Ripper Victim?

[Jeff Leahy]

I understand why the police would have thought there could be a connection between Tabram and Nicholls. Anyone remotely intelligent in the area would have probably thought the same. If there was, where are the official records? I know a lot of the Ripper files have 'lost' themselves over the years but say, Swanson or McNaughten? They don't posit Tabram in with the canon. I'm not saying they're the 'last word' but if McNaughton can talk about Druitt as a possible suspect, then why wouldn't he mention Tabram as a possible victim?

What's this they? Are you talking about the McNaughten C5?

And clearly Tabram was 'Ripped' as you put it, 3" long 1" deep...sounds like a rip to me anyway.

Tabram was clearly a Ripper victim a natural progression from Millwood to Nichols..

Pirate

[harry]

Mitch,
Thanks for your comment.Although revenge is a plausible reason for all the killings,my question about intent as regards the throat injuries,again could be a question posed for the other later victims.I feel it was simply to render Tabram dead, and cutting the throats of the later victims was carried out for the same reason.Dead or at least immobile,and so would be carried out first.So stab or slash,intent is a connecting factor between Tabram and the others.Then after the throat,the torso.Three weeks to change his method.Plenty of time.

[Nothing to see]

Swanson or McNaughton. My point is a valid one. You're comparing Tabram's wounds to Nicholls' and concluding they are similar. They're not. Jack ripped. Jack used one knife. Tabram was stabbed. She was not ripped like Nicholls. Tabram's murderer/s used 2 different weapons. Jack slashed the throat then went for the abdomen in Nicholls and Chapman. Interrupted in Stride. Had time with Eddowes which is why the facial injuries. Had a room to himself with Kelly and he fully indulged. I know I'm off topic but there is no concrete proof that Tabram was one of Jack's gets. Go back and read Killeen.
He's the only medic who autopsied Tabram and spoke about it. You can't ignore him and you can't explain him away.

[Brenda]

I think if it could ever be proven that Martha was a Ripper victim, the record would show that the Ripper was very intoxicated when the murder happened. The murder itself seems like it was committed by someone who wasn't quite sure exactly what they wanted to do!

[Nothing to see]

Don't know about Jack. JMO. I think he'd be so fired up by adrenaline and whatever else drove him that he wouldn't need stimulants. The pros - Nicholls, maybe; Chapman, don't think so; Stride, same; Eddowes I'd think had a hangover and was maybe still drunk; Kelly I think was drunk. And I'm off topic again.

Tabram's murderers were probably drunk or at the argumentative going to get physical stage. Which they probably were.

Alcohol was a huge part of the lives of many of these people, who were just surviving. Pubs flourished and booze was cheap.

[Jeff Leahy]

Swanson or McNaughton. My point is a valid one. You're comparing Tabram's wounds to Nicholls' and concluding they are similar. They're not. Jack ripped. Jack used one knife. Tabram was stabbed. She was not ripped like Nicholls. Tabram's murderer/s used 2 different weapons. Jack slashed the throat then went for the abdomen in Nicholls and Chapman. Interrupted in Stride. Had time with Eddowes which is why the facial injuries. Had a room to himself with Kelly and he fully indulged. I know I'm off topic but there is no concrete proof that Tabram was one of Jack's gets. Go back and read Killeen.
He's the only medic who autopsied Tabram and spoke about it. You can't ignore him and you can't explain him away.

No i'm starting with Millwood. Noting the similarities and differences. Then looking at Martha Tabram, seeing similarities and differences and moving on to Nichols, and again seeing similarities and differences.

What I see is natural learning and development of MO by a serial killer. The wounds inflicted being the natural cause and development of a learning process.

But then I don't believe that a fully formed serial killer suddenly appeared on the streets with his MO fully formed. In fact I find the idea most unlikely.

Martha was stabbed out of necessity because Jack was targeting areas through clothing. As was Annie Millwood.

He clearly learned a lot about blood flow and struggling victims and tried a different approach to Nichols having learned from EXPERIENCE the problems if the victim was still alive.

Pirate

[Sam Flynn]

Killeen specified nine stabs to the throat,a rather small area when compared to the rest of the body. Were they the first stabs?

I doubt it - if some of those stabs had punctured an artery while her heart was still beating (and, with 9 of wounds to the neck, it's almost certain that at least one would have been), jets of blood would have hit the wall and sprayed out further than the subsequent "pool" in which she was found. I'm fairly sure that this would have been commented upon.

As to their being inflicted "together" - I'd say yes.

[Sam Flynn]

I perceive an intent to concentrate ALL the stabs in specific vital areas. Either a soldier did it or someone who knew a little something about killing.

I don't see that raining knife-blows on a body like a boxer would use a punchbag would require any particular knowledge, Mitch.

The intent appears to be... something more than just a small dispute.

There might have been no intent at all, merely a customer's overreaction to something she did that caused him to lose control. It's known that Martha was prone to fits, so it's possible that she went into one whilst "on the job" - her customer freaking out after interpreting it as resistance and/or violent intent on her part.

[Jeff Leahy]

I doubt it - if some of those stabs had punctured an artery while her heart was still beating (and, with 9 of wounds to the neck, it's almost certain that at least one would have been), jets of blood would have hit the wall and sprayed out further than the subsequent "pool" in which she was found. I'm fairly sure that this would have been commented upon.

As to their being inflicted "together" - I'd say yes.

Thats interesting Sam. Are you saying that, there was less blood than would be expected?

Would this not suggest that the heart was targeted earlier in the attack?

Personally my view has always been that he strangled her first. However as he started stabbing she awoke...he then stabbed at the throat to keep her quiet...

Learning curve being best to cut the throat first.

Pirate

[Nothing to see]

Pirate, I agree with you that serial killers don't just appear. Fully formed. Jack must have had a few trial runs. That makes sense.

If Tabram's throat had been slashed I'd have a big rethink.

But. 2 different weapons. Killeen autopsied her and he's the only medic we have and he said 2 weapons. Jack didn't use 2 weapons. Except, this has nothing to do with Tabram, but I've read that Kelly's leg or legs may have had a cleaver used on them. Anyone can point me in the right direction on this, thanks.

Anyway, back to Tabram. 2 weapons. Throat not slashed. No ripping. Not Jack ripping. And I'll refer back to my earlier post. McNaughton, Swanson, like I said. Not the referees but why not mention Tabram as a possible Jack victim?

[Jeff Leahy]

Actually I believe it was an axe suggested at the Kelly murder scene, but I cant fund the source at present.

I think your wrong about Swanson, as far as I'm aware he included Martha Tabram in the series.

There was ripping...3" long 1" deep, thats a rip.

We don't have the original autopsie report however its possible information was held back from the press.

In all other respects times, date, age, location, etc. Martha a fits the pattern.

Plus her killing sticks out as particularly unusual.

Plus most experts I have spoken to seem to suggest Martha as a possible Ripper victim.

Pirate

[Chava]

Tabram's murderers were probably drunk or at the argumentative going to get physical stage. Which they probably were.

I would agree with you except for one thing: no one in George Yard Buildings heard a sound. Drunk and argumentative attacks tend to get louder and louder. And also involve both parties, so you'd hear two voices (at least).

It would make more sense to me to argue that the Tabram killing was in a group with the Emma Smith killing--a few incredibly nasty boys out to hurt helpless old street prostitutes in the same way similar groups target homeless people today. However Smith was attacked on the street. And the circumstances of the Tabram murder suggest to me that she took a trick to that landing. And then there is the laying-out. Which so far no one has explained in any credible way. I understand that most people don't think she was a Ripper victim. I didn't myself for years. However I really don't think we can rule her out just based on the stab vs slash argument.

Don, I don't think it takes a great deal of skill to kill in the way the Ripper did in terms of the actual cut. Get behind, tip the neck up suddenly and slash. The skill comes in the timing and unexpectedness of the attack.

[Lord-z]

Hi. Long time lurker, first time poster.



I too are sceptical of Tabram as a Ripper victim. There are, as has been said, the lack of a cut throat and the two different weapons.

But, if you accept Kelly as a Ripper victim (I am still on the fence about her), you have to accept that the Ripper was escalating the violence. Even with Eddowes, he was starting to get bolder. There may have been several killings from january to august of 1888, possibly even a few years before, that has not been recognised as Ripper killings, because they were not severe enough.

My point is, while I don't think that there are enough evidence to make her a canonical victim, at least not without canonising dozens of others, I don't think that she should be entirely discounted because of her dissimilar wounds.

[Fisherman]

Jeff writes:

"Actually I believe it was an axe suggested at the Kelly murder scene, but I cant fund the source at present."

You are probably referring to the surgeon Nick Warren who proposed that a hatchet was used to split a leg in the Kelly case. Not many seem to agree with the wiew, however.

The best,
Fisherman

[Jeff Leahy]

Hi. Long time lurker, first time poster.

I too are sceptical of Tabram as a Ripper victim. There are, as has been said, the lack of a cut throat and the two different weapons.

But, if you accept Kelly as a Ripper victim (I am still on the fence about her), you have to accept that the Ripper was escalating the violence. Even with Eddowes, he was starting to get bolder. There may have been several killings from january to august of 1888, possibly even a few years before, that has not been recognised as Ripper killings, because they were not severe enough.

My point is, while I don't think that there are enough evidence to make her a canonical victim, at least not without canonising dozens of others, I don't think that she should be entirely discounted because of her dissimilar wounds.

Hi Lord z

And welcome. This whole idea of a 'Cannon' is very miss leading. Its purely a reference to the McNaughten memoranda and was coined I believe by Martin Fido back in the sixties. A ripper expert who I beleive has changed his mind about Tabram in recent years.

Pirate

PS cheers Fish, twas a hatchet, trust you are well today.