Ripper Victim?

[Sam Flynn]

According to Philip Hutchinson, who recently gained some more information about this picture, that is NOT from the inside of George Yard Buildings, although it was assumed as such for a long time.

Is it not inconceivable that it may have been taken on the inside of one of the houses in Hanbury Street, if not number 29?

[Glenn Lauritz Andersson]

Hi Sam,

Well, it could be of course, although hardly number 29 since I feel it doesn't fit in well in style with the interior photo of the corridor and the stairs, which can be seen in Philip's and Robs book.

All the best

[Fisherman]

Why am I not surprised...? It did seem a bit too good to be true. Thanks for sharing.
Maybe the good mr Hutchinson could fill in the details here...? Just to make sure?

Fisherman

[paul emmett]

"The lower portion of the body was penetrated in one place, the wound being three inches in length and one in depth. From appearances, there was no reason to suppose that recent intimacy had taken place." EAST LONDON OBSERVER quoting Killeen.

Hello.

This pony is going to run through his trick one more time--because I think it's important.
This quote says "lower portion of the body," not "lower abdomen." Isn't this just Killeen's way of saying vagina? He does move right on to intimacy. Just like Sugden elides to go right to the great deal of blood between her spread legs. If it does say vagina, then that seems to be doubly significant. On one hand, if the rip(3"x2") is vaginal, then it seems more like early JTR, ripping the feminine, and it seems a precursor to the single stab on Eddowes's left pubes. On the other hand, if there is one--different kind of wound--on the lower body, that seems to fit in with the unique wounds pattern: one that might be left handed and one with a different weapon. And THIS would point to two killers.

Back to the carnival.

[Fisherman]

Hi Paul!

Killeen speaks of four areas that to him seemed to have been targetted by the killer: the breasts, the stomach, the abdomen and the vagina. As for the abdomen, there was the cut to it, explaning why Killeen chose that area as one of the four. But if the abdominal cut was what prompted Killeen to speak of an interest in the addominal area - and we have no mentioning of any other cut or stab going into this particular area - then there must be another explanation for Killeens assertion that the vagina area was ALSO targetted. And there are pointings out in the newspapers that there were stabs to her private parts. So no, I don´t think that "lower portion of the body" is Killeens way of saying vagina. There were other ways to go about it, if subtlety of the language was called for, I think.

As for "the rip", it was not 3x2 - it was 3x1. And no matter if it was placed some distance from the vagina, I think that if it was on the lower abdomen, it could and should be spoken of as ripping the feminine.

As for your sentence on fitting in with the unique wounds pattern, a different kind of wound/weapon and a possibly left-handed killer, I am at a loss. I really don´t understand what you are after here, Paul, perhaps owing to my language. I speak Swedish normally, and maybe I am not picking up on something that I should have picked up on here?

The best,
Fisherman

[Septic Blue]

As far as I recall, George Yard Buildings had once been a weaver's factory, and was not originally built as a model dwelling. Doesn't mean that the landing couldn't have been small, of course, but just something to consider.

"... George Yard Buildings had once been a weaver's factory, and was not originally built as a model dwelling."

Hi Glenn,

I've heard that many times, myself. But I'm afraid that it's just another snippet of conventional wisdom that stands little chance of being accurate.


1873 OS
Red w/ Gold Outline: Future site of George Yard Buildings, on what was denoted as being a "Timber Yard"

George Yard Buildings had yet to be built, in 1873 !!!


Map used in 1876, by The Whitechapel District of The Metropolitan Board of Works, for the development of "The Flower & Dean Street Improvement Plan"
Red w/ Gold Outline: George Yard Buildings, denoted as being a "Model Lodging House"

George Yard Buildings were functioning as a "Model Lodging House", by 1876 !!!

According to Philip Hutchinson, who recently gained some more information about this picture, that is NOT from the inside of George Yard Buildings, although it was assumed as such for a long time.

Why am I not surprised...? It did seem a bit too good to be true. Thanks for sharing.
Maybe the good mr Hutchinson could fill in the details here...? Just to make sure?

From "The East End, Then and Now" by Winston G. Ramsey
circa 1972

The boy is presumably Ramsey's son, as he appears in a handful of other photos in the book; not least, a photo of Buck's Row.

Philip and Rob are rarely seen venturing into this particular type of thread, so a reply from either of them is not likely to be forthcoming.

Rob contacted Winston Ramsey, when he and Philip were compiling their book. Ramsey kindly forwarded Rob some other photos (featuring the same boy), which he had taken in and around GYB, as well as St. George House (?); another complex of "model dwellings" immediately to the south.

After comparison, Rob concluded that this particular photo was probably taken in St. George House (?).

In any case, it, like the photos we have all seen of 108-119 Goulston Street, should serve as a strong indication that the stairways found in late Victorian "model dwellings" were typically quite narrow.


Colin

[paul emmett]

Killeen speaks of four areas that to him seemed to have been targetted by the killer: the breasts, the stomach, the abdomen and the vagina. As for the abdomen, there was the cut to it, explaning why Killeen chose that area as one of the four. But if the abdominal cut was what prompted Killeen to speak of an interest in the addominal area - and we have no mentioning of any other cut or stab going into this particular area - then there must be another explanation for Killeens assertion that the vagina area was ALSO targetted. And there are pointings out in the newspapers that there were stabs to her private parts. So no, I don´t think that "lower portion of the body" is Killeens way of saying vagina. There were other ways to go about it, if subtlety of the language was called for, I think.

Hello, Fisherman.

The 3x2 was just my typo. Sorry. But in the above quote, I haven't found the papers that said stabS to private parts yet. Swanson said, she had been stabbed " body, neck, and privates parts with a knife or dagger." Police Files say, "twenty wounds on breast, stomach and abdomen apparently inflicted with a penknife." So I just wasn't sure where the single 3x1 rip was. Kileen says "lower body," and I imagine you are right about that being lower abdomen. It is vexing, though.

Regarding the unique wound pattern thing, I was just saying that one wound made by a differnt weapon makes me think there might be 2 killers. As does the fact that K. says one wound might have been made by a left handed person. As does ONE 3x1 rip. So I thought if this was the ONLY wound to the vagina, that would have been even more telling, even more suggestive of one person avoiding "lower body" and one not.

Paul

[Glenn Lauritz Andersson]

Hi Colin,

Regarding George Yard Buildings, I have to say that was very interesting information. It just proves that one can't rely on sources one thought to be reliable and accurate. So interesting information indeed and thanks for clarifying it.
I have to admit I did find that bit about weaver's factory a bit confusing in the first place since - possibly apart from the entrance - it doesn't look like anything of the sort.
At least now we know.

As for the interior shot from Winston Ramsey, thanks for clarifying that too. When I talked to Philip at the conference, he was quite sure that it wasn't from the inside of George Yard Buildings and therefore adviced against me using it in my book for that context. And it seems he was right.

I have to say, it looks remarkably like Wenthworth Dwellings; if one look at the well known interior shot from that entrance and especially notes the pillar and the stairs, it looks almost similar in style, width and other details. So obviously it is some kind of building built according to the same standards.
If the George Yard Buildings looked anything like this, however, we can only speculate.
Personally, although I agree the stairs and the space on the landing is narrow, I can't exclude the possibility that two men besides the victim could be there. And who knows, maybe one of them remained on the stairs for the most part. So nothing can be ruled out. In any case, I don't see the argument regarding the space on the landing as especially important.

Thanks again. An interesting post as always.

All the best

[Fisherman]

Glenn writes:
"Thanks again. An interesting post as always"

Seconded! Though it would be nice to some time hear a "Why, yes, that IS Jack on that picture...!"

As for the size of the landings in the George Yard, I still find it odd that Crowe could have passed a woman, flat on her back, bleeding profusely, without realizing what he saw, if there was not some distance between him and the body. If it was crammed à la Wentworth´s, he ought to have tripped over her.
Also, the rumour that this landing attracted people sleeping rough, seems odd. Couldn´t have been much slept, with people trodding in your face throughout the night.
That said, Colins suggestion seems a reasonable one; they would not have fashioned George Yard like Buckingham Palace, would they? Strange!

The best!
Fisherman

[Fisherman]

Hi Paul!

I may have jumped the gun on the newspaper part. I know that some newspaper described the wounds as "one over her heart, and others of a nature too revolting to name", but I cannot find the source at the moment.
Then again, the newspapers serve a mixed buffet, the Star, I think, describing the wounds to the chest as representing a circular form...

Much as I see the logic of throwing forward a possible scenario of two men involved, I have never bought into it. Left-handed or right-handed was something that more than Killeen had trouble with, and I am having trouble accepting somebody adding just the occasional stab to 37 or 38 made by somebody else. I also find the evinced silence even stranger with two men involved, than I do with just the one.

The best!
Fisherman

[Glenn Lauritz Andersson]

As for the size of the landings in the George Yard, I still find it odd that Crowe could have passed a woman, flat on her back, bleeding profusely, without realizing what he saw, if there was not some distance between him and the body. If it was crammed à la Wentworth´s, he ought to have tripped over her.
Also, the rumour that this landing attracted people sleeping rough, seems odd. Couldn´t have been much slept, with people trodding in your face throughout the night.

Well, when Crow went on his way to work and passed the body it was 3.30 am so no doubt it must have been quite dark, and we shouldn't expect the stairs to be lit up like in modern storeys. No doubt he didn't see the blood and thus made the conclusion that it was yet another person who slept rough on the landing since it had happened before.

Why John Saunders Reeves, who discovered the corpse, almost tripped over the body while Crow didn't is of course one of many mysteries but I wouldn't loose too much sleep over it. Maybe Reeves simply walked on a different spot (walking closer to the wall - if that is where Tabram's body was positioned - while Crow for example might have been following the edge of the stairs or the railing). Even if the landing wasn't the size of Los Angeles Airport, we don't know exactly where Tabram was lying. So there could be several explanations.

Again, without any reliable and more exact measurments, and no crime sketches of the murder scene, we are pretty much left in the dark here and subjected to guesswork.

All the best

[Glenn Lauritz Andersson]

I also find the evinced silence even stranger with two men involved, than I do with just the one.

Personally, I don't see why one would expect the perpetrator(s) to be noisy. Surely this would rather be expected from the victim - at least until she passed out (if she did). Why does everyone expect murderers to sound like Sylvester Stallone?

The silence would actually make sense if the perpetrator silenced her by covering her mouth while stabbing her (if they were two collaborating one could do this while the other one used the knife, and maybe then the first guy added the last larger wound with his weapon after the other guy had stbbed her 38 times). I am not saying this is what happened, just playing with possible scenarios.
Now, if the last wound wasn't done with the same weapon as the other 38 (which we can't say for sure either way), then I definitely find it more credible with two offenders than one offender changing weapon, unless he broke his knife while doing the 38 stabs and had to swap to anohter one. But that's just me.

All the best

[Fisherman]

Glenn writes:

"Personally, I don't see why one would expect the perpetrator(s) to be noisy. Surely this would rather be expected from the victim - at least until she passed out (if she did). Why does everyone expect murderers to sound like Sylvester Stallone?

The silence would actually make sense if the perpetrator silenced her by covering her mouth while stabbing her (if they were two collaborating one could do this while the other one used the knife, and maybe then the first guy added the last larger wound with his weapon after the other guy had stbbed her 38 times). I am not saying this is what happened, just playing with possible scenarios.
Now, if the last wound wasn't done with the same weapon as the other 38 (which we can't say for sure either way), then I definitely find it more credible with two offenders than one offender changing weapon, unless he broke his knife while doing the 38 stabs and had to swap to anohter one. But that's just me."

Well argued, Glenn, as expected.
The reason I would expect more noise from two killers than from one, is partially statistical: with every extra perpetrator you bring on the scene, the chance of somebody making a sound grows.
But that is just part of it.Something that interests me more is the rage/no rage issue. I know that you - and probably most people - subscribe to rage being what caused Tabrams death. I have another view, as you know.
And the difference inbetween us here, of course applies to a significant extent to the question of how much sound there was from the landing as Tabram received her wounds. I think most people would have to admit that an enraged killer is less likely to be a silent one, than a cool, composed, calculating one. And if we add another killer to the rage scenario, well it won´t do the neighbours who beg for silence a bit of good, will it?

Of course they could have been two, and of course they could have silenced Tabram before they stabbed her. It´s just that I find it less likely, much owing to the fact that I do not see the stabbings as a randomly dealt shower of wounds. I opt for a scenario with a killer whose aim went beyond the slaying, who targetted specific areas and parts, and who took his time with the knife. I also recognize the abdominal wound as a very feasible sign of interest in the organs hidden by the abdominal wall. If there had to be a three-by-one inches wound to her body somewhere, I think that it is utterly remarkable to find that wound ending up on the EXACT spot of focus for Jack. Far too much of a coincidence to my taste.
There are of course also snippets like the one I mentioned in my post to Paul Emmett; the Star´s assertion that the wounds in the chest area formed a cirkle. STOP IT, GLENN; before you tell me that newspapers are not always to be trusted, I will say that I am pretty much aware of it - but this assertion, true or not, at least reinforces what was said about Tabram: that her death was perhaps the foulest one of all known deaths recorded in the East end until Nichols came along. There is an underlying current, telling us that we may not be dealing with the ordinary madman deed here - for there would have been a fait share of those - but something quite different and more chilling. And that could have involved the circular stabbing, just as it may have been an invention of the Stars. Either way, it tallies with the sentiment of an extremely gruesome death and an extremely gruesome killer, I feel.
Which brings us to the point where i cut and paste from your post, Glenn: "But that´s just me."

The very best!
Fisherman

[Glenn Lauritz Andersson]

Hello, Fisherman old friend,

And the difference inbetween us here, of course applies to a significant extent to the question of how much sound there was from the landing as Tabram received her wounds. I think most people would have to admit that an enraged killer is less likely to be a silent one, than a cool, composed, calculating one.

Not necessarily. This is a common misconception, and I have found little evidence of larger amount of 'noise' related to such cases than others.

And if we add another killer to the rage scenario, well it won´t do the neighbours who beg for silence a bit of good, will it?

Quite possibly, but again - not necessarily.

Of course they could have been two, and of course they could have silenced Tabram before they stabbed her. It´s just that I find it less likely, much owing to the fact that I do not see the stabbings as a randomly dealt shower of wounds. I opt for a scenario with a killer whose aim went beyond the slaying, who targetted specific areas and parts, and who took his time with the knife.

Well, I am afraid that is you reading to many patterns into it where there are none. It was a multiple stabbing, and multiple stabbings are generally triggered by rage or sexual frenzy, and they are definitely not a result of someone 'taking his time with the knife'.
The thought is to me personally quite absurd, nor do I see any compelling evidence of it in Killeen's notes. Tabram was stabbed 38 times besdies that larger wound (which most likely wasn't a rip, although some people seem compelled to make it into one), and there were a number of stabs on every vital organ and probably on the rest of the upper body that weren't accounted for. To seek a pattern in those wound is one of those examples of 'fit facts into theory' attempts that I think we should apply with caution.

There are of course also snippets like the one I mentioned in my post to Paul Emmett; the Star´s assertion that the wounds in the chest area formed a cirkle. STOP IT, GLENN; before you tell me that newspapers are not always to be trusted.

Well, you did beat me to it.
And guess which paper it is - The Star, one of the worst ones.
Of course it is rubbish. A newspaper elaboration without any factual foundation.

All the best

[perrymason]

Hello all,

On a different vein here...pardon the pun....Ive just posted this thought on another thread that relates to perhaps looking at the pattern, rather than the specific wounds when it comes to Martha inclusion.

All Ripper kills are before the 10th of the month, or at months end, on weekends or days that are attached to Holidays.

Martha is killed Bank Holiday Monday, Aug 7th. Shes the only other potential Ripper kill that actually fits the pattern of dates and days.

Ive stated that I feel comfortable concluding that either 1 or 2 soldiers done 'er in, but I do wonder sometimes.

My best regards all.