Ripper Victim?

[Brenda]

In addition to gaining satisfaction from his killing activities, I think Jack was thoroughly enjoying terrorizing the general public and making the police look like idiots. I think some of his progressions (i.e. facial mutiliations, taking organs) were to up the "shock factor" just as much as for his own satisfaction. Maybe the stabs didn't scandalize the public as much as he would have liked, so he gives 'em a little more gore with the next killing.

One thing I do want to say though is that if we did accept Tabram as a Ripper victim, then I believe the Ripper was quite a young man. I have no problem accepting an older Ripper when considering the other victims, but I do feel that the differences from Tabram to Nichols quite possibly indicate a more inexperienced person.

[Fisherman]

Jeff writes:

"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."

No, Jeff. It would statistically have been the more credible thing to expect - but that is another thing altogether. Once statistics are overruled by reality, the latter is the one you should choose to move with. Two blades were used, as emphatically stated by Killeen, and therefore the possibility of two knife-wielders is very large.
To this you should add that the only stab we KNOW came from the second blade was one that showed a focus and intent that was not there with the other, random stabs - they hit just about anything that could be hit. Therefore we seem to be dealing with one man with a small blade and no focus at all, plus a second man with a large blade and a very rational and focused agenda.
The only other wound that seemingly can be questioned is the cut to the lower abdomen - it was a wound that differed from the other 37 stabs in two ways:
1. It came out as a cut, and
2. It was placed in an isolated spot, where there were no other stabs or wounds.

So it´s anybodys choice which of the two blades that caused it: the small one that randomly struck the upper body with no clear focus at all, as in a total frenzy - or the big blade, that we know was a focused one since it produced a coup-de-grace, killing off Tabram.
You know how I place my money - I say that when we find a cut to the lower abdomen on a woman in the East end of the autumn 1888, we have also found a wound that seemingly shows the exact intent that made Jack the Ripper the world´s most infamous killer.

The best,
Fisherman

[Jeff Leahy]

I still see it as beyond belief.

And if what you say were correct, the logical conclusion is that you have Jack working with someone else.

Jack making the Stab to the heart and slash to the abdomen. Mr Frenzy stabbing away cutting everything in site, including Jack probably.

A conclusion that is equally as preposterous.

I’m sorry there is nothing that anybody has said that leads me to a conclusion that this was anything other than an early Ripper attack.

I simply work on the simplest explanation. If it walks like a duck, waddles like a duck and goes Quack..its probably a duck.

Your Boy...Pirate

[Sam Flynn]

If it walks like a duck, waddles like a duck and goes Quack..its probably a duck.

Substitute "stabber" and "cutter" into the above sentence, Jeff, and you'll see what some of us have been getting at:

If it walks like a stabber, waddles like a stabber and goes Quack..its probably a stabber.

If it walks like a cutter, waddles like a cutter and goes Quack..its probably a cutter.

(Note that there are only two quacks in my logic )

[Fisherman]

Beyond belief, Jeff? That there were two men involved? Especially taking into account thet we KNOW that two blades came into play?

"And if what you say were correct, the logical conclusion is that you have Jack working with someone else."

Not at all, Jeff - since we can conclude that the most reasonable scenario in the canonical strikes is that Jack worked alone, it would be distinctly illogical to think he had an accomplice in George Yard buildings.
What has to be taken into account, however, is John Bennetts find of a photo, depicting the back of George Yard buildings and showing us that the landings were open gallery landings, meaning that anybody within the block outlined by George Yard, Wentworth Street, Commercial Street and Whitechapel High Street may have seen Tabram being attacked by the frenzied stabber. My scenario has Jack in that yard, realizing as the frenzied stabber left, leaving Tabram for dead, that he had been served what he wanted most of all on a silver plate.
So, no cooperation at all involved - but instead a killer who took advantage of an opportunity that suddenly opened up to him. Jack was not a man who felt an urge to kill, as effectively shown by the way he treated Nicholls, Chapman and Eddowes - he had an urge to eviscerate, and my contention is that he would not let a golden opportunity like the one Tabrams body on the landing offered slip by him.

You say, Jeff, that you work on the simplest explanation. But if there is no simple exlanation to a deed, then you will end up dead wrong. And the two blades, the differing focus and intentions of the stabs and the cut, plus the silence of the deed hints very clearly that we should NOT look for a statistically viable explanation to this one!

The best,
Fisherman

[Shelley]

It could be possible that someone saw where Martha was killed and they couldn't see what was really going on, too dark and also tiredness etc, and if there were two men instead of one they may have though ' a gang fight 'and wouldn't want to get involved anyway.

[Glenn Lauritz Andersson]

No, it isn't.

A serial killer is perfectly capable of gaining new insights as he progressses and explores.

Yes, when it comes to method of killing but fantasies (which signatures often are based on) are constructed during a longer period of time and not something you change abruptly. Perhaps you can find such examples in other killers but looking at how Jack the Ripper operated and how he mutilated his victims I find it extremely unlikely.
The wounds on Nichols, Chapman and Eddowes prove that the way these women were mutilated derives from something deeper in the offender's psyche.

Easily. Facial mutilations are a component of signature, since they were entirely extraneous to the act of pulling off an efficient crime, and yet he came up with that component of signature within the space of a month.

It is not the same thing, Ben, since the other trademarks of his work are there anyway!
Therefore his preferences haven't changed! A new element has been added, but they are still the same and haven't changed in its basic formula! With Tabram it is a completely different matter.
It doesn't seem to matter how many times this is explained to you - it still doesn't seem to sink it.

Yes, the facial cuts are a part of signature - that is not the issue. The point you continue to miss is that they are STILL NOTHING BUT ADDTIONS TO THE ORIGINAL, GENERAL SIGNATURE since the other elements are there as well! He has added something to his preferences (which is certainly not an uncommon thing) but they haven't changed!
The Ripper's main signature/post mortem mutilations seems to be throat cuts and disembowelling/abdiominal mutilation by ripping! These are apparent on Eddowes as well.

It is useless to refer to the facial cuts on Eddowes as "change of signature" and compare that to Tabram since Tabram didn't have ANY of the Ripper's mutilation hallmarks. It is not even the same ballpark.
And certainly not the same type of offender.

All the best

[Sam Flynn]

The problem with the idea of being "gang fight", Shelley, is that no resident had heard any significant disturbance during the night.

[Sam Flynn]

The Ripper's main signature/post mortem mutilations seems to be throat cuts and disembowelling/abdiominal mutilation by ripping upwards!

Downwards in the case of Eddowes, according to Dr Brown - and, as a downward stroke makes sense in terms of a right-handed killer, it was probably the case with the others too.

Just a minor point, though. Perfectly sound observations otherwise, Glenn.

[Glenn Lauritz Andersson]

Downwards in the case of Eddowes, according to Dr Brown - and, as a downward stroke makes sense in terms of a right-handed killer, it was probably the case with the others too.

Ah yes, that's probably true, Gareth.
I'll edit that.

All the best

[Shelley]

#622 post

Good Post Glenn,
A good sound explaination of MO and Signature, the signature for the killer's fantasies and addition/adaptions.

Cheers
Shelley

[Shelley]

The problem with the idea of being "gang fight", Shelley, is that no resident had heard any significant disturbance during the
night.

Sam,
It's a possibility that no one saw anything, or heard anything, yet again some people were reluctant to come forward, afraid of trouble either from an assailant or because they didn't want to come into contact with the police for fear or guilt of some other misdemeanour not related to Tabram.
Either way is possible.

[Sam Flynn]

Possible, Shelley, but the residents of George Yard Buildings seemed to be fairly cooperative with the police and coroner.

[CLK]

"The Ripper's main signature/post mortem mutilations seems to be throat cuts and disembowelling/abdiominal mutilation by ripping!"

Tabram's throat, abdomen and private parts were targeted like Nichols, Chapmen and Eddowes. She was also found on her back with her skirts pulled up and her legs apart. Is it possible the body position and the targeting on those areas was his signature and the disembowelling and mutilation by ripping was added later.

We do not know if Jack was trying to disembowel Nichols or was just mutilating her. The disembowelling could have been added with Chapmen.

[Sam Flynn]

Tabram's throat, abdomen and private parts were targeted.

Her throat was stabbed, rather than cut, CLK - unlike all the other Ripper victims. Furthermore it was the throat, chest and upper abdomen (mainly the stomach region) that received the vast majority of the blows, so the focus of Tabram's killer was emphatically much further up the body than the perpetrator of the Ripper crimes. Only ONE short cut was found in the lower body - precise location unknown - and that could certainly have been a skidding stab, rather than a cut, despite arguments to the contrary.

She was also found on her back with her skirts pulled up and her legs apart.

That's the only common denominator, it would appear - but then, Tabram was a prostitute, so it kind of loses its significance.