Ripper Victim?

[Sam Flynn]

Hi Fish,

It did NOT work on Tabram, Shelley. He did not want to kill, he wanted to eviscerate. That was priority one. And that was something he was not allowed to to in Tabrams case. He was forced to abort it...

... an "abort sequence" that entailed Jack puncturing Tabram's upper body 38 times doesn't sound very efficient to me. Given that he rained so many stab-wounds down on Tabram's throat and thorax, one presumes that, if he'd intended to remove any organs at all, they were the thyroid and thymus glands.

[perrymason]

Have to agree with Gareth on that point myself Fisherman.....there is no indication that Marthas killer wanted or considered evisceration...just as there are no indications Liz Strides killer was interrupted.

Its a self serving interpretation Im afraid.

Best regards FM, Sam, all.

[DVV]

Hi Fish,... an "abort sequence" that entailed Jack puncturing Tabram's upper body 38 times doesn't sound very efficient to me. Given that he rained so many stab-wounds down on Tabram's throat and thorax, one presumes that, if he'd intended to remove any organs at all, they were the thyroid and thymus glands.

I'm with Sam too, but Fish said "eviscerate".

This said, the cut, though one of 39 wounds, isn't to be overlooked.
Added to the posing of the body, legs apart, blood between them, abdomen exposed, and to the fact that the next victim was to be ripped-up and not properly eviscerated, there is nothing against a possible " JtR-like interest".

Amitiés,
David

[perrymason]

I'm with Sam too, but Fish said "eviscerate".

This said, the cut, though one of 39 wounds, isn't to be overlooked.
Added to the posing of the body, legs apart, blood between them, abdomen exposed, and to the fact that the next victim was to be ripped-up and not properly eviscerated, there is nothing against a possible " JtR-like interest".

Amitiés,
David

I think Marthas pose could easily be the result of struggle David. Its was not described as what will become a stereotypical Ripper mutilation pose, skirts cut or lifted above the waist, knees bent pointed outwards.

I suggest seeing "JtR" like interest isnt the same as seeing what JtR actually does.

Best regards mate.

Best regards

[DVV]

Hi Mike,

I hardly see any struggle.
No bruises on her face.
No cuts or other wounds on her hands.
Apparently a rather silent deed.

Amitiés mon cher,
David

[perrymason]

Hi Mike,

I hardly see any struggle.
No bruises on her face.
No cuts or other wounds on her hands.
Apparently a rather silent deed.

Amitiés mon cher,
David

Hi David,

You may not see evidence of struggle, but the first person to find her did. From the Inquest August 10th, from the man that found her John Reeves....

"The deceased's clothes were disarranged, as though she had had a struggle with some one."

Since its also important to the thread, from Killeen,...

"The wounds generally might have been inflicted by a knife, but such an instrument could not have inflicted one of the wounds, which went through the chest-bone. His opinion was that one of the wounds was inflicted by some kind of dagger, and that all of them were caused during life."

This was a stabbing frenzy on a woman who was alive and may well have been conscious as it occurred, unable to yell due to punctures made in her airways.

There was struggle evident, as there was with Mary Kelly. But none evident with Mary Ann, Annie, Kate and only in the condition of the scarf with Liz.

Best regards my friend.

[DVV]

Ah, Mike,

Had Killeen discovered the body, and Reeves conducted the post-mortem !

Amitiés,
David

[Shelley]

Hi Fish,... an "abort sequence" that entailed Jack puncturing Tabram's upper body 38 times doesn't sound very efficient to me. Given that he rained so many stab-wounds down on Tabram's throat and thorax, one presumes that, if he'd intended to remove any organs at all, they were the thyroid and thymus glands.

Well, i'm with Sam too on this one....It doesn't show Fisherman that he had intentions to evicerate Tabram, although who knows it could be possible that JTR was there, but i would have thought that he would have at least delivered 1 stab in the woman's neck, perhaps even a tiring one ( or more) for old times sake, if Ada was taken into account as an early attack of the Ripper. But with two men at the scene, it's hard to distinguish who did what exactly. But it could well be that JTR was at the scene & participated in the attack on Tabram. You could still be right Fisherman, even with a slip here and there getting your point accross.

All the Best Fisherman

Shelley

[perrymason]

Are we now positing that Jack was in fact 2 or more men so as to better understand if Martha Tabram might be a Canonical?

2 weapons, yes. 2 men, logically possible. 2 men that are Rippers, or 1 of them that is..not so strong. There is no evidence in the Canonicals... save Wideawake Hat man about Millers Court... that suggests an possible accomplice or that 2 men were required to commit any of the murders...nor that 2 mens different styles or techniques were present in evidence.

I believe Fisherman contends that its possible Jack scavenged the final stab or two....to me that could be more probable than a 2 man Ripper team.

But it changes nothing about the fact we are talking about stabs vs cuts, and cold emotionless mutilations vs emotionally charged, large numbers of stabs.

Best regards all.

[Shelley]

Hi Perymason,
Just saying based on theory that is possible that 2 men were present with the attack on Tabram, definatley 2 weapons that Dr Killeen pointed out, one of which went through bone the other weapon used on Martha couldn't possibly have, Tabram doesn't have any signs of being a Ripper victim, as she was stabbed feriously, but of course everyone agrees that the Ripper would have started somewhere, in which i would say it is quite possible that the woman Ada could have been the starting point rather than say Annie Millwood ( but who knows & some might think that Millwood was an early attack of the ripper), i don't know anything about dress in particualr, as that can be changed, it's just descriptions of the man say with Eddowes for instance she was seen with a man around 5 ft 9 inches and fair moustache and so was Ada attacked by a fair haired man around 5 ft 6 inches ( 3 inch difference i grant you...But what of descriptions of footwear? that wasn't account for). But as for the 2 man team, i'm not implying that as in the case of Stride, all i am saying is that it is possible that the Ripper may have had some involvement with a gang or gang member that's all, but a loner all the same when it came to other canocials.
Yes, indeed that cannot be disputed about stabs v cuts and 3 weeks for Tabram to be a starting point, but was she?....But hey if he has stabbed before as in the case of Ada, like i said it could be a tiring one delivered on Tabram for old times sake, but with another guy present with him, as Tabram's death look like the hands of another and not a ripper for sure, people will and do act differently in the company of others. the only type of MO which could include Tabram is Location, a knife was used, and the fact that she was a part-time prostitute, flimsy indeed. it is theory i grant you, but not impossible. that's perhaps why experts say that Tabram wasn't a ripper victim, which is understandable, but from the primative side and actions of a budding serial killer some may think that either a scavenger theory is possible, or a 2 man attack was possible, that's why they wouldn't rule Tabram out. I'm just saying it is possible and for JTR to be at the scene of Tabram, i would more likely plug that a stab to the neck has more of a possibility in that theory than just say a cut to the abdomen and the heart alone, therefore 2 men at the same time to have been present, as a coincidence. It did strike me that the guy that has the same description of being last seen with Eddowes could be the same man that attacked Ada, the guy that attacked Ada struck me as being a gang member. Theory i grant you of 2 men at the same time with Tabram, but how many women were stabbed in the throat? ( as with Ada). Tabram does not appear to have the signs of strangulation, her face could have been naturally plump as the rest of her body, but a blow to the head may well have been a part of a clumsy chokehold. It is hard to determine who may have done what from a scavenger theory to a happenstance of 2 men present at Tabram's attack.


But overall Tabram does not not appear as the fully fledged Ripper attack as some of the canocials. But for theory sake, that can be hidden by another man at the scene, and placed together in the same attack.

All the Best Michael

Shelley

[Shelley]

And i do stress that acting differentley in the company of another as regarding 2 men present at the scene at the same time.

All the Best
Michael

[Shelley]

Michael, Fisherman,
What should be looked at throughly is the pattern of wounding on Tabram to hold a possible 2 man with 2 weapon theory, or even Fisherman's scavenger theory ( as he would be alone and not act differently at the presence of another man). As any weapons such as a knife or even a bullet can act oddly and deflect off bone, the pattern to look for is how the knife was used on Tabram, was the knife held in a manner that would go upwards? or downwards? Then you can begin to surmise that the cut to the abdomen area which Fisherman suggests as 1 of the wounds to Tabram being delivered by JTR was a logical assumption for scavenger or 2 man possibility, and not one that slipped from the sternum bone to the way the knife was weilded by the attacker.

This is why i doubt Tabram was a Ripper victim. Just leaving info that's all.

All the Best
Bye
Shelley

[Archaic]

Hi, I have a question about Bayonets. I don't happen to believe that a soldier killed Martha, but I am confused as to why any off-duty soldier would be wandering around Whitechapel late at night with a Bayonet... He didn't have his Rifle too, did he? I understand soldiers wore certain gear on holidays, but I would think that at the end of the day, if he had been "on duty" he would have to report back to his post before going officially "off duty", and at that time he would turn in his Rifle, Bayonet, & any other such equipment.

So why would an off-duty soldier out for an evening of drinking & whoring be carrying his Bayonet? If he set out with the INTENTION to commit Murder, wouldn't it be dumb to carry around & then use use a big awkward hand-held bayonet? Wouldn't it be extremely visible & noticeable to potential witnesses, even if it was on his belt?

If the Bayonet was carefully concealed somehow on his person, why not simply carry a lighter, sleeker & more useful weapon instead? -THANKS!

[Chava]

Hi, I have a question about Bayonets. I don't happen to believe that a soldier killed Martha, but I am confused as to why any off-duty soldier would be wandering around Whitechapel late at night with a Bayonet... He didn't have his Rifle too, did he? I understand soldiers wore certain gear on holidays, but I would think that at the end of the day, if he had been "on duty" he would have to report back to his post before going officially "off duty", and at that time he would turn in his Rifle, Bayonet, & any other such equipment.

So why would an off-duty soldier out for an evening of drinking & whoring be carrying his Bayonet? If he set out with the INTENTION to commit Murder, wouldn't it be dumb to carry around & then use use a big awkward hand-held bayonet? Wouldn't it be extremely visible & noticeable to potential witnesses, even if it was on his belt?

If the Bayonet was carefully concealed somehow on his person, why not simply carry a lighter, sleeker & more useful weapon instead? -THANKS!

Yes, well, that's always been my question as well. Even though those soldiers might have been parading around in their dress uniforms, I think it's beyond unlikely that they would have taken their weapons out for a night on the town. I imagine such behaviour was prohibited for the obvious reason that a soldier getting into a drunken brawl and having his bayonet handy could cause a frightening amount of damage in a very short time.

I think the bayonet idea only came about after witness testimony had Tabram with a soldier earlier in the evening.

[DVV]

I imagine such behaviour was prohibited for the obvious reason that a soldier getting into a drunken brawl and having his bayonet handy could cause a frightening amount of damage in a very short time.

Hi Chava,

I thought that on a bank holiday, soldiers were allowed to fight with their bayonets, while ordinary drunkards would be free to respond with some sort of dagger.

Amitiés,
David