack, though, was something quite different - his interest did not lie in inflicting pain and tormenting people - he had an urge to eviscerate, and to that end he found that cutting necks provided the best opportunity to go about his real area of interest.

Thoughts, anybody?
Fisherman

[Fisherman]

Chava writes:

"I think...er...something else is going on while the stabbing is taking place"

I´m not all that sure, Chava - but it cannot be ruled out, of course. Still, I think we should take great care before dubbing it a sexual attack.

The best,
Fisherman

[Ben]

The facial mutilations were still cuts, though, Ben - not stabs. Whoever killed Eddowes appeared to be a man who liked cutting into flesh quite a bit.

I don't see the stabbing/slashing "difference" as remotely problematic from the point of view of assessing whether or not Tabram should belong in the series though, Gareth, especially if the victims share the same small, concentrated locality and the fact that they were both prostitutes. For what it's worth (i.e. alot! ) nor does any expert in the field of serial crime, perhaps most notably Bob Keppel.

Considering the alterations many other serial killers are capable of within a relatively short space of time (and the fact that serial killers don't generally start out with a ready-polished technique), stabbing to slashing is completely minor by comparison. "Stabbing/slashing" is a valid construct in as much as it applies to Nichols' injuries, despite the different doses of each.

All the best,
Ben

[Sam Flynn]

I don't see the stabbing/slashing "difference" as remotely problematic

Remind me not to stand next to you in a urinal

"Stabbing/slashing" is a valid construct in as much as it applies to Nichols' injuries, despite the different doses of each.

It's a matter of degree, Ben. Personally, I'd say it was invalidated because of the different extent and proportion of each, not in spite of them.

[Sam Flynn]

For what it's worth (i.e. alot! ) nor does any expert in the field of serial crime, perhaps most notably Bob Keppel.

Having read his paper on this very subject, his opinion cuts no ice with me. Or should that be "stabs no ice"...? The two actions are emphatically dissimilar, despite what Keppel thinks.

[Fisherman]

Sam writes:

"The two actions are emphatically dissimilar, despite what Keppel thinks."

You know, Sam, you´re one of the very few posters here that can get away with this kind of statement without having a "So you think you´re better than a renowned profiler?" thrown after you.

Let me just say that - as evinced by my post No 602 - I agree with your stance; they ARE dissimilar and carry different implications to my mind too.

The best,
Fisherman

[Ben]

So you think you´re better than a renowned profiler?

Just kidding.

Guess we'll have to disagree, Gareth. I don't find the two actions dissimilar at all in the context of what known serial killers are capable of.

Surely Keppel's opinions on the subject assume more validity than ours given his greater experience and insight on the topic, though? It would be one thing if all the other experts of equal professional standing disagreed with him, but they don't. None one has argued for the exclusion of Tabram. I feel that ought to be given due consideration. That doesn't mean we should automatically embrace his view that Tabram was a ripper victim, but I do get a bit irritated when people reject all expert insight into the topic and then set themselves up as the "replacement" authority on the topic (Not you! But you get the picture).

Best regards,
Ben

[Jeff Leahy]

Doesn’t that depend on whether you see jack on a learning curve experimenting and discovering his MO as he goes along?

And surely whether he stabs or Slashes the importance is the ferocity and speed that all the attacks were carried out at? (that's not great English I know but hopefully you get what I mean)

Pirate

[Sam Flynn]

So you think you´re better than a renowned profiler?

"renowned profiler" = "contradiction in terms"

Just kidding.

I know, Ben

Surely Keppel's opinions on the subject assume more validity than ours given his greater experience and insight on the topic, though?

Knowing stuff about crime stats is one thing, but that doesn't make his opinion on stabs and cuts any better than mine. I'd as much seek his opinion on such an eminently physical matter as I'd take an astrologer's advice on the density of Jupiter's atmosphere.

[Ben]

Hi Gareth,

What I meant was that a professional whose knowledge and background with serial killers certainly surpasses any contributor to this discussion may know better from experience than to attribute two murders to two seperate killers on the basis of the stab/slash difference. I wouldn't dream of suggesting that his opinion is "better" than yours, or that he has the monolopy on theoretical "soundness" in general, but it could be observed that he might have more knowledge and experience to bolster an opinion on this particular topic than you or I do.

Just like Fisherman might have more insight into fish-bait than I do.

All the best,
Ben

[Shelley]

"renowned profiler" = "contradiction in terms"
I know, Ben Knowing stuff about crime stats is one thing, but that doesn't make his opinion on stabs and cuts any better than mine. I'd as much seek his opinion on such an eminently physical matter as I'd take an astrologer's advice on the density of Jupiter's atmosphere.

Sam,
You do get professionals arguing amongst themselves, it's not uncommon....However i am inclined to agree with Dr Lyle PhD for one ( and some others) that Stabbing & cutting are different. Keppel in any case may not have explained himself properly. No worries Sam.....Ignore Keppel if he did ever say that, as some readers can be confused in the bargain, and guilty as charged myself a few years ago!

[Jeff Leahy]

And why were on the Tabram subject. Just one other thing that just doesn’t make sense. If two knives were used why did one attacker stab the victim 38 times while the other attacker, who was after all going for the heart, only stab her once?

It doesn’t make sense, surely you’d expect knife wounds from both attackers who’d probably be stabbing each other accidentally…unless your suggesting Jack put his knife down and pulled out another? Which suggests calmness not frenzied attack..

There was only one killer and one knife…it’s the only logical conclusion.

And a lone attacker suggests to me another similarity to the C5.

Pirate

[Ben]

However i am inclined to agree with Dr Lyle PhD for one ( and some others) that Stabbing & cutting are different

I know, but none of them has ever argued the case for ruling out Tabram on the basis of that "difference". Why? Well, the logical conclusion is that they all know better from experience.

[Shelley]

Sam,
Also having a brief flick through Bob Keppel stating serial violence he does start on an outward tone with some of it. It isn't properly established that JTR was a sexual screwed up guy, so that's incorrect Keppel is assuming and joining all in the same band. However, he slips up on something that is more familiar in the band of psychiatry and what has also been niggling me, is the time of year Nicholls & Chapman died, i can very much understand Eddowes and the time of year she was killed ( as he had bucket overload!) and definatley i would assume ' Eddowes ' relates to her killer's mother, then perhaps not sexual.
Personally i like to extent from profiling to that of forensic psychiatry in books, study of reading etc. I think Keppel made a slip and didn't explain himself properly. Personally i wouldn't have thought that Eddowes Killer would have had any problem in engaging in sex himself as a grown male, to me JTR seems like someone who would enact what he saw, so i go with him having been sexually knowledgeable.