Probibility of Martha Tabram Being a JtR Victim

[Harry D]

That's why Butchers and Hunters and medical students were investigated throughout September... as a result of the first 2 Canonicals. They ALL would have experience cutting flesh and excising organs.

The bayonet choice of weapon wasn't mine, although I don't see any reason it couldn't have been...I have a fairly extensive collection of 19th and 20th century bayonets and many resemble daggers as well...another idea that I didn't insert.

So..we have a learning Ripper stabbing frantically with a pen knife, then switching to a larger weapon to deliver a single stab? he then migrates within 3 weeks to someone who carries 1 weapon, who with cool demeanor, poses as a client...cuts her throat not once but twice...and proceeds to mutilate her abdomen? He has almost stopped stabbing completely now?

Or isn't it a bit more realistic if we have a soldier or some man who was intoxicated getting out of control angry at a prostitute he has "hired", who pulls out whatever weapon he has on him...a pen knife...and stabs her repeatedly?

Cheers

A much more likely scenario, Michael.

[Michael W Richards]

From our Victims Folder, under Martha Tabram;

"The post-mortem examination of Martha Tabram was held by Dr. Timothy Killeen (also spelled Keeling or Keleene) at 5:30 AM on the morning of August 7th. Tabram was described as a plump middle-aged woman, about 5'3" tall, dark hair and complexion. The time of death was estimated at about three hours before the examination (around 2:30-2:45 AM). In all, there were thirty-nine stab wounds including:
5 wounds (left lung)
2 wounds (right lung)
1 wound (heart)
5 wounds (liver)
2 wounds (spleen)
6 wounds (stomach)

Martha Tabram's death certificate.
According to Killeen, the focus of the wounds were the breasts, belly, and groin area. In his opinion, all but one of the wounds were inflicted by a right-handed attacker, and all but one seemed to have been the result of an "ordinary pen-knife." There was, however, one wound on the sternum which appeared to have been inflicted by a dagger or bayonet (thereby leading police to believe that a sailor was the perpetrator). "

Now John, factor in that they were on a landing of a building with people sleeping a wall or 2 away, nothing was heard, and that I believe all the wounds were inflicted while she was alive, and that based on the above there was no specific target, there was only an intention to inflict a lot of stabs.

In other words, the killer didn't stab her where it would have been fatal quicker, and.... he didn't cut her throat.

There were 2 weapons used,...on what basis do we find that plausible for the man(men) who killed any of the Canonicals? Is there medical evidence that any of them were killed by either a pen knife or a dagger, or with 2 weapons?

I don't think its sophisticated investigative work to just pencil in smoke coming from a gun when none was found.

Cheers

[Tom_Wescott]

Tom,

I realize that your carving out a niche with the Bank Holiday murders, but my recollection is that this murder is still unsolved, therefore, any discounting of any person from any walk of life would be speculative, not definitive, as your comments above suggest.

Cheers

You and others on this thread keep repeating 'soldiers' and 'bayonet' and we know to which soldiers you're referring. They didn't kill Tabram. Sure, some unknown soldier may have, same as a car man, a milk man, a clerk, etc., but I don't see other professions being brought up. And there's no evidence of a bayonet as the murder weapon.

Also, the entire run of the Whitechapel murders and beyond is my 'niche'. I just have the one book out so far. A book I recommend everyone to read if they're sincerely interested in the Tabram murder. If it's not something that interests you, then by all means, don't read it. But then why post about it?

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Tom_Wescott]

Paul Begg gives the name as "Keleene": see Begg (2004)

I would be surprised if he said that's how he spelled his name. He didn't do so in the books I have. 'Keleene' is a press misspelling.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[John G]

Hi Michael,

Although I believe that Tabram is less likely to have been a victim of the same killer than the C5, I believe on balance that she was.

Firstly, there is the general rarity of this type of crime. As Colin Roberts' excellent statistics reveal there was only 11 murders of adult females in 1887 by means of cut/stab or cur throat; and just 2 murders by cut/stab. And this throughout the whole of England, not one tiny district with a population of 75,000.

Secondly, there is clear evidence of the rare signature of picquerism, where the focus is typically on the breast and groin area. In respect, of Tabram, Keppel et al. (2005) note that 17 of the wounds were in the breast and, as you've noted, other wounds were focussed on the groin area. There were also 9 wounds to the throat, which ties in with the other murders, where the throat was also a focus of the killer's attention.

Picquerism was also clearly a feature of the C5 murders, except Stride where the killer was probably interrupted and, for that matter, Emma Smith.

And, despite Dr Killeens's conclusions, I would question whether two knives were used. It seems strange to be that a killer would deliver 38 blows with one knife before putting that away and taking out a second knife to deliver a final blow.

It is even less likely that he would deliver numerous blows with one knife, put that knife away, take out a second knife to deliver a single blow, put that knife away, take out the first knife again and continue stabbing.

If he did, that is surely evidence of a methodical rather than an uncontrolled frenzied attack. I therefore think that more than one stab wound may have struck the same area, giving the impression that a larger knife was used.

Now, you yourself note that residents were sleeping very close to where the attack took place and heard nothing. That suggests to me a killer demonstrating the same relatively self- controlled approach that we observe in the C5 murders; if the attack on Tabram was more frenzied surely one of the residents would have been alerted.

Of course, with Nichols he needed to modify his MO. I mean, for one thing he would have been covered in blood after the Tabram murder, which would have been extremely risky. Hence, the adoption of the perfect tactic: cutting his victims throat close to the ground, whilst using strangulation/suffocation to further cut off the flow of blood. For me, this murder has all of the hallmarks of a killer using a refined technique after learning from past experience.

Finally, it is not at all unusual for serial killers to change their MO, even radically. Gary Taylor's MO changed radically as his need for control changed: he started by attacking women at bus stops, targeting the head; he then started shooting women with a rifle; then he progressed to chasing women with a machete; he then decided to phone women up, getting them to leave the house on some false pretext, before attacking them as they got into their car; next he decided to kidnap 2 women, who he tied up, shot in the head and eventually buried in his back garden. Finally, he gave up being a serial killer and became a serial rapist instead, this time letting his victims live.

I think it's safe to conclude that if the same killer was responsible for the C5 and Tabram, then his MO would have been the model of consistency in comparison!

Cheers,

John

[Abby Normal]

Hi Michael,

Although I believe that Tabram is less likely to have been a victim of the same killer than the C5, I believe on balance that she was.

Firstly, there is the general rarity of this type of crime. As Colin Roberts' excellent statistics reveal there was only 11 murders of adult females in 1887 by means of cut/stab or cur throat; and just 2 murders by cut/stab. And this throughout the whole of England, not one tiny district with a population of 75,000.

Secondly, there is clear evidence of the rare signature of picquerism, where the focus is typically on the breast and groin area. In respect, of Tabram, Keppel et al. (2005) note that 17 of the wounds were in the breast and, as you've noted, other wounds were focussed on the groin area. There were also 9 wounds to the throat, which ties in with the other murders, where the throat was also a focus of the killer's attention.

Picquerism was also clearly a feature of the C5 murders, except Stride where the killer was probably interrupted and, for that matter, Emma Smith.

And, despite Dr Killeens's conclusions, I would question whether two knives were used. It seems strange to be that a killer would deliver 38 blows with one knife before putting that away and taking out a second knife to deliver a final blow.

It is even less likely that he would deliver numerous blows with one knife, put that knife away, take out a second knife to deliver a single blow, put that knife away, take out the first knife again and continue stabbing.

If he did, that is surely evidence of a methodical rather than an uncontrolled frenzied attack. I therefore think that more than one stab wound may have struck the same area, giving the impression that a larger knife was used.

Now, you yourself note that residents were sleeping very close to where the attack took place and heard nothing. That suggests to me a killer demonstrating the same relatively self- controlled approach that we observe in the C5 murders; if the attack on Tabram was more frenzied surely one of the residents would have been alerted.

Of course, with Nichols he needed to modify his MO. I mean, for one thing he would have been covered in blood after the Tabram murder, which would have been extremely risky. Hence, the adoption of the perfect tactic: cutting his victims throat close to the ground, whilst using strangulation/suffocation to further cut off the flow of blood. For me, this murder has all of the hallmarks of a killer using a refined technique after learning from past experience.

Finally, it is not at all unusual for serial killers to change their MO, even radically. Gary Taylor's MO changed radically as his need for control changed: he started by attacking women at bus stops, targeting the head; he then started shooting women with a rifle; then he progressed to chasing women with a machete; he then decided to phone women up, getting them to leave the house on some false pretext, before attacking them as they got into their car; next he decided to kidnap 2 women, who he tied up, shot in the head and eventually buried in his back garden. Finally, he gave up being a serial killer and became a serial rapist instead, this time letting his victims live.

I think it's safe to conclude that if the same killer was responsible for the C5 and Tabram, then his MO would have been the model of consistency in comparison!

Cheers,

John

Great post
I dont understand how those who discount tabram as a murder victim say the MO difference is too much. Or too much learning between Tabram and Nichols. Would they have us believe the rippers MO began from the start fully formed and efficient with Polly Nichols?

Sorry- any true crime amateur knows that MO changes due to many factors, not the least which is perfecting the technique to become more efficient to avoid detection.


Change in MO is one of the weakest arguments I have ever seen on casebook.

[John G]

Great post
I dont understand how those who discount tabram as a murder victim say the MO difference is too much. Or too much learning between Tabram and Nichols. Would they have us believe the rippers MO began from the start fully formed and efficient with Polly Nichols?

Sorry- any true crime amateur knows that MO changes due to many factors, not the least which is perfecting the technique to become more efficient to avoid detection.


Change in MO is one of the weakest arguments I have ever seen on casebook.

Thanks Abby, much appreciated. I think in the case of Gary Taylor a number of people would have be looking for 5 different killers, although once they'd examined the miniature of each crime scene that might have increased to 25!

I agree, that a killers technique changes as he learns from past mistakes and his need to control the situation changes. And, as you say, it always seems remarkable to me how many people believe that JtR was a fully formed serial killer at the time of the Nichols' murder, when everything about that murder suggests an experienced, confident killer who has learned from past mistakes.

Cheers,

John

[Harry D]

Does Nichols show a transition between Tabram & Chapman?

Nope. The Ripper had apparently adapted into his new MO straight from Tabram. From excessive stabbing and no cut throat, to long abdominal slashing and a deeply sliced throat. All in three weeks.

Therefore all this talk of the Ripper refining his technique and learning from his mistakes is unfounded. As I said before, was throat-slashing some kind of revelation to our Ripper? It only just dawned on him after stabbing Tabram umpteen times that it might do to cut her throat next time? Whoever killed Martha had lost themselves in the moment, the frenzied nature of the stabbing wasn't due to amateurism, it was due to anger.

[Archaic]

#1 Objective = Gratification

Does Nichols show a transition between Tabram & Chapman?

Nope. The Ripper had apparently adapted into his new MO straight from Tabram. From excessive stabbing and no cut throat, to long abdominal slashing and a deeply sliced throat. All in three weeks.

Therefore all this talk of the Ripper refining his technique and learning from his mistakes is unfounded. As I said before, was throat-slashing some kind of revelation to our Ripper? It only just dawned on him after stabbing Tabram umpteen times that it might do to cut her throat next time?
Whoever killed Martha had lost themselves in the moment, the frenzied nature of the stabbing wasn't due to amateurism, it was due to anger.

Hi Harry. I think your last sentence identifies a key aspect of the killer's motivation, though not the entire motivation. We will probably never know the entire motivation, because it lies deep within the killer's psyche. But we can observe some of his actions and attempt to interpret their meaning and motivation.

Of course serial killers "learn as they go" and their manner of doing things is likely to evolve over time; after all they are human.

Sometimes in analyzing modus operandi people forget that the serial killer's #1 objective is NOT to "kill the victim as efficiently as possible."

The serial killer's #1 objective is to perform whatever acts and actions fulfill their own perverted need for 'gratification'.

This 'gratification' includes a highly complex and perverted mix of ego gratification (eg: the need to 'dominate' and 'control') and sexual gratification that is expressed (and potentially temporarily fulfilled) in their actions, which are often identifiable paraphilias. These paraphilias often "evolve" (devolve?) over time.

Paraphilias can be so bizarre that "normal" people have difficulty even connecting them to Sexuality.

For example, "Crush Fetish" or "Trampling" is very difficult to conceive of as a form of sexual gratification. The vast majority of people would find the deliberate trampling and crushing to death of small, helpless live animals such as kittens beyond horrifying. I would cry and throw up if I ever saw such a horrible thing. Yet there are apparently thousands of people who share this paraphilia and find it somehow sexually gratifying rather than utterly wrong and revolting.

Websites offering videos of such acts have recently been in the news. It's hard to believe that there is anyone who would willingly watch this, but not only are there crush fetishist who will watch, there are crush fetishists who strongly crave such videos and will pay to watch because it gives them gratification! Abnormal gratification, but gratification nonetheless.

The perverted ego/sexual gratification this gives certain individuals is not based upon having learned "efficient killing techniques"; it has to do with many more aspects of the acts which probably wouldn't even occur to the average person.

These aspects usually include sexual fetishes for certain types of shoes (from high heels to flip-flops), human feet, 'gigantess' fantasies, sadism (the deliberate infliction of suffering), a desire to see 'blood and guts', etc.

This paraphilia often 'evolves' from a desire to crush or see crushed inanimate objects such as grapes to the crushing and trampling invertebrates such as live frogs, to the crushing and trampling vertebrates such as baby kittens, baby rabbits, chicks or ducklings, etc.

The deliberate crushing of live vertebrates such as mammals is illegal in the US and UK under Animal Cruelty laws, but the laws have not stopped the proliferation of this grotesque paraphilia. I don't even want to google the subject because the results of any search will be so horrifying and upsetting.

The point is that Jack the Ripper was actively pursuing his own ego/sexual gratification via the Ripper Murders, and that is why we can observe a "change" or "evolution" in his modus operandi.

And yes, I believe that Martha Tabram was a Ripper victim.

Best regards,
Archaic

[Michael W Richards]

You and others on this thread keep repeating 'soldiers' and 'bayonet' and we know to which soldiers you're referring. They didn't kill Tabram. Sure, some unknown soldier may have, same as a car man, a milk man, a clerk, etc., but I don't see other professions being brought up. And there's no evidence of a bayonet as the murder weapon.

Also, the entire run of the Whitechapel murders and beyond is my 'niche'. I just have the one book out so far. A book I recommend everyone to read if they're sincerely interested in the Tabram murder. If it's not something that interests you, then by all means, don't read it. But then why post about it?

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

Im not speculating that the soldiers she and Poll took under their wing were involved in case that's what you meant, too early for consideration. But it does establish that soldiers were out in pairs, at least 1 pair, and we know that a soldier was waiting for a mate nearer to the time of death, so that establishes it once again. I didn't bring up the dagger, or the bayonet, the medical examiner did.

Not only do I think that 2 men were likely involved, (by the fact at least 2 weapons were used), but I don't see any evidence anywhere that discounts a solider or a pair of them...or the wound being made by a dagger, or bayonet.

Perhaps you have evidence that no-one else has seen or heard of which gives you the authority to state so empirically about these things,... but I doubt that.

I post on murder threads here that have nothing to do with Jack the Ripper solely for the purpose of reminding those posting on it that Jack has not had a single murder pinned on him, and there is zero cause for a Canonical Group plus.

If anything, the list should be shortened.

Cheers

[Tom_Wescott]

People who've read my book have seen it, Michael.

Harry D,

Actually, Nichols was stabbed multiple times.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[John G]

I really cannot understand why some people seem to be wedded to the idea that serial killers do not evolve but retain a consistent, predictable MO throughout.

Let us consider, for example, the Nichols and Chapman murder, where the overwhelming consensus is that just one killer was involved. In the case of Chapman the mutilations suggested a significant degree of surgical skill, or at least anatomical knowledge. The Report concludes: "obviously the work of an expert...or one who had such knowledge of anatomical or pathological examinations as to be enabled to secure the pelvic organ with one sweep of the knife." In contrast, Nichols' killer seemed to demonstrate only rough anatomical knowledge.

And Chapman's body was clearly posed, with the extensive injuries to the abdomen obviously displayed. In contrast, Nichols' killer made a determined effort to cover up the abdominal injuries- so much so that weren't initially notice by Dr Llewellyn, so now we also, apparently, have a change in signature characteristics.

The killer also removed body parts from Chapman, which he took, like trophies, from the crime scene. With Nichols, the killer did not remove any organs.

Neither can these differences be explained by time pressure. In fact at Hanbury Street, the killer seemed to be under far greater time restraints, and was at far greater risk of getting caught, than Bucks Row.

So now, in the space of just 9 days the killer has, apparently, significantly upgraded his surgical skills, changed his signature and started harvesting and collecting organs! Is it therefore so hard to accept that over a period several months there wouldn't have been a significant evolution of MO between Tabram and Nichols?

in the case of Stride the killer was most likely interrupted but, apparently, Eddowes' suggests a further evolution in MO; in fact, some people now argue that this proves she must have been killed by someone else!

And with MJK he left a scene of utter carnage, in an apparently frenzied attack, leaving the highly respected Dr Bond to conclude that the killer "does not even posses the technical knowledge of a butcher or horse slaughterer."

Of course, to some, this is clear evidence that yet another killer must have been on the loose!

So there we have it. Are we to seriously accept that 6 killers were operating in Whitechapel during 1888- 7 if you count Emma Smith- a tiny district with a population of just 75,000? And all of them presenting with highly unusual signature characteristics and committing rare murders in an area where even more mundane killings were unusual, with just 2 murders being recorded for the Whitechapel District in the 4 years either side of 1888. In a country, England, where in both 1887 and 1889 only 11 adult female murders in total were by way of stab or cut throat.

Isn't it just far more likely to accept that serial killers evolve, frequently changing their MO, and behaving anything but predictably? Or perhaps you think it more likely that half a dozen or more killers- each demonstrating rare signatures-suddenly descended on Whitechapel in 1888 only, by the Strike of midnight on New Year's Eve, to decide to collectively give up serial killing and return to the day job!

Or perhaps by then they were all either caged in an asylum or drowned in the Thames!

Cheers,

John

[John G]

Im not speculating that the soldiers she and Poll took under their wing were involved in case that's what you meant, too early for consideration. But it does establish that soldiers were out in pairs, at least 1 pair, and we know that a soldier was waiting for a mate nearer to the time of death, so that establishes it once again. I didn't bring up the dagger, or the bayonet, the medical examiner did.

Not only do I think that 2 men were likely involved, (by the fact at least 2 weapons were used), but I don't see any evidence anywhere that discounts a solider or a pair of them...or the wound being made by a dagger, or bayonet.

Perhaps you have evidence that no-one else has seen or heard of which gives you the authority to state so empirically about these things,... but I doubt that.

I post on murder threads here that have nothing to do with Jack the Ripper solely for the purpose of reminding those posting on it that Jack has not had a single murder pinned on him, and there is zero cause for a Canonical Group plus.

If anything, the list should be shortened.

Cheers

Hello Michael,

Surely the evidence that a soldier was involved in the murder of Tabram is extremely scant. I mean, it's largely dependent on the evidence of Pearly Poll, who in my opinion ranks well behind the likes of George Hutchinson and Catherine Maxwell in the list of reliable witnesses!

Firstly, despite the fact that her friend has been brutally murdered, it takes her 3 days to report vital evidence to the police. Then there's her claim that she and Tabram visited various pubs with 2 soldiers over a period of almost 2 hours. However, despite the length time they were allegedly together, this is uncorroborated by any other known witness.

Next, she claims that Tabram left with her soldier at around 11:45, but this is almost 3 hours before the estimated time of death given by Dr Killeen, i.e 2:30am. Surely, they couldn't have been together, unseen, for that length of time, especially when you consider Tabram's profession. And, of course, Connelly was apparently neither threatened or assaulted by the soldier she went off with.

Connelly's subsequent conduct is also bizarre. She initially failed to turn up for a line-up and threatened to drown herself. When an identity parade eventually did take place she seemed to treat the whole thing as a joke,before changing her description of the two men and then picking out two innocent soldiers at a second parade!

And what of the 2 weapons theory. How does that imply two killers? I mean, even if 2 weapons were used then, according to Dr Killeen, 38 out of 39 wounds were caused by a single knife. Are we seriously to believe that killer A inflicted 38 wounds before Killer B took over and struck a single blow?

Or maybe killer A delivered, say, 20 blows. became exhausted, went away for a break, allowing the more passive Killer B to inflict a single wound, before returning fully revitalized and resuming the assault!

Frankly, I think the last thing we need is yet another addition to the ever growing list of Whitechapel, 1888, murderers.



Cheers,

John

[Michael W Richards]

People who've read my book have seen it, Michael.

Harry D,

Actually, Nichols was stabbed multiple times.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

Im sure Tom, and I know you also believe you've Exonerated Kidney, but real evidence is what Im talking about. Nichols was killed by a double cut to the throat, the "stabbing" had nothing to do with her demise.

Cheers

[Michael W Richards]

Hello Michael,

Surely the evidence that a soldier was involved in the murder of Tabram is extremely scant. I mean, it's largely dependent on the evidence of Pearly Poll, who in my opinion ranks well behind the likes of George Hutchinson and Catherine Maxwell in the list of reliable witnesses!

Firstly, despite the fact that her friend has been brutally murdered, it takes her 3 days to report vital evidence to the police. Then there's her claim that she and Tabram visited various pubs with 2 soldiers over a period of almost 2 hours. However, despite the length time they were allegedly together, this is uncorroborated by any other known witness.

Next, she claims that Tabram left with her soldier at around 11:45, but this is almost 3 hours before the estimated time of death given by Dr Killeen, i.e 2:30am. Surely, they couldn't have been together, unseen, for that length of time, especially when you consider Tabram's profession. And, of course, Connelly was apparently neither threatened or assaulted by the soldier she went off with.

Connelly's subsequent conduct is also bizarre. She initially failed to turn up for a line-up and threatened to drown herself. When an identity parade eventually did take place she seemed to treat the whole thing as a joke,before changing her description of the two men and then picking out two innocent soldiers at a second parade!

And what of the 2 weapons theory. How does that imply two killers? I mean, even if 2 weapons were used then, according to Dr Killeen, 38 out of 39 wounds were caused by a single knife. Are we seriously to believe that killer A inflicted 38 wounds before Killer B took over and struck a single blow?

Or maybe killer A delivered, say, 20 blows. became exhausted, went away for a break, allowing the more passive Killer B to inflict a single wound, before returning fully revitalized and resuming the assault!

Frankly, I think the last thing we need is yet another addition to the ever growing list of Whitechapel, 1888, murderers.



Cheers,

John

Let me ask you John, have you read about a constable questioning a soldier loitering near George Yard? Waiting for a friend?

As to the issue of 2 weapons, that fact alone suggests 2 men, for why would a killer use a penknife which would necessitate all those stabs just to attempt to kill the woman if he had a larger weapon with his at the time that could do it in one stroke.

If a drunk soldier, or someone posing as a soldier was with Martha and lost control of his anger for some reason then I can easily see the multiple stabs being explained. It would also indicate that the man did not go out to kill anyone, he just used the only thing he could to stab her with that he had on him...his pen knife. If a second man comes to get the first, and he is a solider or posing as one, and finds the first man over a woman who is not yet dead, but stabbed seemingly beyond repair, and this second man has a dagger or bayonet on him, I can see the single stab to end the womans suffering and to allow both to leave immediately. I can see soldiers covering each others behinds. I can see that the solider loitering represents a case where 2 soldiers were out together that night, and can also see that perhaps there were lots of pairs of military buddies out in their regalia.

This explains 2 weapons, it validates the idea of a bayonet being used, it explains why only one stab with the larger weapon, and it utilizes an account we already have on the books that puts 2 soldiers out that night near George yard, one off with a girl.

What you are attempting to do is akin to putting square pegs into a round opening...the only way to accomplish this is to modify either the peg or the opening.

What you have with the following Unsolved murder in the area is a fully formed killer who does not lack experience cutting into flesh and tissue, who knows how to kill effectively and fast, and who kills primarily because he desires to mutilate the body afterward. There is nothing of that kind of killer evident in the Tabram murder....or the Stride murder. Or the Ada Wilson attack. Or the Smith attack. Or the Torsos. Or with Annie Farmer.

There is in the Chapman attack, and for some reason with less skill and knowledge....Eddowes attack, then with Alice McKenzie. However, IF the killer of Polly also killed Alice, then you would have direct evidence that every comment by any one of the police interviewed concerning the apprehension of the murder at large and his detention...were lies.


Cheers