Tabram Questions

[Tom_Wescott]

Hi Harry. Of course it's possible, but I don't know that it's likely. And to what medical condition are you referring? Her heart was a bit fatty, and her brain was pale (whatever that might mean), but otherwise Dr. Killeen found her and all her organs to be in remarkable health.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[SarahLee]

Wonder what characterizes "hysterical fits" ?

Hi Curious,

It's been a long time since I studied psychology, but iirc hysteria at that time was something of a catch-all for any aberrant physical or emotional behaviour that couldn't be attributed to a physical ailment. It was something of an upper class phenomena, so slightly odd that somebody of Martha's social standing would claim to be subject to "hysterical fits", but who knows where she may have picked the term up from.

Again working from memory, I think that 1880s would have been around the time that Freud was just starting to develop theories about suppressed memories etc being the root cause for this sort of ailment, prior to that these "women's illnesses" were thought to be linked to the libido or uterus. (in fact I think hysteria comes from the Latin for uterus)

Perhaps a bit of a stretch, but I wonder if suffering "hysterical fits" in the context of staying out all night under the influence of alcohol might be a coy way of suggesting that she'd been out looking for sex???

EDIT: Just checked in with Google and hysteria is from the Greek for Uterus not Latin - but hey, I was pretty close!!!

[caz]

I wonder if these hysterical fits were the equivalent of today's panic attacks. It could have been quite alarming for anyone in Tabram's company if she woke up with one in the middle of the night for instance. I believe they can come on quite suddenly and for no reason that would be apparent to anyone watching.

If this was something she genuinely suffered from, particularly when drinking, her killer may have been with her when she went into one, taken it personally and reacted with violence.

Having said that, the fact remains that Tabram was murdered on a Bank Holiday, just a few seconds' walk from where Smith claimed she was attacked on a previous Bank Holiday. I can't get the suspicion out of my head that the attacks were connected, and my current thinking is that one or two members of the same 'gang of three' (if Smith was telling the truth) could have been involved, with one going solo by the end of August.

A theme of 'let's stick it to a whore tonight' suggests itself, with a ringleader who went on to take it to extremes.

Love,

Caz
X

[The Good Michael]

I can't get the suspicion out of my head that the attacks were connected, and my current thinking is that one or two members of the same 'gang of three' (if Smith was telling the truth) could have been involved, with one going solo by the end of August.

Caz,

Kind of interesting. One going rogue and the others not talking because how would you do that without incriminating yourself? If it's a soldier angle, we could have two being shipped out and the 3rd being found unfit for duty.

Mike

[caz]

Hi GM,

Yes, a possibility. It's the lack of any credible motive that gets me every time, with all the Whitechapel victims. What was to gain from attacking such downtrodden women in the first place, apart from a very temporary feeling of euphoria from having the upper hand - strong versus weak, the power over life and death?

I also think alcohol would have played its part on any such Bank Holiday 'jollies', fuelling the violence and removing inhibitions from our fledgling mutilator and any sidekicks.

Love,

Caz
X

[Trevor Marriott]

Hi Caz

I trust you are well

Hi GM,

Yes, a possibility. It's the lack of any credible motive that gets me every time, with all the Whitechapel victims. What was to gain from attacking such downtrodden women in the first place, apart from a very temporary feeling of euphoria from having the upper hand - strong versus weak, the power over life and death?

Nothing to gain they were vulnerable persons, stiill the same today by reason of their occupations they have to put themslelves in unsafe situations to try to earn money

You only have to look back in time at many of the renown serial killers many targeted downtrodden prostitutes

I also think alcohol would have played its part on any such Bank Holiday 'jollies', fuelling the violence and removing inhibitions from our fledgling mutilator and any sidekicks.

Love,

Caz
X

[Michael W Richards]

Hello all,

If the assumption is that the womens occupation, lifestyle or circumstances were the selection criteria for the killer or killers, what effect would victims that may not fit those categorizations have on the assumptive Canonical Group theory? If they werent soliciting, drunk or without ability or means to secure a bed for the night when they were killed.

I believe the pro-Canonical arguments would then suggest that the killer mistook them for downtrodden women, or prostitutes. Which raises another germane point...if a woman sells herself once, or twice, or a handful of times over the span of her adult life, can she fairly be referred to as a prostitute? Or someone that had to resort to desperate measures occasionally?

Seems to me thats where the term Unfortunate fits. And at least 1 Canonical was'nt obviously soliciting, wasnt drunk, and had sufficient doss coinage when she left her lodgings for the night to secure a bed. Another one didnt need to solicit to stay indoors and warm when she was killed.

So....Is it any woman on the street after midnight that he chooses, or just the ones that lead him into dark places where he can strike? Because women who werent soliciting werent likely to take strange men into the dark corners.

Best regards,

Mike R

[Jon Guy]

Hello all,

If the assumption is that the womens occupation, lifestyle or circumstances were the selection criteria for the killer or killers, what effect would victims that may not fit those categorizations have on the assumptive Canonical Group theory?

What`s the assumptive Canonical theory?

What`s with your obsession with the Canonical?
The only person talking about the canonicals is you ?

[caz]

Hi Trevor,

Don't faint - I agree with you!

So....Is it any woman on the street after midnight that he chooses, or just the ones that lead him into dark places where he can strike? Because women who werent soliciting werent likely to take strange men into the dark corners.

We meet again, perry mason.

I suspect it's as you say, and mainly those who led him into dark places where he could strike - because, as you also say, women who weren't soliciting (or at least desperate for drink or doss money) were hardly likely to take, or go with strange men anywhere - particularly after news of Tabram's rare and horrific murder broke.

I rather think that Liz Stride's killer may have assumed too much about what she was willing to do, but that's for another thread.

Love,

Caz
X

[Wickerman]

So....Is it any woman on the street after midnight that he chooses, or just the ones that lead him into dark places where he can strike? Because women who werent soliciting werent likely to take strange men into the dark corners.

What we don't know is how many nights a week did this killer stalk the streets?, and how many women did he pick-up, only to turn away for whatever reason. We cannot assume the common victims we have all come to know so well were his first and only choices on those nights.

Given what we don't know it makes it difficult to judge one way or the other.

Regards, Jon S.

[Michael W Richards]

What`s the assumptive Canonical theory?

What`s with your obsession with the Canonical?
The only person talking about the canonicals is you ?

Hi Jon,

Its merely that Im one of the few that refers to the Canonical Group as a theory, not as fact. If there was no "series" as has been theorized by contemporary and modern investigators then there was no single killer of the 5, therefore the motives for some murders may be other than madness.

Hi Caz,

Our first exchange for some time and I think it went pretty well.


Best regards,

Mike R

[Hunter]

Good post, Jon.

What we are left with are the results of the murders and a bit of the antecedents of the victims leading up to the times that they met their fate. We have nothing pertaining to the time that each murder took place; that most critical of evidence.

But if we had that, it probably would have been solved at the time.

And thus... we are here.

[Michael W Richards]

What we don't know is how many nights a week did this killer stalk the streets?, and how many women did he pick-up, only to turn away for whatever reason. We cannot assume the common victims we have all come to know so well were his first and only choices on those nights.

Given what we don't know it makes it difficult to judge one way or the other.

Regards, Jon S.

Hi John,

With respect, the primary "what we dont know" is how many killers stalked the streets that Fall, the "he" and "his" are still 120 odd years later presumptive. We do have ample police reports of women being scared off by a man acting strangely or threatening towards them all throughout the Fall and during the lapse of Ripper rippers that occurred in Oct 88.

Maybe the killer or killers were foiled at times.

That however presumes that the killer or killers of the Canonical 5 went out to kill randomly, and when foiled once, he just picked someone else that night or on a later night. I believe many feel the increased superfluous mutilations on Kate Eddowes were a result of just such a frustration. Maybe some Canonicals were killed by such a man.

Some examples of why that would be of concern to me is that without clear evidence suggesting the killer in the passageway at 40 Berner Street intended anything more than murder, its just speculation. In the case of Tabram, a non-Canonical, we have evidence that she was an Unfortunate without a secured bed for the night, she had been drinking, that she was soliciting on the night she is murdered.. but that 2 instruments were likely used in the murder. We have a victim that did indeed have a bed and room secured and at the last Inquest sighting, was quietly inside that dark room.

If any or all of these murders were committed by someone other than the man that went out seeking homeless women to kill then the theory of a series was and is wrong. As far as I know categorically there is a difference between multiple murderers and serial killers.

I dont mean to be off thread topic but it is my belief that the distinction between assumption and knowledge is a key to solving these cases. So I had to address the comments.

Best regards,

Mike R

[caz]

Hi Mike,

You were off topic with your initial post. This thread is for discussing the very many questions we have about the Tabram murder. Very little knowledge here, but equally I am not aware of too many unsupported assumptions being made in relation to Tabram.

One assumption I am prepared to make is that whenever there is a clear motive for the murder of a particular person, the killer should be easier to catch than one who attacks a complete stranger, apparently for no more than the temporary feeling it gives him inside.

There is no evidence with Tabram (nor indeed with any of the Whitechapel murders) that the killer or killers had clear motives for wanting the victim dead - which just might explain the difficulty we continue to face when proposing any kind of solution - for any of these crimes.

Love,

Caz
X

[Michael W Richards]

Hi Mike,

One assumption I am prepared to make is that whenever there is a clear motive for the murder of a particular person, the killer should be easier to catch than one who attacks a complete stranger, apparently for no more than the temporary feeling it gives him inside.

There is no evidence with Tabram (nor indeed with any of the Whitechapel murders) that the killer or killers had clear motives for wanting the victim dead - which just might explain the difficulty we continue to face when proposing any kind of solution - for any of these crimes.

Love,

Caz
X

Hi Caz,

That "clear" motive might well be one that happens spontaneously just before the murder and it could well be that the killer just wanted the victim dead. For example.....if Martha withheld or did not comply with an agreed liason's particular act or acts, a man less in control of his emotions and faculties due to alcohol consumption might lash out in anger at her. Such a man wouldnt likely stop to change weapons for a single stab either.

The man may have had no prior violent history other than perhaps being surly when drunk, and would have had no intentions of killing anyone until Martha gave him what he felt at the time was a reason. Another man perhaps involved with some crime may kill a woman he thought was spying on him. Another might kill a woman he thought was cheating on him.

I take it that you are not suggesting that these kinds of "clear" motives signs are not present in any Canonical death evidence,.. just that they have not been interpreted and validated as such. Martha Tabram could have been killed by someone like I suggested in the just the manner she was with all the required physical evidence present to support that conclusion. Liz Stride could have been silenced for being a spy on the Socialists. Mary Kelly could have been cut up by an ex lover. None of the known physical evidence would eliminate those as possible motives. The circumstantial evidence might.

The interpretation of the data is I believe the issue. Sometimes the story comes straight from the data, sometimes a story is required to better understand the data.

Best regards Caz,

Mike R