Ripper Victim?

[perrymason]

Hi Fisherman,

I know Sam hates this response technique, but I actually prefer it so....

PMQ:"A question...since we know two blades were involved....it is almost certain....why doesnt he use the larger blade first?"

FMA:How about pondering that there were TWO men involved? Takes care of that detail nicely.

A: I agree...two killers would take care of that issue, one choking her while the other stabbed...there is no evidence that suggests, denounces or clarifies whether she was choked and stabbed simultaneously.

PMQ: "she is killed with 2 different length and breadth weapons....the larger blade being used once"

FMA: Once - or TWICE, Michael! We cannot exclude the possibility that the cut was made by the larger blade, since cut surfaces donīt give away blade size in the same manner as stabs do. As for the differing lengths you speak of, I would not put my signature on such a proposal - there is no reason not to believe that the smaller blade was still quite a long one."

A: As far as I read, a single wound was indicated as being from a larger blade,...Ive not seen anything that suggests even remotely that all wounds were from one blade.

PMQ: "She is not obviously "cut" using the knife at all."

FMA: Yes, she is, and the cut came out 3x1 inches.

A: As I said, that sounds like a gash as compared to a slice, a slit, or a "cut", and he stabs at 90 degrees and pulls the knife out at 45 degrees, you get a longer wider stab wound...thats all.

The best, Michael!
Fisherman

I know you wonder whether another killer, Jack, comes across a nearly dead woman and then he uses his knife....I wonder what the odds would be on a killer stabbing a woman 38 times leaving her for dead and another man capable and intent on killing that same night finding her and adding a single stab would be?

My feeling is I'd rather take the risk of holding my golf club in lighting storms rather than bet this 1 in 100 million shot takes place.

My best regards FM

[Fisherman]

Hi Michael!

You should look out for lightning storms, they can be pretty dangerous!

More on topic:

"As far as I read, a single wound was indicated as being from a larger blade"

What Killeen said was that all of the other wounds could have been inflicted by the same blade. Statistically, he opted for the best possibility, but in fact there is no way that a cut would give away any information on blade width. Slice a loaf of bread with a thin knife AND a broad knife, and then tell me which blade was used at which slice, Michael.

"that sounds like a gash as compared to a slice, a slit, or a "cut", and he stabs at 90 degrees and pulls the knife out at 45 degrees, you get a longer wider stab wound...thats all."

No, Michael, that is NOT all, beacuse if he started out with a stab, he would not end up with a wound that was no deeper than an inch, would he?

Finally and once again, the thing about my scenario is that it has an answer for each and every anomaly that leaves most people out here with a number of unanswered questions. And when we find an answer to a riddle that covers all the details, we may want to be careful not to discard such a thing. Also, it provides you and every other member of the boards with the opportunity to flash your statistical insights, does it not?

The best,
Fisherman

[perrymason]

According to the PM there were 39 stab wounds all delivered 'during life'. I assume he means 'perimortem'. I very much doubt that poor woman was responsive after the first 10 or so. Which means that for the next 29 blows, he would have been stabbing a basically dead body. He's probably crouched over and stabbing a woman on the ground for a considerable period of time. It would have taken quite a while to stab like that into muscle, and at one point into bone, through the clothes she was wearing. Maybe that's why he tore the bodice away. But if that's the case, we have the image of a man crouched over and for all intents and purposes defacing and mutilating the body of a murdered middle-aged destitute prostitute in an area central to the Ripper scare three weeks before the first canonical victim was killed.

Hi Chava,

Theres no reason to suggest the killer crouched over her still stabbing, or that she was dead after 10 or so stabs. I can make motions like stabbing horizontally 39 times in just under 15 seconds...making each one a firm thrust....and since he doesnt sever arteries as part of his kill technique...she could have been standing or held and choked from behind while all, or almost all the stabs were made, the large one coming as she is slumped on the ground.

If you consider that even a major artery wound might take a few seconds for the victim to lose consciousness from blood loss...assuming she doest pass out from fear alone...there is every possibility that she endured most of the stabs while conscious.

To imagine these women were cut when dead and felt nothing is just a comfort to some...but hardly realistic. Kate had to be still alive..maybe not conscious.. when he cuts her abdomen, Liz was alive and conscious when she has her throat cut, Annie is perhaps alive enough to get "no" out, and she may have been opened up mere seconds from that moment, making her semi or unconscious but still alive when cut into, and it seems Mary fought with her knife wielding attacker...suffering wounds from the knife while conscious. Unless the killer paused after he subdues Polly, the same case goes.

Whether they felt the pain and were aware they were being cut into is a question mark, but due to his speed requirements I feel he opened the abdomens right after the throat cut, making the victims mortally injured but technically alive...and able to feel pain perhaps.

Martha may well have consciously felt her stabbing death...and been temporarily still alive at the time.

Cheers Chava

[perrymason]

No, Michael, that is NOT all, beacuse if he started out with a stab, he would not end up with a wound that was no deeper than an inch, would he?

The best,
Fisherman

Of course you can.. a downward blow with a bent arm can slide through the flesh at very shallow depths, and leave a long slit mark you like to call a "cut"...and from what I can see, the killer wasnt trying to kill her efficiently he was frantically stabbing, so a shallow stab miss is pefectly fine an explanation I feel.

On theories and speculations in general, I would have no issues setting aside some of the baseless ones that appear..and including Martha Tabram as a Ripper victim is just that...even less likely than Stride in my opinion...at least she is killed by a slitting...almost like that which was used by the Ripper.

All the best FM

[Ben]

Theres no reason to suggest the killer crouched over her still stabbing

I cannot, for the life of me, envisage how any other alternative would be remotely credible, Mike. If the killer never "crouched over her still stabbing", it would mean that Tabram remained in an upright position after 39 stabs. Virtually impossible, in my view. And it is still emphatically not "baseless" to include Tabram as a possible early murder on the part of the ripper. Stabbing to slashing with a bit of stabbing is simply an invalid reason for ruling out a potential victim.

Cheers,

Ben

[Roy Corduroy]

Theres no reason to suggest the killer crouched over her

Huh?

Here is how James Kelly killed his wife. "... he throws her to the floor, pulls a pen-knife from his pocket and plunges it into her neck. He then begins digging away with the knife as if trying to burrow deeper and deeper."

Very good post, Chava. The numerous stabs could be JtR engaging in overkill. And also your previous post showing the "progression" victim to victim, Tabram included.

Roy

[perrymason]

I cannot, for the life of me, envisage how any other alternative would be remotely credible, Mike. If the killer never "crouched over her still stabbing", it would mean that Tabram remained in an upright position after 39 stabs. Virtually impossible, in my view. And it is still emphatically not "baseless" to include Tabram as a possible early murder on the part of the ripper. Stabbing to slashing with a bit of stabbing is simply an invalid reason for ruling out a potential victim.

Despite any opinion to the contrary, stabbing someone dozens of times is a uncontrolled killer at work...and without evidence he subdued Martha first before stabbing her....we can safely assume that a frenzied killer is not following a "process".

Cheers,

Ben

Hi Ben,

As Ive pointed out numerous times, there is no evidence Martha was choked before a knife was used, (there is in some real Canonical deaths), and there is no evidence that would preclude 2 men from being involved here...we do have 2 types of wounds after all.

Ill give you some examples and see if that helps....she is held from behind by an assailant who is choking her with a scarf or some ligature... and another man stands in front stabbing her, gradually releasing her as she loses blood and consciousness. She is pinned with her back to the wall, the assailant covering her sounds by using a bent arm with force pushed into her throat, while stabbing her. He can be behind her, grab her throat from behind with one arm, and with the other deliver stabbing blows down and inward to her front, ....she could have been punched or hit on the head, and while still upright, then repeatedly stabbed before she falls...if its one man and he is strong, he can cup a hand over her mouth and jab and stab with his free arm.

Slit a womans throat while she stands or lies....she will collapse within seconds, still alive, but dying from blood loss....you can stab someone countless times without killing them, even the major organ hits would still take a few minutes to flow her life out. Martha was not petite, and quite a few stabs missed organs. Only one wound was considered absolutely fatal in its own right.

She was by all accounts relatively healthy and had strong healthy organs when she dies.
Best regards Ben

[Ben]

there is no evidence Martha was choked before a knife was used, (there is in some real Canonical deaths), and there is no evidence that would preclude 2 men from being involved here

But do you see how the reverse is just as true, Mike?

There is no evidence that two people were involved, but "nothing to preclude" Tabram being choked before the knife was used. There's no proof for either being correct, just as there is "nothing to preclude" either scenario. It's just a question of how we phrase things. In fact, if we examine the article I referenced earlier from the Illustrated Police News, there is a reasonable case to be made for her being either strangled or suffocated.

Your examples are all well and good, but the possibility of a second attacker notwithstanding, you certainly don't need one to explain how she could be have been found in a supine position with multiple stab wounds. The most parsiminious conclusion is that she was stabbed while she was on the ground by the person who shoked her beforehand, dovetailing nicely with the fact than extremely close neighbours heard nothing.

The fact that you can create a highly speculative scenario involving more than one man doesn't mean that two attachers were necessary to explain away the crime scene evidence. It is, however, impossible to accept that Tabram remained upright after being "punched or hit on the head" and then stabbed 39 times.

Regards,
Ben

[perrymason]

Only stabbing... and slicing and cutting into the body and internal organs for the purpose of excising warm organs that have been removed from a woman just murdered...do not form any kind of basis for a logical progression element...particularly when perhaps the next three consecutive deaths are almost identical in style, knife use and signatures present.

He rapidly evolves without any further practice...from someone that is clearly killing in a highly emotional state to someone who has clear controlled "steps" he takes.. in the same sequence... with the C1, C2 and C4 victims.

It doesnt work.

You want progression...its there alright,.... you just want to extend it beyond what is in evidence with this particular non-Canonical,...just like the fact that Marys attack by only what is known and clearly present has nothing in common with those 3 victims....but she is included as well regardless.

You want the killer to have killed by knife stabs, shovel smacks or victims being tied to the railway ties....thats your business, by all means believe what you want.

Believing there is evidence in the murder of Martha Tabram that links her to the women who had their throats slit to kill them and their abdomens mutilated for pleasure is not something that can be supported simply by suggesting the killer has therefore changed his style completely before the next victim... anytime the real MO/acts/signatures/processes dont fit a case.

3 women were killed almost identically outdoors within 5 weeks. All had postmortem wounds in the same region, and 2 had organs taken from that region. In my opinion, thats your Ripper streak evidence....not with all the stabbings and robberies that went on too.

Best regards all

[Fisherman]

Michael writes:

"Of course you can.. a downward blow with a bent arm can slide through the flesh at very shallow depths"

Perhaps, Michael - but you suggested a 90 degree stab in your former post. And if he managed to sink each and every of the other 38 stabs deep into her by the look of things, why would he suddenly decide on a stab to an area he had not targetted before - and almost miss it totally??

Not buying that, Iīm afraid. Not cause itīs in any way impossible, though - just because I donīt like coincidences stacked on top of each other.

The best,
Fisherman

[Ben]

Hi Mike,

Only stabbing... and slicing and cutting into the body and internal organs for the purpose of excising warm organs that have been removed from a woman just murdered...do not form any kind of basis for a logical progression element

They do if you avoid the age-old trap of fine-tuning a serial killer's MO too much and believing that a serial killer who can boast a few very consistent kills to his tally must only be responsible for those and no others. If we applied that logic to other serial killers, we'd be ruling out the majority of their victims.

You want progression...its there alright,.... you just want to extend it beyond what is in evidence with this particular non-Canonical

Well no, all you really have to do is examine a few other serial killers and find out how capable they are of diversity. Message board contibutors like us may make assertions as to what works and what doesn't work, and they're entitled to that view, but unfortunately those assertions are very often offset by what the experts in serial crime have learned to accept from experience.

Believing there is evidence in the murder of Martha Tabram that links her to the women who had their throats slit to kill them and their abdomens mutilated for pleasure is not something that can be supported simply by suggesting the killer has therefore changed his style completely before the next victim

Yes we can, because it wouldn't be a complete change of style. If he'd starting bombing or poisoning people, that would be a "complete change". Tabram-to-Nichols is incredibly minor by comparison.

Best regards,
Ben

[perrymason]

But do you see how the reverse is just as true, Mike?

There is no evidence that two people were involved, but "nothing to preclude" Tabram being choked before the knife was used. There's no proof for either being correct, just as there is "nothing to preclude" either scenario. It's just a question of how we phrase things. In fact, if we examine the article I referenced earlier from the Illustrated Police News, there is a reasonable case to be made for her being either strangled or suffocated.

Your examples are all well and good, but the possibility of a second attacker notwithstanding, you certainly don't need one to explain how she could be have been found in a supine position with multiple stab wounds. The most parsiminious conclusion is that she was stabbed while she was on the ground by the person who shoked her beforehand, dovetailing nicely with the fact than extremely close neighbours heard nothing.

The fact that you can create a highly speculative scenario involving more than one man doesn't mean that two attachers were necessary to explain away the crime scene evidence. It is, however, impossible to accept that Tabram remained upright after being "punched or hit on the head" and then stabbed 39 times.

Regards,
Ben

Hi Ben,

The facts are that despite what either of us believe, there is evidence that perhaps 2 people were involved simply by the fact 2 different wounds exist...and that is is illogical to imagine one man stops frantically stabbing at the body in general.. to change his weapon.

Name for me the physical evidence that suggests the probability of 2 men in the case of Polly, Annie and Kate. And yes.....probability.....as illustrated above.

We have 2 wound types, 2 soldiers being seen with or near where Martha is killed, and many military men that night wearing bayonets, daggers or short swords due to the Holiday. We have no evidence that suggests she was not choked and stabbed simultaneously, and we have to explain how she is kept quiet by the stabber if she was conscious while being stabbed.

All the best Ben.

[Ben]

and that is is illogical to imagine one man stops frantically stabbing at the body in general.. to change his weapon.

I'm not personally convinced he did change his weapon, Mike. I'm unwilling to debate the matter here again - there's a relevant discussion along those lines elsewhere - but even if the same attacker did use two weapons, there's nothing "illogical" about him changing halfway through. And even if there were two attackers, the Fishmeister would be the first to tell you that they needn't have been working together.

Name for me the physical evidence that suggests the probability of 2 men in the case of Polly, Annie and Kate. And yes.....probability.....as illustrated above.

I don't think you did illustrate it above, and I don't think it is "probable" that two attackers were involved in Tabram's murder.

We have no evidence that suggests she was not choked and stabbed simultaneously

No evidence that she was either.

See, this is a slight problem I have with your reasoning and phraseology on occasions. When you disagree with the opinion, you say there's "no evidence", but when you're arguing a position for which there is equally evidence, it becomes "no evidence that s/he/it didn't".

and we have to explain how she is kept quiet by the stabber if she was conscious while being stabbed.

By being stangled or suffocated first.

Best regards,
Ben

[Fisherman]

Ben writes:

"If he'd starting bombing or poisoning people, that would be a "complete change". Tabram-to-Nichols is incredibly minor by comparison."

Itīs a good thing that we can copy and paste, Ben! Now donīt you loose it - my prediction is that you are going to need this particular passage a good many times in the future....

The best,
Fisherman

[perrymason]

Hi Mike,
hey do if you avoid the age-old trap of fine-tuning a serial killer's MO too much and believing that a serial killer who can boast a few very consistent kills to his tally must only be responsible for those and no others. If we applied that logic to other serial killers, we'd be ruling out the majority of their victims.

Well no, all you really have to do is examine a few other serial killers and find out how capable they are of diversity. Message board contibutors like us may make assertions as to what works and what doesn't work, and they're entitled to that view, but unfortunately those assertions are very often offset by what the experts in serial crime have learned to accept from experience.

Yes we can, because it wouldn't be a complete change of style. If he'd starting bombing or poisoning people, that would be a "complete change". Tabram-to-Nichols is incredibly minor by comparison.

Best regards,
Ben

I mis-phrased myself evidently Ben, of course you can suggest that the killer went from obviously amateur status to seemingly semi-professional without intermediary steps. Or that murders which show none of the repetitive elements shown in the Canonicals 1,2 and 4, were just the same guy but with a different character based on his place on his evolutionary scale, on each of those non-attributed kills. You can say.... based on serial killer data from men that were interviewed after their arrest that share none of the salient points in these crimes but only a "serial killer" moniker..that many of them changed style and weapon and victim and exhibited controlled and highly emotional composure both.

What you cannot say is that there is any physical or circumstantial evidence in the case of Martha Tabrams death that indicates she was killed by the man with the specific agendas shown in perhaps 4 of his 5 attributed murders called the Canonicals. You cannot say with any authority that her attack was done by one man. You cannot say with any authority that she was unconscious, or on the ground, when being stabbed.

She is an unfortunate stabbed and perhaps robbed....like 2 similar preceding attack-murders with knives, of Unfortunates, that Spring ....the physical details of her murder dont match any forthcoming Canonical murders, thats for sure. And she is thought by the Coroner of at least Mary Ann's Inquest to perhaps be by another hand than the one that killed Polly and Annie.

My best regards Ben.