An emerging pattern?

[SarahLee]

You're far too kind Dave - and I shall ponder your opinions when my head's a bit clearer than tonight (got a stinking cold )

Maybe inviting "ripping into" my musings was a little harsh, but I'm honest enough to say that well thought out doesn't equate to right and I've been around forums long enough to know that new posters can easily open old cans of worms even if it's unintentional.

The way I look at it, harsh challenges will either lead me to form a new and better informed conclusion or if they don't sway me, at least I'll know that I'm comfortable in my own thinking. And I'm big enough not to get offended by people taking issue with my thoughts.

p.s. I'll don my hard hat for the one knife / two knife controversy. That's just one of those cans of worms that I talked about new posters inadvertently re-opening

[Cogidubnus]

Hi Sarah

For what my opinion's worth (probably not a lot!) I think this is a very well thought out posting...

Subdue
I'd tend to agree with your conclusions, the minor bleeding from the scalp suggesting to me her head was banged either against a wall or the floor.

Dispatch
More difficult to assess, and be aware you're reopening the one knife/two knife controversy! Personally, without commenting either way on the number of blades, I'd go along with the way your footnote was shaping rather than the body of the thread...ie the wound through the breastbone being the coup de grace...I thought the article you linked to was fascinating and may go some way towards justifying some of Dr Killeen's views which have been criticised on these boards.

Mutilation
I'm prepared to keep an open mind on this...if one accepts that this case formed part of Jack's "apprenticeship", from which he (and his choice of weaponry) subsequently progressed, then yes maybe...however, it would appear that all the wounds are "stab" type wounds as opposed to the later incised wounds...progression in MO or different MO?

I don't think anybody can or should simply rip into your musings Sarah, although they will probably take issue with you over them!

All the best

Dave

[SarahLee]

I know I haven’t posted much over the last few weeks, but I’m still here, still reading and still trying to piece bits of the puzzle together.

Apart from dipping into the MJK story, due to an obvious interest in the Welsh connection, starting with the earliest killings and working forward seems to be as logical an approach as any – so here I am with Martha Tabram.

I’m sure that I’m treading a path many of you have been down already but please bear with me, while I try to put my thoughts in order. I’m not going to position this as anything as grand as a possible theory, rather a collection of my current thoughts and reasoning plus some uncertainties / unanswered questions.

It seems to me that there is a rather distinct pattern to each killing of :
- Subdue
- Dispatch
- Mutilate
And I’m wondering if what we see with MT, is this pattern starting to emerge.

Subdue
Well, it certainly seems that no witnesses heard anything which would lend weight to MT being subdued quickly and quietly with a minimum of fuss. Clearly, I’d prefer some evidence of strangulation here to be consistent with later killings (see my other thread), but in the absence of that I could persuade myself to go along with a blow to the head (effusion of blood between scalp and skull) as being an early manifestation of this. IMO, subduing and doing away with the victim are secondary to the main objective of abdominal mutilation and are merely the most efficient means to an end.

Dispatch
Most of what I’ve read about MT suggests that the one distinct wound through the sternum was the final killing stroke, but (and this is complete supposition on my part) could this wound have been made first? *
It would fit with the pattern established in later murders where the victim was killed prior to any mutilation taking place. In fact, if this proved an inefficient method it would make perfect sense for it to be adapted to throat cutting in later victims. It could also possibly explain the speculation about the two weapons. Would a stab through the sternum be sufficient to blunt, bend or otherwise damage a long blade? And if so, could this lead to our killer switching to another weapon – possibly a blade that Martha had on her person or another knife that he was carrying?

Mutilation
With MT we have the skirts pushed up giving access to the abdomen, as we see in later killings – and while we have stabbings rather than cutting and outright mutilation as we see later, it doesn’t take too much imagination to perceive this as a first experimental attempt. I know that this discussion has been done to death and I have absolutely nothing new to add to it. I did find a rather tantalising reference to an abdominal incision in this article http://inpursuitofjacktheripper.com/11.html but without finding a source and absolutely no corroboration, I’m afraid that I’ve dismissed it.

Anyway, I’ve probably rambled on more than enough - I’m completely open to any input, challenges or just plain ripping apart from those who have spent more time than me in researching this. Don't worry, I won't get all upset and storm off

*I suppose the main opposition to the puncture wound in the chest being the first injury is that the wound to the heart in itself was sufficient to be fatal and that the other wounds were thought to have been made while she was alive. However, I’m unclear in my reading of the facts whether these were indeed one and the same wound. Was there one wound that went through the sternum and punctured the heart or were these two separate wounds – one to the heart and one to the sternum? And even assuming that it was a single wound, although fatal I’m doubtful as to whether it would have resulted in instant death. I’m not a medical person, but after some searching, I've come across this rather interesting article regarding what happens with stab wounds to the heart http://smj.sma.org.sg/0702/0702smj9.pdf