Ripper Victim?

[Fisherman]

David, I really don´t think we should try and dub each other naive - it serves no good purpose.

I think you are launching a project that won´t float here, simple as that. You speak about cartilagenous breastplates and such things, but don´t you think that Killeen would have established what kind of material the blade went through BEFORE he made his assertion? No?
You may of course argue that he too was "naive" and just chanced that the blade hade travelled through bone, but if I have to choose between your chance suggestion and Killeens hard work at the slab, well... I´m sorry, bro, but I´m with the good doctor all the way on this one.

My wording on the shape of the hole produced in bone still stands, by the way: If you shove a blade through bone at a ninety-degree angle, you will get a very good "imprint" of what the blade looked like. It´s exactly the same with many hard materials like for example wood, as you will know. If the blade is NOT shoved through the bone at a ninety-degree angle, it will be more difficult to establish the exact shape of it, just as it will be if there is any wiggling of some sort involved.
This all becomes very uninteresting if we have dagger blades that resemble bayonet blades and vice versa, though. And I´m not sure to what extent Killeen was updated on all blades on the market of them days.
I do, however, suspect that he only suggested a dagger, whereafter it would have been asked if it could have been a bayonet. And if Killeen was not aquainted with the looks of all the bayonet blades around, he may have said "well, possibly...", and then the papers would have taken care of the rest.
Not to realize this is completely nai... Oh, sorry! Well, you take my meaning, don´t you? And who says you DON´t realize it?

The best,
Fisherman

[Fisherman]

Hi Shelley!

What I am suggesting is that the Ripper may have produced two of the wounds only: the cut to the lower body and the stab through the sternum.

This theory I combine with what Killeen said about Tabrams death - she lived throughout the stabbings! I think that the Ripper may have taken over after the first stabber fled the scene, after having produced 37 punctured holes in Tabram. The Ripper then did what he wants to do - he started cutting at the abdomen. But if Tabram was alive, and if she gave away some sound or stirred, it would have given him a frightful shock - he was faced with the very real possibility that somebody may open their door and come out on the landing to investigate.
So the Ripper aborts, and he shoves his knife through the breastplate to ensure that she would not be able to tell about him. Then he flees the scene.
And the aborted mission on the Rippers behalf is what would have taught him never again to start out by cutting at the abdomen. From that lesson on, he would alway secure silence and death prior to his "hobby" - by cutting the throat.
Lord almighty, I hope no more people will ask me about this - I´ve explained it a thousand times by now, or so it feels!

The best, Shelley!
Fisherman

[Shelley]

Hi Fisherman,
Thankyou for your reply, so you are saying then that JTR was not guilty of the throat stabbings on Tabram. So your two wounds theory stands. However, why do you think that JTR would change his MO from Tabram ( stab through the heart to finish her off) to that of throat-cutting of Nicholls? Seems as both the MO on Tabram and the MO on Nicholls both worked in killing these women, did it not? Also as i understand it Dr Killeen surmised Tabram to have died due to blood loss possibly, but that the stab through the heart alone would have finished her off, that's why you have the heart stabbing in your theory ( as i understand it) and a credible one that can be concluded as pertaining to the heart. So why would JTR do something completley different if the kill worked on Tabram?

[perrymason]

I think that the evidence that the Doctor gave suggests 2 weapons, and that the larger one caused the chest puncture Fisherman....it is not suggested that 2 strokes were by that large weapon, not does he associate the larger blade with what you believe to be a cut in her lower body. He associates the large blade with 1 wound, through her breastbone.

I know whats tantalizing you is a belief that based on her having throat stabs, and a stab that may look like a cut on her lower body, you have both Ripper fascination points covered....throat and abdomen.

It appears though that the throat was stabbed with the "pen-knife"...so by the guy who makes the vast majority of the stabs, not the larger weapon. And the larger blade was used just once according to the doctor.

One man stabbed her furiously with a smaller knife, and another, or the same man stabbed her once with a larger one in her breastbone.

If you like Jack as a vulture here, coming in to poach after the multitude of smaller blade stabs by another guy .....then Jack is the guy that stabs her breastbone with a dagger most likely....not the guy who stabs either her lower body or her throat at all. Jacks zones....as your mind reveals with your premise.

This murder is even less likely done by Jack the Ripper than Liz Strides.....and she was almost certainly not killed by Jack.

Best regards FM.

[Chava]

I'm not entirely certain how Killeen knew that all those stabs were committed 'during life'. He says the stab to the heart would cause death, but how does he know she was alive when it occurred? Yes, there would be blood flow if she was alive, but in such an attack it would be really difficult to determine which and when the killing blow was delivered.

I'd like to draw back from the stab vs rip argument that's been dominating this thread. It'll never be answered satisfactorily on either side. But, if Tabram was not the first victim, is it possible that her murder put the idea of murder into our guy's head? Did he live, say, in George Yard Buildings, and did he discover an interesting reaction to the sight of her dead body? Or, if Tabram was the first victim, but killed because she p*ssed-off her killer, did he find he enjoyed that murder a little more than he expected, and so went looking for more enjoyment of the same kind?

Because like it or not, Tabram is horribly similar in physicality, social position, place and time of murder and profession to most of the canonical victims. It's true that there were a lot of women out there like Tabram. It's also true that 3 weeks after she was murdered, the Ripper started his work, killing a number of women just like Tabram. I feel there must be some kind of connexion there somewhere...

[perrymason]

But, if Tabram was not the first victim, is it possible that her murder put the idea of murder into our guy's head? Did he live, say, in George Yard Buildings, and did he discover an interesting reaction to the sight of her dead body? Or, if Tabram was the first victim, but killed because she p*ssed-off her killer, did he find he enjoyed that murder a little more than he expected, and so went looking for more enjoyment of the same kind?

Hi Chava,

Your first suggestion is the interesting one in my opinion. Cause on the 2nd, If he enjoyed this murder enough to kill again how would that explain his not doing anything he did to Martha with his next victim, or how he suddenly developed this new unique style that he keeps using repetitiously until the end of September? Marthas killer was an amateur in all senses....Polly and Annies killers were thought to have some skill and savvy.

But a man that sees Martha or hears the stories, lives in or near George Yard, and is mesmerized with the idea of doing something like that himself is an interesting concept....giving him about 3 weeks to construct a style and method that he will use. And does, without Liz, 3 times in a row.

Martha to Mary Ann isnt pupae to imago....its embryo to imago....its rash and emotional vs determined and methodical. 2 differently constructed minds.

Best regards Chava

[Shelley]

Chava,
It is possible that JTR could have gone off as a loner from a whitechapel gang in the area though, as it was only thought that Tabram may have gone off with a sailor or a soldier. Fisherman with the scavenger theory at the moment, may not have just come along as an opportunity after Tabram was stabbed in a frenzy, there is a possibility that he was there with the other guy, if a 2 weapon and 2 guy theory is there. Tabram could have been the result of an opportunity gang killing. It's possible. But i doubt it that's all.

[Shelley]

I don't think it is concievable that an enjoyment from Tabram's killing led the murder of Nicholls, then Chapman of course with her disembowlement and removal of organ's, that to me, with Nicholls and Chapman was already a necessary taste concerning the killers mind. But it is a possibility that killing could have arisen as say a possible jump start with Tabram if JTR was probably a whitechapel gang member and present with another guy at Tabram's killing, it is not impossible either to surmise in theory that JTR could have been with those that were involved with Emma Smith's attack. It is possible, a theory i grant you, but not impossible.

[FrankO]

Cause on the 2nd, If he enjoyed this murder enough to kill again how would that explain his not doing anything he did to Martha with his next victim, or how he suddenly developed this new unique style that he keeps using repetitiously until the end of September?

Hi Michael,

What if the Ripper hadn't thought about actually carrying out his fantasies until after Tabram? What if he had just went out that evening, had a few drinks and ended up in a dark alley or stairway with a prostitute, without murder on his mind, like many other nights before? And what if this particular prostitute pissed him off so badly that he wasn't able to control himself?

Then we'd have a Ripper who wasn't quite prepared for what he was to do later on, when he does go out with murder and some sort of plan on his mind. It is not uncommon for serial killers that, because they haven't thought about actually carrying out their murderous fantasies, their first murder turns out quite differently than their later murders, when they are prepared.

All the best,
Frank

[Sam Flynn]

But a man that sees Martha or hears the stories, lives in or near George Yard, and is mesmerized with the idea of doing something like that himself is an interesting concept....giving him about 3 weeks to construct a style and method that he will use. And does, without Liz, 3 times in a row.

"3 or 4" times in a row, Mike. Naughty, naughty! Unlike your good self, we haven't written off Kelly yet - well, most people haven't. There's nothing wrong with comparing the style of Tabram's murder to the "C5", but you might at least caveat your subliminal propaganda when you bring them into the discussion

[perrymason]

"3 or 4" times in a row, Mike. Naughty, naughty! Unlike your good self, we haven't written off Kelly yet - well, most people haven't. There's nothing wrong with comparing the style of Tabram's murder to the "C5", but you might at least caveat your subliminal propaganda when you bring them into the discussion

Thats a fair conclusion Sam, but inaccurate in this case. The only reason I mentioned C1/C2/C4 in isolation is because they can be easily seen as a series of victims by the same killer/killers. When I suggest removing Liz its to see those three murders "side by side" if you will. If they were consecutive kills, 3 in a row, ...and almost identically executed, I think thats a very strong indicator of Jack the Rippers murderers profile.

If Liz wasnt a Ripper victim...and Polly, Annie and Kate were consecutive kills..I believe that would suggest methodology and techniques that could not be learned from stabbing Martha Tabram to death.

If he did kill Liz, then it would suggest he can be an amateur murderer after 2 semi-skilled kills, and return to his semi-skill status 45 minutes after the 3rd Canonical murder...or the second purely amateur one if you include Martha.

I dont see indications that I should consider that the killers skill level was only being shown sporadically.

Best regards Sam

[Sam Flynn]

Thats a fair conclusion Sam, but inaccurate in this case. The only reason I mentioned C1/C2/C4 in isolation is because they can be easily seen as a series of victims by the same killer/killers.

My point was that C1/C2/C4/C5 hasn't been universally written off as a series either, Mike. And it hasn't. Even if Kelly weren't a Ripper victim, I can say without fear of contradiction that the manner of her death had significantly more in common with the deaths of Nichols, Chapman and Eddowes than it had with the deaths of Liz Stride or Martha Tabram.

[perrymason]

My point was that C1/C2/C4/C5 hasn't been universally written off as a series either, Mike. And it hasn't. Even if Kelly weren't a Ripper victim, I can say without fear of contradiction that the manner of her death had significantly more in common with the deaths of Nichols, Chapman and Eddowes than it had with the deaths of Liz Stride or Martha Tabram.

For many reasons... all of which are obvious Sam, Mary Kelly isnt a natural 4th to that string of 3 murders...if consecutive. Starting with being found in her own bed with defense wounds without any obvious abdominal mutilations focus.

What I was suggesting was continuity in actions taken...(and the change from Kate to Mary let alone Polly or Annie to Mary is significant)....seen in the Ripper attributed kills of Polly, Annie and Kate, ...suggest that the killer had some skill with a knife and some understanding of how to go about cutting organs out of a person.

Those skills could not be gained from a stabbing death 3 weeks before the start of the series. And I contend they wouldnt be abandoned completely when killing Liz Stride either.

Best regards Sam.

[Sam Flynn]

For many reasons... all of which are obvious Sam, Mary Kelly isnt a natural 4th to that string of 3 murders.

Read again what I said, closely, Mike: "Kelly's manner of death had more in common with Nichols, Chapman and Eddowes than they had with those of Stride or Tabram". That's because it's true - they all sustained long, deep cuts to their abdomens.

One's opinion of Kelly's "canonicity" shouldn't enter into it. Neither, for that matter, should one's opinion of Stride - for her murder, like the rest of the "C5" (Kelly included), at least involved a cut throat. No matter what one's personal "canon" consists of, none of those two key factors are in evidence in Tabram's murder.

[Suzi]

'The canonicity' (Is that really a word!) -is always a worry I guess -I can never be swayed from the idea that Polly ,Annie and Kate were sorted (!) by one and the same hand.

Liz- I can never come to terms with- it just doesn't make sense!

.....and Martha- much as I would like to put her as No 1 somehow the MO is so seriously wrong -all 39 reasons wrong!!! (Sorry Richard!) - Just a night out on the wazz with the two 'soldiers' which went rather 'orribly wrong as far as Martha was concerned- maybe Pol went to look for her chum after a couple of sessions- saw what had happened -and then disappeared into her 'I don't know nuffink' mode.

I guess the same could apply to our Mary She was a one off! -lived on her own,in her own room etc etc -- The scenario- let's face it -It's so totally different to Pol, Annie and Kate- IMHO it just doesn't sit right- The whole set-up somehow feels wrong

There's too much known about the residents of Millers Ct and their statements not to believe 'em- after all a couple of minutes fame can't have been that attractive/lucrative ,even for the Barnetts /Praters /Cox's of this world.

Maybe Mrs M was right after all (sure she was!) You do remember your plates when push comes to shove!

Suz x

(Where's that Police Illustrated News record of a cat seen leaving Dorset St at speed at 8.30 am when you need it ? )