Why NOT??

[robhouse]

It is also overlooked how this wound is very similar to the one or two cuts to Polly Nichols lower "lower abdomen".

Yes, another similarity is that Nichols had “tw[o] small stabs on private parts.”

RH

[Stewart P Evans]

Thirty Nine Stabs

Yes, another similarity is that Nichols had “tw[o] small stabs on private parts.”
RH

With thirty nine stabs inflicted one or two were bound to be in the 'right' place! What about the dissimilarity of the other thirty seven stabs?

[protohistorian]

I agree. 5% of wounds is not sufficient for speculating on perpetrator. Dave

[Stewart P Evans]

Opinion

This whole debate boils down to opinion. And opinions are bound to differ. They are also influenced by personal preferences as to suspects and theories. Another influence is that of wanting to boost the Ripper's tally, rather than reduce it.

This has to be looked at objectively and all the facts, such as they are, carefully weighed and balanced. In my humble opinion the factors tending to suggest a soldier as the offender outweigh those suggesting it may have been a Ripper killing. But there is no definite answer and, as always, an open mind should be kept. Personally I have no agenda, no preference, and it would matter not to me should some fact emerge that tilted the balance the other way.

[robhouse]

Hello Stewart,

I think you misunderstood... I was referring to two stab wounds on Nichols, not Tabram. It is often pointed out that the character of "stab" wounds in the Tabram murder is different from the Ripper's later style. But my point was that Nichols (not Tabram) had two stab wounds in the "private part." This, in my mind, suggests a similarity with Tabram who had stab wounds all over the place, and only one wound that was described as a cut "in the lower portion of the body."

I am not sure if anyone has ever been able to come up with a totally accurate description of Tabram's wounds. It does seem that she was stabbed all over... 21 stab in tthat punctured various organs, 9 stabs (I think?) in the neck. This obviously does not account for the 39 stabs. Possibly some of the remaining stabs were in the legs, but I am not sure if that is clear. I also do not necessarily think that the 21 wounds that pierced the various organs, actually account for all the stabs the torso. Presumably, some of these stabs in the torso or abdomen may not have hit any organs at all. In any case, it seems clear from reading the accounts of the inquest that the papers omitted the most obscene details of Killeen's testimony... which is presumably that the one 3-inch long cut was in the private parts. (Hence the coroner thanking Killeen "for the very careful way in which he had given his testimony." I do not know if I agree that this one particular wound was just random accident. It is the only wound that was not described as a simple stab or puncture wound. And if it was indeed in the genital area, I think that would be significant in assessing Tabram as a potential Ripper victim.

Rob

[robhouse]

By the way Stewart... I do agree that this is all just opinion. Tabram is a good example of one aspect of the case that is more open to opinion than others. I do lean toward feeling Tabram was a Ripper victim. The main reason I think this is because I would expect to see some early trial and error as part of the evolution process in the series. Of course, the series is shorter, time-wise, than other serial killer murder series that show an evolution in technique.

Still, if you look at early attacks by other serial killers, they are often clumsier and less focused...

Rob

[harry]

There cannot be,in my opinion,objections to presence of soldiers at the time stated.It would be however, a strong possibility, that those soldiers were technically absent without leave,unless on special pass.In both cases,it would be almost impossible to avoid their absence from barracks being known.So when the identification parade took place,all absentees would have been known to the military,but not necessarilly to the police.
No commanding officer will countenence murder,whatever the status of the murdered person,and such persons as I have mentioned would have received a severe grilling.There would have been no right to silence.As nothing obviously came to light,I am pretty sure the soldiers had nothing to do with Tabram's killing.

[FrankO]

Hi all,

In my opinion there are points for and pionts against Tabram being a Ripper victim.

Against:
As Stewart already more or less stated: the term ‘soldier’ crops up relatively often in this case.

Dr Killeen testimony suggests that 2 weapons were used.

For:
Nine wounds out of 39 (ca. 23%) were inflicted on the throat, which is relatively quite a small area compared to the part of the body where the rest of the known stabs landed. So, even though Tabram’s killer didn’t cut her throat, he does seem to have had something with it.

There’s seems to be only one cut, 3 inches long, in the area that the Ripper also showed interest in. Compared to the 38 stabs, this seems to have been a deliberately inflicted wound, the more so because it wasn’t near any of the others.

Even though Tabram may have lifted her skirts and spread her legs herself so that she and her punter could have sex, there’s also a good chance that her killer deliberately lifted the skirts and spread her legs, after which he inflicted that 3 inch cut. After all, the 3 inch cut does seem deliberate.

My opinion is that, if the Ripper did for Tabram, he didn’t actually go out with murder on his mind on the night Tabram was killed, which is what I do believe he did on the nights of the following murders. If he killed Tabram, I believe he hadn’t thought of actually acting out his fantasies yet, and killed her in the spur of the moment because she made him explode into fierce anger only on that landing. That would be why Tabram’s murder doesn’t seem as calculated as the following murders.

It doesn’t seem to be uncommon for serial killers to start off with an ‘accidental’ kill that doesn’t look all that much like there later murders and murder scenes.

However, I must admit that the wound to the sternum and the implication of soldiers makes me doubt that Tabram was a Ripper victim. But even then, this murder may well have been a trigger for the Ripper. Hearing and perhaps reading about this killing may have put him on the track of finally going over the edge and start acting out his fantasies.

All the best,
Frank

[protohistorian]

I think maybe the question should be why. Tabram shares contextual elements like time of day, date of event, and geography, but shares no Tabram specific characteristics of the defined grouping. I will be the first to admit the grouping is likely wrong, but that places in the position of redefining the grouping over a contemporary expert, a position we have no data to assert from. Dave

[miss marple]

Interesting discussion. I think Harry has the nail on the head. The problem with the soldier theory is that any bloody drunken soldier who had committed murder would have been discovered by the authorities, whether he was absent without leave, or came back in a distressed and bloody state.
Just speculating,so soldiers wear noisy boots.Living in a terraced house opposite a backstreet pub until recently, the sounds of noisy footwear on the pavement is intensely loud,echoing up the the first floor, also the stupid, loud drunken arguments that people engage in outside the pub can be heard halfway down the street, some drunks may be quiet if they are on their own, but how many drunks stay quiet when engaged in social or sexual or violent intercourse with a woman?
Did soldiers on leave carry weapons?
Being the night of the bank holiday jack may half taken advantage of increased prostitute activity[ he did seem to favour holidays and weekends] Perhaps he had seen her go into George yard, perhaps he had seen a punter leave, and speculatively crept up on her in his quiet footwear, stabbing her before she had a chance to get away.
So Stewart is not convinced by profiling, yet profiling is one of the reasons the ripper case is so fascinating. If we think of him as the first modern serial killer, that is someone who murdered not for material gain, or revenge, or to conceal, but to murder without motive for the enjoyment of the act, that brings into play all kinds of speculation about his state of mind.
Miss Marple

[Fisherman]

Some sound reasoning going on here. Just like miss Marple, I find Harrys suggestion intriguing, and something I have not given much thought before - of course soldiers were very strictly monitored.
I have no objections to Miss Marples scenario either, with a Ripper that follow a prostitute and a punter - that may well be something that may have happened. But I would like to add that if he "speculatively crept up on her in his quiet footwear, stabbing her before she had a chance to get away", it would seem that he swopped weapons after some time. I believe that speaks very much of a possibility that there were TWO men with knives involved in Tabram´s death.
As has been mentioned before on the thread, the cut to the lower abdomen/private parts is something that must be weighed in, and when I do the weighing, the scales tip over in favour of a Ripper deed, not least because it seems that this cut was performed in an area that was not targetted by the stabber, for he concentrated on the upper body as signs will have it. Jon Guy points this out, I believe, and rightly so.

The best,
Fisherman

[Hunter]

As has been mentioned before on the thread, the cut to the lower abdomen/private parts is something that must be weighed in, and when I do the weighing, the scales tip over in favour of a Ripper deed, not least because it seems that this cut was performed in an area that was not targetted by the stabber, for he concentrated on the upper body as signs will have it. Jon Guy points this out, I believe, and rightly so.

The best,
Fisherman

Indeed, Fish.

One could surmise continual stabbing in a vital region - even to the extent of overkill - but the genital area is very different and would suggest a different motive.

[Fisherman]

Hunter:

"One could surmise continual stabbing in a vital region - even to the extent of overkill - but the genital area is very different and would suggest a different motive."

Exactly. Which is why we seem to be dealing with two different mindsets as well as with two different blades. Of course, it can be suggested that a guy who sets out stabbing in a frenzy may calm down, and subsequentially move from that frenzy to a more exploratory phaze, involving perhaps the coup de grace to the heart and the cut to the lower abdomen - but when we realize that this sudden change of mindset was accompanied by a decision to use another knife ..?
Two men with different focuses and blades is the easiest way to deal with this, I think, however coincidental it may sound.

The best,
Fisherman

[Stewart P Evans]

Soldiers

There cannot be,in my opinion,objections to presence of soldiers at the time stated.It would be however, a strong possibility, that those soldiers were technically absent without leave,unless on special pass.In both cases,it would be almost impossible to avoid their absence from barracks being known.So when the identification parade took place,all absentees would have been known to the military,but not necessarilly to the police.
No commanding officer will countenence murder,whatever the status of the murdered person,and such persons as I have mentioned would have received a severe grilling.There would have been no right to silence.As nothing obviously came to light,I am pretty sure the soldiers had nothing to do with Tabram's killing.

The fact that there were many soldiers out either on leave or absent without leave that night cannot be disputed. It is also patently obvious that it was very difficult to monitor these men and establish their whereabouts despite the fact that there were signing in and out books (these could be 'fiddled' anyway).

The detailed police reports show that the main thrust of the investigation was to trace the soldiers involved in both the Connelly statement and that supplied by PC Barrett. The attempted identifications failed. This was a police murder enquiry and it was not down to a commanding officer to 'grill' the suspects but for the police to do so and to try and identify them, which they did. A report by Swanson summed up the police enquiries (MEPO 3/140 ff. 37-42). Part of this report may be seen below and it cannot be denied that soldiers were the main suspects in this investigation.







Now, whether or not a soldier was the culprit we shall never know for sure, but this was the direction the investigation took. Subsequent police opinion did differ as to whether this was the first of the series although, as we have seen, Macnaghten rejected that idea.

[Stewart P Evans]

Stabs

Hello Stewart,
I think you misunderstood... I was referring to two stab wounds on Nichols, not Tabram. It is often pointed out that the character of "stab" wounds in the Tabram murder is different from the Ripper's later style. But my point was that Nichols (not Tabram) had two stab wounds in the "private part." This, in my mind, suggests a similarity with Tabram who had stab wounds all over the place, and only one wound that was described as a cut "in the lower portion of the body."
I am not sure if anyone has ever been able to come up with a totally accurate description of Tabram's wounds. It does seem that she was stabbed all over... 21 stab in tthat punctured various organs, 9 stabs (I think?) in the neck. This obviously does not account for the 39 stabs. Possibly some of the remaining stabs were in the legs, but I am not sure if that is clear. I also do not necessarily think that the 21 wounds that pierced the various organs, actually account for all the stabs the torso. Presumably, some of these stabs in the torso or abdomen may not have hit any organs at all. In any case, it seems clear from reading the accounts of the inquest that the papers omitted the most obscene details of Killeen's testimony... which is presumably that the one 3-inch long cut was in the private parts. (Hence the coroner thanking Killeen "for the very careful way in which he had given his testimony." I do not know if I agree that this one particular wound was just random accident. It is the only wound that was not described as a simple stab or puncture wound. And if it was indeed in the genital area, I think that would be significant in assessing Tabram as a potential Ripper victim.
Rob

I didn't 'misunderstand' anything and I realise where you are 'coming from.'

The most likely reason for inflicting thirty nine stabs is a frenzied, possibly drink-fuelled rage, attack. The fact that the shallower wounds were not sufficient to kill could indicate that the final stab, with the strong-bladed weapon, was the killing strike in order to finish her off (after the rage attack inflicted with the first knife that had sprung to hand, I have argued this before). This scenario is, of course, also speculation and opinion. It has to be as the offender was not arrested and the motive was not established.

Needless to say all the arguments we are hearing here are old hat and have been proposed many times in the past. Indeed the idea of the 'one cut', i.e. it was a 'cut' and not a stab was first found, seriously proposed, and argued by Jon Ogan back in the mid-1990s, a while before you came on the scene. But the obvious counter to that is that it wasn't a deliberate cut, merely a dragging of the knife in the stab wound when it was extracted, thus lengthening the wound slightly.