Probibility of Martha Tabram Being a JtR Victim

[Colin Roberts]

Registered Deaths of Female Adults, Classified as 'Murder', by way of 'Knife' … Cont.

In Accordance with the Forty-Forth through Fifty-Third Annual Reports of the Registrar-General of Births, Deaths, and Marriages in England:


Registered Deaths of Female Adults (Ages 20 - xx) throughout England, Classified as 'Murder', by way of 'Cut'/'Stab' (Blue) / 'Cut Throat' (Red): 1881-1890 (Click Image, to Enlarge in flickr)


Registered Deaths of Female Adults (Ages 20 - xx) throughout England, Classified as 'Murder', by way of 'Cut'/'Stab' (Blue) & 'Cut Throat' (Red): 1881-1890 (Click Image, to Enlarge in flickr)


Registered Deaths of Female Adults (Ages 20 - xx) throughout England, Classified as 'Murder', by way of 'Cut'/'Stab' or 'Cut Throat': 1881-1890 (Click Image, to Enlarge in flickr)

Registered Deaths of Female Adults (Ages 20 - xx) throughout England, Classified as 'Murder', by way of 'Cut Throat' or 'Cut'/'Stab'
1881: 7
1882: 3
1883: 9
1884: 11
1885: 4
1886: 5
1887: 11
1888: 17
1889: 11
1890: 12

---

Range: 3 - 17
- Mid-Range (i.e. 'Range Mid-Point'): 10.00

- Median: 10.00

- Mean (i.e. 'Average'): 9.00

- Year, in which We are Most Interested (i.e. 1888): 17.00


Registered Deaths of Female Adults (Ages 20 - xx) throughout England, Classified as 'Murder', by way of 'Cut'/'Stab' or 'Cut Throat': 1881-1890 (Click Image, to Enlarge in flickr)

[Colin Roberts]

Registered Deaths of Female Adults, Classified as 'Murder', by way of 'Knife' … Cont.

In Accordance with the Forty-Sixth through Fifty-Sixth Annual Reports of the Registrar-General of Births, Deaths, and Marriages in England:


Registered Deaths of Female Adults (Ages 20 - xx) throughout England, Classified as 'Murder', by way of 'Knife'¹: 1883-1893 (Click Image, to Enlarge in flickr)

Registered Deaths of Female Adults (Ages 20 - xx) throughout England, Classified as 'Murder', by way of 'Knife'¹
1883: 9
1884: 11
1885: 4
1886: 5
1887: 11
1888: 17
1889: 11
1890: 12
1891: 10
1892: 11
1893: 6

¹ Registered Deaths of Female Adults (Ages 20 - xx) throughout England, Classified as 'Murder', ...
- by way of 'Cut Throat' or 'Cut'/'Stab': 1883-1890
- by way of 'Knife': 1891-1893

---

Range: 4 - 17
- Mid-Range (i.e. 'Range Mid-Point'): 10.50

- Median: 11.00

- Mean (i.e. 'Average'): 9.73

- Year, in which We are Most Interested (i.e. 1888): 17.00


Registered Deaths of Female Adults (Ages 20 - xx) throughout England, Classified as 'Murder', by way of 'Knife'¹: 1883-1893 (Click Image, to Enlarge in flickr)

¹ Registered Deaths of Female Adults (Ages 20 - xx) throughout England, Classified as 'Murder', ...
- by way of 'Cut Throat' or 'Cut'/'Stab': 1883-1890
- by way of 'Knife': 1891-1893

[Colin Roberts]

Cases of 'Attempting to Murder' / 'Murder': Metropolitan Police District, 1883-1893

In accordance with the Reports of the Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis, 1883-1893:


Cases of 'Attempting to Murder: Shooting, Cutting, etc.': Metropolitan Police District, 1883-1893 (Click Image, to Enlarge in flickr)

Attempting to Murder: Shooting, Cutting, etc.

1883
- Cases: 112
- Apprehensions: 107
- Convictions: 69

1884
- Cases: 143
- Apprehensions: 151
- Convictions: 105

1885
- Cases: 93
- Apprehensions: 96
- Convictions: 63

1886
- Cases: 135
- Apprehensions: 130
- Convictions: 86

1887
- Cases: 130
- Apprehensions: 134
- Convictions: 76

1888
- Cases: 192
- Apprehensions: 192
- Convictions: 101

1889
- Cases: 153
- Apprehensions: 155
- Convictions: 82

1890
- Cases: 145
- Apprehensions: 145
- Convictions: 97

1891
- Cases: 189
- Apprehensions: 203
- Convictions: 103

1892
- Cases: 165
- Apprehensions: 156
- Convictions: 82

1893
- Cases: 184
- Apprehensions: 173
- Convictions: 101

---

Attempting to Murder: Shooting, Cutting, etc.

~ Cases: 1883-1893 ~

- Range: 93 - 192

- Mid-Range (i.e. Range Mid-Point): 142.50

- Median: 145.00

- Mean (i.e. 'Average'): 149.18

- Year, in which We are Most Interested (i.e. 1888): 192.00


Cases of 'Attempting to Murder: Shooting, Cutting, etc.': Metropolitan Police District, 1883-1893 (Click Image, to Enlarge in flickr)

~~~

In accordance with the Reports of the Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis, 1883-1893:


Cases of 'Murder': Metropolitan Police District, 1883-1893 (Click Image, to Enlarge in flickr)

Murder

1883
- Cases: 16
- Apprehensions: 14
- Convictions: 9

1884
- Cases: 16
- Apprehensions: 16
- Convictions: 7

1885
- Cases: 9
- Apprehensions: 11
- Convictions: 5

1886
- Cases: 8
- Apprehensions: 10
- Convictions: 1

1887
- Cases: 13
- Apprehensions: 13
- Convictions: 8

1888
- Cases: 28
- Apprehensions: 24
- Convictions: 6

1889
- Cases: 17
- Apprehensions: 8
- Convictions: 0

1890
- Cases: 16
- Apprehensions: 13
- Convictions: 11

1891
- Cases: 14
- Apprehensions: 8
- Convictions: 6

1892
- Cases: 14
- Apprehensions: 10
- Convictions: 7

1893
- Cases: 20
- Apprehensions: 12
- Convictions: 10

---

Murder

~ Cases: 1883-1893 ~

- Range: 8.00 - 28.00

- Mid-Range (i.e. Range Mid-Point): 18.00

- Median: 16.00

- Mean (i.e. 'Average'): 15.55

- Year, in which We are Most Interested (i.e. 1888): 28.00


Cases of 'Murder': Metropolitan Police District, 1883-1893 (Click Image, to Enlarge in flickr)

~~~

The 'Murder' data is annotated, in certain years, to suggest that it is exclusive of cases, in which the victim was an 'Infant' (i.e. a child, aged less than one year); whereas in other years, it is not.

I believe that it is clearly the case, however, that the annotation should apply to each of the years under consideration (1883-1893).

Consider, for example, the following:

In Accordance with the Fifty First Annual Report of the Registrar-General of Births, Deaths, and Marriages in England, 1888:

Registered Deaths Classified as 'Murder', throughout England, within Specified Intervals of Victim Age (Male)

~~~

Infancy - Age 4: 55
---{Infancy: 48}
------{Birth - One Month: 42}
------{One Month - Twelve Months: 6}
---{Age 1: 2}
---{Age 2: 2}
---{Age 3: 0}
---{Age 4: 3}

~~~

Ages 5 - 9: 2
Ages 10 - 14: 2
Ages 15 - 19: 2
Ages 20 - 24: 5
Ages 25 - 34: 3
Ages 35 - 44: 2
Ages 45 - 54: 7
Ages 55 - 64: 2
Ages 65 - 74: 3
Ages 75 - 84: 1
Ages 85 - xx: 0

~~~

Total: 84

~~~

Registered Deaths Classified as 'Murder', throughout England, within Specified Intervals of Victim Age (Female)

~~~

Infancy - Age 4: 48
---{Infancy: 41}
------{Birth - One Month: 35}
------{One Month - Twelve Months: 6}
---{Age 1: 2}
---{Age 2: 3}
---{Age 3: 1}
---{Age 4: 1}

~~~

Ages 5 - 9: 3
Ages 10 - 14: 2
Ages 15 - 19: 2
Ages 20 - 24: 8
Ages 25 - 34: 12
Ages 35 - 44: 17
Ages 45 - 54: 11
Ages 55 - 64: 1
Ages 65 - 74: 6
Ages 75 - 84: 1
Ages 85 - xx: 0

~~~

Total: 111

[Colin Roberts]

Cases of 'Attempting to Murder' / 'Murder': Metropolitan Police District, 1883-1893


Cases of 'Attempting to Murder' & 'Murder': Metropolitan Police District, 1883-1893 (Click Image, to Enlarge in flickr)


Cases of 'Attempting to Murder' / 'Murder': Metropolitan Police District, 1883-1893 (Click Image, to Enlarge in flickr)


Cases of 'Attempting to Murder' / 'Murder': Metropolitan Police District, 1883-1893 (Click Image, to Enlarge in flickr)

Attempting to Murder / Murder

~ Cases: 1883-1893 ~

- Range: 102 - 220

- Mid-Range (i.e. Range Mid-Point): 161.00

- Median: 161.00

- Mean (i.e. 'Average'): 164.73

- Year, in which We are Most Interested (i.e. 1888): 220.00


Cases of 'Attempting to Murder' / 'Murder': Metropolitan Police District, 1883-1893 (Click Image, to Enlarge in flickr)

Note: The Metropolitan Police District data would of course be exclusive of the murder of Catherine Eddowes.

[Colin Roberts]

"Crime during the year has shown a decided tendency to increase. This fact may be accounted for, to a certain extent, by circumstances which affected the administration of the Force in a peculiar manner at different periods of the year. The agitation which centered in Trafalgar Square, and the murders in Whitechapel, necessitated the concentration in particular localities of large bodies of police, and such an increase of force in one quarter of the Metropolis, it must be remembered, is only procurable by diminishing the number of men ordinarily employed in other divisions. In the present state of the force increase of protection in the East End means diminished numbers of police in other quarters, and so long as the available force is hardly sufficient, as it is just now, for the performance of the ordinary and every day duties of the Police, any additional drain on its resources leads to diminished protection against, and consequent increase of, crime. There has been no relaxation of effort on the part of the Police to cope with crime; the fact is that the Force is overworked, and under such circumstances crime cannot be met or coped with in a satisfactory and efficient manner. The statistics of crime will be found in the tables attached. I need not do more than merely allude to the extraordinary series of murders which occurred in Whitechapel, which gave rise to the greatest excitement in London. I regret to say that in spite of most strenuous efforts on the part of the Police, the criminal has up till now remained undiscovered." [sic]

James Monro,

The Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis

"I need not do more than merely allude to the extraordinary series of murders which occurred in Whitechapel, which gave rise to the greatest excitement in London."

~~~

The Metropolitan Police District, and the City of London Police District, 1888 (Red Outline); 'Metropolitan London', 1888 (Navy Outline) (Click Image, to Enlarge in flickr)

In Accordance with the Census of England & Wales, 1891:

'Greater London', i.e. the Metropolitan Police District and the City of London Police District (Red Outline)
- Area: 443,421.00 Statute Acres, i.e. Approximately 692.85 Square Miles
- Population: 5,633,806
- Population Density: 8,131 Persons per Square Mile

- {The Metropolitan Police District}
--- Area: 442,750.00 Statute Acres, i.e. Approximately 691.80 Square Miles
--- Population: 5,596,101
--- Population Density: 8,089 Persons per Square Mile

- {The City of London Police District}
--- Area: 671.00 Statute Acres, i.e. Approximately 1.05 Square Miles
--- Population: 37,705
--- Population Density: 35,910 Persons per Square Mile

---

'Metropolitan London'¹, i.e. The Administrative County of London (Inclusive of the City of London) (Navy Outline)
- Area: 74,771.00 Statute Acres, i.e. Approximately 117.88 Square Miles
- Population: 4,232,118
- Population Density: 35,902 Persons per Square Mile

¹ As Defined, in 1888, by the Boundaries of Jurisdiction, of the Metropolitan Board of Works

[Colin Roberts]

The 'Murder' statistics pertaining to the Whitechapel Registration District that John G has quoted are not particularly meaningful, as the district was rather small and very irregularly shaped.


Whitechapel Registration District / Poor Law Union - 1888 (Click Image, to Enlarge in flickr)
Underlying Aerial Imagery: Copyright Google Earth, 2007
Overlying Plots, Labels and Color-Shadings: Copyright Colin C. Roberts, 2010

In accordance with the Census of England & Wales, 1891 ...

Whitechapel Registration District / Poor Law Union:
- The Liberty of Norton Folgate (Green): 1,449
- The Old Artillery Ground (Aqua): 2,138
- The Parish of Christ Church Spitalfields (Blue): 22,859
- The Hamlet of Mile End New Town (Orange): 11,303
- The Parish of Holy Trinity ('Minories') (Yellow): 301
- The Parish of St. Mary Whitechapel (Red): 32,326
----- {Portion within the County of Middlesex, -1889; the County of London, 1889-1965: 32,284}
----- {Portion within the City of London, -1900: 42}
- The Liberty of Her Majesty's Tower of London (Orange): 933
----- {The Liberty of the Tower: n/a}
----- {The Precinct of Old Tower Without: 65}
----- {The Tower: 868}
- The Precinct of St. Katharine (Blue): 182
- The Parish of St. Botolph without Aldgate (Green): 2,971
----- {Portion within the County of Middlesex, -1889; the County of London, 1889-1965: 2,971}

The portion of the Parish of St. Mary Whitechapel that was situated within the City of London (becoming part of St. Botolph without Aldgate, in 1900), was a component of the Whitechapel Registration District / Poor Law Union (until 1900); but, was not a component of the Parliamentary Borough of Tower Hamlets. It is, however, included here, for the purposes of this analysis.

- Total Population (1891 Census): 74,462

[John G]

Hi John

.

Quite right - my slip...but that still leaves 16 knife-related killings out of a total you're quoting of 28....still a very high proportion...unless the Met's stats (or our interpretation of them) are somehow awry...do we know the basis on which they were compiled? Are they for example homicides or murders excluding manslaughters, or what?



I don't disagree, but then again I don't recall making any distinction between domestic or non-domestic crimes - I was discussing the number of knife-related killings

All the best

Dave

Hi Dave,

The statistics that I cited refer to crimes that were classified as murder. Metropolitan Police statistics record the following for manslaughter:


1886:98
1887:96
1888:94
1889:34
1890:41
1891:32

I should point out that these are figures for London as a whole not just Whitechapel! Obviously, manslaughter is much more common than murder and I would accept that some murders may have been wrongly classified as manslaughter, i.e because of lack of evidence. However, I don't see how this would impact significantly on the relative figures, i.e Whitechapel compared to the rest of London.

The manslaughter figures for 1888 are obviously very similar to the 3 preceding years, which suggests to me that there were not an inordinate number of murders that year wrongly classified as manslaughter.

I agree that knife - related crimes do seem to be quiet prevalent, at least in 1888! However, I would note with interest Colin's statistics (post 255) which show that just 15 adult females are recorded as being murdered by cut throat for England in 1888, 6 more than the preceding year. Also the fact that there is a spike in the number of female knife murders for 1888, 17 as opposed to 11 the preceding year.

Best wishes,

John

[John G]

The 'Murder' statistics pertaining to the Whitechapel Registration District that John G has quoted are not particularly meaningful, as the district was rather small and very irregularly shaped.


Whitechapel Registration District / Poor Law Union - 1888 (Click Image, to Enlarge in flickr)
Underlying Aerial Imagery: Copyright Google Earth, 2007
Overlying Plots, Labels and Color-Shadings: Copyright Colin C. Roberts, 2010

In accordance with the Census of England & Wales, 1891 ...

Whitechapel Registration District / Poor Law Union:
- The Liberty of Norton Folgate (Green): 1,449
- The Old Artillery Ground (Aqua): 2,138
- The Parish of Christ Church Spitalfields (Blue): 22,859
- The Hamlet of Mile End New Town (Orange): 11,303
- The Parish of Holy Trinity ('Minories') (Yellow): 301
- The Parish of St. Mary Whitechapel (Red): 32,326
----- {Portion within the County of Middlesex, -1889; the County of London, 1889-1965: 32,284}
----- {Portion within the City of London, -1900: 42}
- The Liberty of Her Majesty's Tower of London (Orange): 933
----- {The Liberty of the Tower: n/a}
----- {The Precinct of Old Tower Without: 65}
----- {The Tower: 868}
- The Precinct of St. Katharine (Blue): 182
- The Parish of St. Botolph without Aldgate (Green): 2,971
----- {Portion within the County of Middlesex, -1889; the County of London, 1889-1965: 2,971}

The portion of the Parish of St. Mary Whitechapel that was situated within the City of London (becoming part of St. Botolph without Aldgate, in 1900), was a component of the Whitechapel Registration District / Poor Law Union (until 1900); but, was not a component of the Parliamentary Borough of Tower Hamlets. It is, however, included here, for the purposes of this analysis.

- Total Population (1891 Census): 74,462

Hi Colin,

Thanks for these incredibly detailed statistics and all of your hard work- it puts my modest efforts to shame! It is very much appreciated,

Best wishes,

John

[John G]

Hello John
Another aspect of the Keppel paper that he and his co-authors over-cook. There may have been (incidental?) trauma to Tabram's pubic area, but it is surely dwarfed by the constellation of nearly 40 deliberate stabs that peppered her upper abdomen, chest and neck. The focus of Tabram's killer was decidedly on the top half of her body, quite unlike what we see in any of the Ripper, or "ripper-like", murders that followed so soon afterwards.

Hello,
Yes, I agree that the Keppel paper might not be without its flaws However, for me I would focus on how rare that Tabram murder was for the period. Thus, excluding 1888, when the murder rate clearly spiked, we have a total of 54 recorded murders in the Metropolis for the 4 years either side of 1888, i.e 1886:8; 1887:13; 1889:17; 1890:16. This represents an average of 13.5 per year.

Now, based upon the Keppel statistics we can expect a murder involving trauma to the genital area to occur in less than one in a thousand murder cases. Therefore, considering an average murder rate for London as 13.5 p/a, we could expect a Tabram- style killing in the Metropolis as a whole just once every 74 years.

In fact, Whitechapel's population in 1888 was around 75000, representing a small fraction of London's 1888 population of around 5.5 million. And in the 4 years either side of 1888 there were only 2 recorded murders in this district of any description. This is an average of 0.5 per year, suggesting a Tabram-style murder once every 2000 years in Whitechapel.

However, it could, of course, be argued that the above exercise is somewhat academic because Tabram-style killings may have been more common in the late Victorian period and, as you say, we cannot be sure that the cuts to the genital area were not incidental.

Nonetheless, Begg (2004) as argued that her sexual organs were a particular focus- this seems to be based upon Dr Keleene's report indicating that the vagina had been one of the targets of the wounding, although given the number of wounds this is clearly open to debate and interpretation.

I believe, however, that you have accepted that this was an extremley rare crime- I'm not aware of anything similar being recorded anywhere in the Metropolis, let alone the relatively tiny Whitechapel area, so I think it a legitimate exercise to consider whether a frenzied knife attacker could evolve their Mo, resulting in the far more clinically precise approach that is evident in the C5 murders.

I believe he could for 3 reasons. Firstly, it would be expedient. Tabram probably took quite a significant time to die and her attacker would no doubt have been covered in blood- presenting a considerable risk of getting caught. In my opinion a concurrent theme in the C5 murders is the clinical efficiency with which the unfortunate victims were dispatched. i.e with the throat being cut whilst the victims were close to the ground, with the added precaution of strangulation or suffocation being applied to further stem the blood flow. This approach had the advantage of ensuring that the victims were quickly killed, with the added advantage for the killer that he would have been unlikely to be covered in blood.

To my mind, such a refined approach suggests an experienced killer who has learned from past mistakes.

Secondly, it could be that he was disturbed by the Tabram murder. Thus is no evidence that JtR was a sadist, who enjoyed seeing his victims suffer in pain. Sutcliffe, for instance, temporarily switched from killing by knife to strangulation. However, he found this method so disagreeable- he actually vomited because his victim took so long to die- that he returned to using a knife. Such is the twisted mind of a serial killer.

Thirdly, Tabram could have said or done something that made angry, sending him into a frenzy. Jean Jordan was the most severely mutilated of Sutcliffe's victims, and he admitted that this was because he flew into an uncontrolled rage because of his failure to find an incriminating £5 note.

Such is the twisted, incomprehensible mind of a serial killer.

Best Wishes,

John

[Bridewell]

With Tabram, it looks like murder was the goal of the perpetrator, hence the wild overkill

Why 'hence'? Surely, if murder was the goal, wild overkill would be wholly unnecessary?

[Colin Roberts]

Thanks ...

You are most welcome!

[dahler101]

The idea that the Ripper 'refined' his technique after Tabram's murder is quite preposterous to me. This whole 'Oh, I'll have to cut the next one's throat!' as if throat-cutting was this sudden revelation when it comes to murder. No, the Tabram murder has all the hallmarks of a frenzied attack, driven by anger rather than some kind of twisted, visceral fantasy with the canonicals. With Tabram, it looks like murder was the goal of the perpetrator, hence the wild overkill and lack of post-mortem signature.

Harry D,
While every murder was carefully planned, when you look at all the Ripper victims its clear this man had a hatred of woman, all his victims were done as an outward expression of anger and rage.

[Michael W Richards]

What are the chances that a coin flipped 99 times and landing on heads will land on tails, or heads, on the 100th flip?

The same as the odds were on the very first flip.

Assuming that statistics resolves the issue of how many killers in 1888 were capable of committing crimes like the ones seen in the Canonical Group is about as valuable to solving the crimes as the above example would be to calculate a bet on flip # 100.

Colin has to be one of the most thorough users of statistics to illustrate why he believes many of the Unsolved Whitechapel murders were committed by one individual. His probability analysis is lacking in the area of how each murder might influence any of the men capable of killing during the period in question. I know that in modern times a despicable act of violence often spawns similar acts of violence by others, some by killers not at all pre-disposed or driven to that kind of violence before the act occurred. We had a girl murdered and dismembered in Toronto a few years back.. which was followed by a murder and dismemberment north of Toronto, and an act of murder and dismemberment in Buffalo, and then again in Montreal.

Since we know that all of these crimes were committed by 4 different people, I submit that this is proof that the imagination of killers are as pliable as that of regular folks. And that similar acts do not lead inevitably to the same source.

Cheers

[Harry D]

Harry D,
While every murder was carefully planned, when you look at all the Ripper victims its clear this man had a hatred of woman, all his victims were done as an outward expression of anger and rage.

Hello dahler,

The salient point being that this anger or hatred (if that's what it was) manifested itself in a markedly different style with Tabram than it did with the canonicals.

[John G]

What are the chances that a coin flipped 99 times and landing on heads will land on tails, or heads, on the 100th flip?

The same as the odds were on the very first flip.

Assuming that statistics resolves the issue of how many killers in 1888 were capable of committing crimes like the ones seen in the Canonical Group is about as valuable to solving the crimes as the above example would be to calculate a bet on flip # 100.

Colin has to be one of the most thorough users of statistics to illustrate why he believes many of the Unsolved Whitechapel murders were committed by one individual. His probability analysis is lacking in the area of how each murder might influence any of the men capable of killing during the period in question. I know that in modern times a despicable act of violence often spawns similar acts of violence by others, some by killers not at all pre-disposed or driven to that kind of violence before the act occurred. We had a girl murdered and dismembered in Toronto a few years back.. which was followed by a murder and dismemberment north of Toronto, and an act of murder and dismemberment in Buffalo, and then again in Montreal.

Since we know that all of these crimes were committed by 4 different people, I submit that this is proof that the imagination of killers are as pliable as that of regular folks. And that similar acts do not lead inevitably to the same source.

Cheers

Hello Michael,

I believe that the use of statistical analysis is a valuable tool in assessing crimes such as these although, as you suggest, it is clearly not an infallible approach.

Thus, I would start from the position that all of the C5 murders represent very rare crimes, even for the period in question. In fact, so rare that I'm not personally aware of a single example prior to 1888 of a women being found dead on the streets of Whitechapel with her throat cut; nor after the Coles murder, although I concede there may be the odd rare example.And murders involving abdominal mutilations were clearly rarer still.

And then there's the fact that Whitechapel was a tiny area with a population of just 75000-only 1.3% of London's 5.6million total population for 1888. Perhaps not surprising, for such a small area, there were no murders at all in 1886 or 1887. In fact, there were only 13 murders in total for London in 1887, and that was both men and women, most being of the domestic variety. compare that to the 6 murders in Whitechapel in 1888- all women, all attacked or killed on the street. Others will disagree, but to my mind, the possibility of this being the work of multiple killers is extremely remote.

And then there's the example of the Yorkshire Ripper, Peter Sutcliffe. I believe that of the many murders he was suspected of he eventulaly admitted all but one: Joan Harrison, who was indeed killed by another hand. And this a killer who frequently and radically changed his Mo, i.e. from targeting prostitutes in red light districts, to attacking non-prostitutes in residential areas.

And. of course, Sutcliffe operated over a wide area with a large population, not a tiny area with a relatively small population, surely making it much more likely that mistakes would be made when attributing victims to a single killer.

It seems to be that the only alternative is to concentrate on the miniature of the crimes, rejecting any victim where the Mo doesn't exactly correspond to other victims. And where does that get you? Well, as far as I can see it results in a conclusion that every victim was killed by a different killer.

I mean, consider this. The vast majority of people accept that Nichols and Chapman were killed by the same person, but in looking at anomalies and direct comparisons how could they be? Thus, it is quite clear that Chapman's body, like Tabram and the other C5 was posed, with her injuries on display. However, Nichols wasn't- her killer covered up her injuries. So much so, in fact, that the extensive abdominal mutilations were not even noticed until she was taken to the mortuary, even by Dr Llewellyn, and he examined the body!

And if posing was part of the killers signature then surely Nichols must have had a different killer!

You're analogy of the coin flip is interesting, though. As far as I can see, applying your logic, if you lent someone £5 on 99 occasions and, on each occasion they failed to pay you back, what would be the chances that they would pay you back the next time? Well, 50-50 according to your logic- mind you, I wouldn't lend people money if I were you!

Of course, it wouldn't be 50-50 because a clear pattern of behavoir has been established on the 99 previous occasions. Just as we can see a clear pattern develop in the Whitechapel murders- street prostitutes killed in the street, in isolated locations, with their throats cut and their abdomens mutilated.

Best wishes,

John