Did JtR change his MO after murdering Martha Tabram

[JeffHamm]

Hi Trevor,

In my opinon she could have been the first victim as she was stabbed 39 times in a frenzied attack, which is how some of the other victims were attacked also in what I would describe as frenzied attacks.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

I agree, that aspect of her murder is one of the main points that suggests she needs to be considered as a serious potential case. Many of the police at the time certainly included her, though of course not all. Nichols abdominal slashes could be viewed as much more frenzied and less "goal directed" (the goal being to open up the abdominal cavity and explore), and certainly the slashes to Eddowes face would be characterised as frenzied, though some argue the cuts over her eyes were deliberate, purposeful, and meticulous, I'm not sure they couldn't result from a less purposefully made slash (placing the blade along the face and slicing, such that the eye socket affords some protection to the lower structures due to them being inset lower than the brow type thing).

- Jeff

[Trevor Marriott]

Hi Jeff,

I can totally see the disgruntled Soldier explanation. Its still that strangulation element that tips the balance for me, for her being the first JtR victim. If she was just stabbed in a frenzy, then I would see it more likely being the soldier. Somehow the escalation just makes sense to me. I am always surprised that she was not put down as the first victim? I wonder if something definitive excluding her has been lost in the 130 years?

In my opinon she could have been the first victim as she was stabbed 39 times in a frenzied attack, which is how some of the other victims were attacked also in what I would describe as frenzied attacks.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[JeffHamm]

Hi Abby,

hey Jeff
soldiers couldnt ever go out in civilian clothes? when they were on leave? perhaps if tabram was the first and or trigger kill it was while he was in uniform and for obvious reasons he continued the series without his uniform?

would a soldier on leave possibly fit the pattern of the dates of the murders? ie weekends and holidays? beginning or end of the month?

I'm not sure if they were expected to wear some sort of uniform when out on weekends and expected to return to barracks. Obviously, if they are out for the entire weekend, and have a residence to go to (as the alibi for one of the soliders indicates - he was with his wife), then they would be able to dress and go out in civilian clothes. So it's not out of the question, but it would mean someone who is out for the weekend who either is not spending time with their wife (if married), which would probably not lend itself to marital bliss, or someone who is out for the weekend and maintains a residence of their own. The latter seems unlikely to be affordable, but I'm assuming a married soldier's wife has some sort of income as well, of course. If a soldier's pay allows for that expense, then problem solved. I just don't know enough on those issues. While the typical soldier who is not married would most likely not take on that expense given they have a residence on base (or a military housing type situation - maybe that's where our alibied soldier's wife lived?), if JtR were a soldier he would not be typical and might see that expense as necessary.

I'm not sure of how the cycle of weekend leaves would work either. If they were on a two week rotation, maybe it fits. These are questions that someone more knowledgeable about how the military worked at that time might be able to assist us on. Without knowing the answers to those, we're left with possibilities that we can't resolve making each decision/question point another time we have to make an assumption. The more assumptions we make, the more likely we will guess wrong at least once. And one wrong guess tends to divert us to the "not a soldier" while to get to "could be a soldier" requires a lot more of those to come out a particular way.

As I say, it's not impossible, but from what I know, it seems improbable at this point. Given more information, of course, that probability assessment could very easily change. That's the power of information.

- Jeff

[Abby Normal]

Hi Abby,



True, JtR could have been a soldier, though in none of the cases are any of the men thought to be seen with the victims described as having the appearance or dress of a soldier. We get sailor, but that doesn't necessarily mean navy of course. While we can't entirely rule out JtR as a soldier, I think the lack of any descriptions pointing in that direction tends to be taken as pointing away from that. So, if Tabram was killed by a soldier, as the evidence we have tends to suggest, that's generally considered as meaning "not JtR". But, if none of the sightings of men with the victims was JtR, then he could have been anyone, soldier included.

I'm not sure on this point, but I think when soldiers were out, they were in uniform (as Pearly Poll's testimony indicates), so they would be readily identifiable as such. If we go down the road of "well, he left the base, changed clothes, murdered, changed back into uniform, etc", we have to figure out where he left his uniform, and how he could get his civilian clothes in and out of the barracks. It seems unlikely that a soldier could afford to keep a residence for this purpose.

Anyway, while I agree with what you're getting at, I think trying to connect Tabram to the series by suggesting JtR was the soldier that killed Tabram leads to a very complicated set of conditions that need to be explained and for which we have no evidence to build that explanation with. As such, I tend to view things as "If Tabram was killed by the soldier, she's not a JtR victim", and while stated there as if it's definitely the case, I only mean that I think the probability extremely low, but I recognize it's not strictly impossible. Note, of course, I'm also of the mind that "If Tabram wasn't killed by the soldier, then she is much more likely to be part of the series."

Of course, if I'm wrong on that, and the improbable did happen, then I'm wrong.

- Jeff

hey Jeff
soldiers couldnt ever go out in civilian clothes? when they were on leave? perhaps if tabram was the first and or trigger kill it was while he was in uniform and for obvious reasons he continued the series without his uniform?

would a soldier on leave possibly fit the pattern of the dates of the murders? ie weekends and holidays? beginning or end of the month?

[JeffHamm]

Hi Abby,

hi los
the soldier could have been the ripper. its not either or. i think this perhaps is a reason or one of them, shes not seen as a definitive ripper victim. ibe seen alot of people make this assumption/ mistake.

True, JtR could have been a soldier, though in none of the cases are any of the men thought to be seen with the victims described as having the appearance or dress of a soldier. We get sailor, but that doesn't necessarily mean navy of course. While we can't entirely rule out JtR as a soldier, I think the lack of any descriptions pointing in that direction tends to be taken as pointing away from that. So, if Tabram was killed by a soldier, as the evidence we have tends to suggest, that's generally considered as meaning "not JtR". But, if none of the sightings of men with the victims was JtR, then he could have been anyone, soldier included.

I'm not sure on this point, but I think when soldiers were out, they were in uniform (as Pearly Poll's testimony indicates), so they would be readily identifiable as such. If we go down the road of "well, he left the base, changed clothes, murdered, changed back into uniform, etc", we have to figure out where he left his uniform, and how he could get his civilian clothes in and out of the barracks. It seems unlikely that a soldier could afford to keep a residence for this purpose.

Anyway, while I agree with what you're getting at, I think trying to connect Tabram to the series by suggesting JtR was the soldier that killed Tabram leads to a very complicated set of conditions that need to be explained and for which we have no evidence to build that explanation with. As such, I tend to view things as "If Tabram was killed by the soldier, she's not a JtR victim", and while stated there as if it's definitely the case, I only mean that I think the probability extremely low, but I recognize it's not strictly impossible. Note, of course, I'm also of the mind that "If Tabram wasn't killed by the soldier, then she is much more likely to be part of the series."

Of course, if I'm wrong on that, and the improbable did happen, then I'm wrong.

- Jeff

[Abby Normal]

Hi Jeff,

I can totally see the disgruntled Soldier explanation. Its still that strangulation element that tips the balance for me, for her being the first JtR victim. If she was just stabbed in a frenzy, then I would see it more likely being the soldier. Somehow the escalation just makes sense to me. I am always surprised that she was not put down as the first victim? I wonder if something definitive excluding her has been lost in the 130 years?

hi los
the soldier could have been the ripper. its not either or. i think this perhaps is a reason or one of them, shes not seen as a definitive ripper victim. ibe seen alot of people make this assumption/ mistake.

[MrBarnett]

Why didn’t Killeen mention that there was evidence of strangulation?

[Losmandris]

Hi Tristan,

Oh, I don't think Pearly Poll was reliable, just one of those things that feels a bit less resolved than ideal. Given she wasn't insistent on her identification though, it's nothing to really build on other than a "well, maybe ..." type thing.

And who knows, if Tabram did find another customer after the soldiers, and there was time for that, then maybe it was JtR. The attack on Nichols is less directed than that of Chapman, and Eddowes shows the frenzy in the face slashing as well. So it's worth considering. It may point to someone without those skills as you mention, and their learning as they go coupled with reliving the events and working out how to improve upon things. Or, as appears most likely, Tabram was killed by a soldier who, for whatever reason, lost it with her. Perhaps he couldn't perform and she said something that set him off, for example. I could see her murder being unrelated, but given the temporal proximity to the Nichols and Chapman murder, the overkill displayed, and the location, victim characteristics, well, it shouldn't be dismissed out of hand.

- Jeff

Hi Jeff,

I can totally see the disgruntled Soldier explanation. Its still that strangulation element that tips the balance for me, for her being the first JtR victim. If she was just stabbed in a frenzy, then I would see it more likely being the soldier. Somehow the escalation just makes sense to me. I am always surprised that she was not put down as the first victim? I wonder if something definitive excluding her has been lost in the 130 years?

[JeffHamm]

Hi Jeff,

Some really good points here. I think the strangulation element of Tabram's murder seals the deal for me in making her a victim of JtR and not just a random murder. I wonder if, she was a victim if this evolution/change in approach says something about the killer? In that he was not in a profession that involves killing/knives/anatomy, i.e. not doctor/butcher or soldier and therefore not entirely sure how to go about taking someones life effectively.Also this could explain the panic/manic stab wounds? Just a thought?

In reference to Pearly Poll, I am not sure how reliable a witness she really is. I am always inclined to take her evidence with a serious pinch of salt.

Hi Tristan,

Oh, I don't think Pearly Poll was reliable, just one of those things that feels a bit less resolved than ideal. Given she wasn't insistent on her identification though, it's nothing to really build on other than a "well, maybe ..." type thing.

And who knows, if Tabram did find another customer after the soldiers, and there was time for that, then maybe it was JtR. The attack on Nichols is less directed than that of Chapman, and Eddowes shows the frenzy in the face slashing as well. So it's worth considering. It may point to someone without those skills as you mention, and their learning as they go coupled with reliving the events and working out how to improve upon things. Or, as appears most likely, Tabram was killed by a soldier who, for whatever reason, lost it with her. Perhaps he couldn't perform and she said something that set him off, for example. I could see her murder being unrelated, but given the temporal proximity to the Nichols and Chapman murder, the overkill displayed, and the location, victim characteristics, well, it shouldn't be dismissed out of hand.

- Jeff

[Losmandris]

Hi Tristan,



It's certainly possible. Serial killers are not quite as robotic as sometimes assumed, and they can vary in their actions at crime scenes quite a bit. And given Martha, if part of the series, would be prior to the more typical abdominal slashing murders, a frenzied stabbing attack could be an early approach. David Berkowitz's (Son of Sam) first attacks were with a knife, but they proved non-fatal and ineffective. After that he switched to using a large calibre hand gun (a 44).

The lack of her raising any sound, or cries of pain, etc, would be explained if he did strangle her to at least the point of unconsciousness.

We do have "Pearly Poll's" testimony that they were with two soldiers that night, and there is a police constable who testifies he saw one soldier waiting for his friend who had "gone off with a girl" though. And while neither of them were great witnesses, both picking out the wrong men during some line ups, all that tells us is that they didn't have a strong memory for what the soldiers looked like.

I believe it was one of the soldiers Pearly Poll identified who was cleared because he was with his wife that weekend (she verified his alibi). One could view that as potentially providing a false alibi, but as PP didn't insist she had the right fellow, I don't think even that line of speculation would provide for a strong argument that one of the men had been found.

In the end, Tabram needs to be considered as potentially the first victim (who died, there may have been some prior non-fatal attacks, like Millwood, though her consideration is, in my view, tied to accepting Tabram). I believe it was the view of many of the police at the time that Tabram was part of the series. It was McNaughton who later rejected that idea when he penned his memorandum, creating the C5.

- Jeff

Hi Jeff,

Some really good points here. I think the strangulation element of Tabram's murder seals the deal for me in making her a victim of JtR and not just a random murder. I wonder if, she was a victim if this evolution/change in approach says something about the killer? In that he was not in a profession that involves killing/knives/anatomy, i.e. not doctor/butcher or soldier and therefore not entirely sure how to go about taking someones life effectively.Also this could explain the panic/manic stab wounds? Just a thought?

In reference to Pearly Poll, I am not sure how reliable a witness she really is. I am always inclined to take her evidence with a serious pinch of salt.

[Losmandris]

Hi Los
Totally agree. I think he attacked her grabbing her around the neck and strangling her and possibly banging her head (there was evidence of bruises on her head i beleive) and then stabbing in her in the neck/ rest of body to try and finish her off. It didnt go as planned-she didnt go quickly or quietly.
I think he may used two knives also-a smaller one and a larger one.
Next time he went to strangling and slashing the neck and only used a bigger knife. change(slight) in MO and escalation as the ripper perfects his technique.

Hey Abby,

This certainly makes sense to me. I see this first murder as a bit of an evolution. To me, with each subsequent murder, the killer grows both in confidence and ferocity (with the exception of Stride of course, but then he was probably disturbed). I just don't see somehow that Nichols was the first victim.

[Abby Normal]

Hi Tristan,



It's certainly possible. Serial killers are not quite as robotic as sometimes assumed, and they can vary in their actions at crime scenes quite a bit. And given Martha, if part of the series, would be prior to the more typical abdominal slashing murders, a frenzied stabbing attack could be an early approach. David Berkowitz's (Son of Sam) first attacks were with a knife, but they proved non-fatal and ineffective. After that he switched to using a large calibre hand gun (a 44).

The lack of her raising any sound, or cries of pain, etc, would be explained if he did strangle her to at least the point of unconsciousness.

We do have "Pearly Poll's" testimony that they were with two soldiers that night, and there is a police constable who testifies he saw one soldier waiting for his friend who had "gone off with a girl" though. And while neither of them were great witnesses, both picking out the wrong men during some line ups, all that tells us is that they didn't have a strong memory for what the soldiers looked like.

I believe it was one of the soldiers Pearly Poll identified who was cleared because he was with his wife that weekend (she verified his alibi). One could view that as potentially providing a false alibi, but as PP didn't insist she had the right fellow, I don't think even that line of speculation would provide for a strong argument that one of the men had been found.

In the end, Tabram needs to be considered as potentially the first victim (who died, there may have been some prior non-fatal attacks, like Millwood, though her consideration is, in my view, tied to accepting Tabram). I believe it was the view of many of the police at the time that Tabram was part of the series. It was McNaughton who later rejected that idea when he penned his memorandum, creating the C5.

- Jeff

hey jeff
yeah i consider tabram and probably millwood as part of the series. too many similarities and i doubt the ripper started with his mo fully formed with nichols. the final straw with me re tabram is that she was found with her skirt hiked up, like the others.

[JeffHamm]

Hi Tristan,

I was just reading a really interesting old thread on Martha Tabram. It raised some key points questioning the cause of death. Most interestingly that her face appeared to indicate that she was strangled. I am wondering if the murderer strangled her to render her unconscious, then stabbed her in the neck to kill her. He then plans to carry out some kind of post mortem mutilations. However the stabs to the neck have not been effective and Martha is still alive (and possibly kicking). He then, in a panic stabs her multiply times and thus no mutilations. Following from this for his next victims he changes his MO to slashing rather than stabbing the neck.

Any thoughts?


Tristan

It's certainly possible. Serial killers are not quite as robotic as sometimes assumed, and they can vary in their actions at crime scenes quite a bit. And given Martha, if part of the series, would be prior to the more typical abdominal slashing murders, a frenzied stabbing attack could be an early approach. David Berkowitz's (Son of Sam) first attacks were with a knife, but they proved non-fatal and ineffective. After that he switched to using a large calibre hand gun (a 44).

The lack of her raising any sound, or cries of pain, etc, would be explained if he did strangle her to at least the point of unconsciousness.

We do have "Pearly Poll's" testimony that they were with two soldiers that night, and there is a police constable who testifies he saw one soldier waiting for his friend who had "gone off with a girl" though. And while neither of them were great witnesses, both picking out the wrong men during some line ups, all that tells us is that they didn't have a strong memory for what the soldiers looked like.

I believe it was one of the soldiers Pearly Poll identified who was cleared because he was with his wife that weekend (she verified his alibi). One could view that as potentially providing a false alibi, but as PP didn't insist she had the right fellow, I don't think even that line of speculation would provide for a strong argument that one of the men had been found.

In the end, Tabram needs to be considered as potentially the first victim (who died, there may have been some prior non-fatal attacks, like Millwood, though her consideration is, in my view, tied to accepting Tabram). I believe it was the view of many of the police at the time that Tabram was part of the series. It was McNaughton who later rejected that idea when he penned his memorandum, creating the C5.

- Jeff

[Abby Normal]

I was just reading a really interesting old thread on Martha Tabram. It raised some key points questioning the cause of death. Most interestingly that her face appeared to indicate that she was strangled. I am wondering if the murderer strangled her to render her unconscious, then stabbed her in the neck to kill her. He then plans to carry out some kind of post mortem mutilations. However the stabs to the neck have not been effective and Martha is still alive (and possibly kicking). He then, in a panic stabs her multiply times and thus no mutilations. Following from this for his next victims he changes his MO to slashing rather than stabbing the neck.

Any thoughts?


Tristan

Hi Los
Totally agree. I think he attacked her grabbing her around the neck and strangling her and possibly banging her head (there was evidence of bruises on her head i beleive) and then stabbing in her in the neck/ rest of body to try and finish her off. It didnt go as planned-she didnt go quickly or quietly.
I think he may used two knives also-a smaller one and a larger one.
Next time he went to strangling and slashing the neck and only used a bigger knife. change(slight) in MO and escalation as the ripper perfects his technique.

[Losmandris]

I was just reading a really interesting old thread on Martha Tabram. It raised some key points questioning the cause of death. Most interestingly that her face appeared to indicate that she was strangled. I am wondering if the murderer strangled her to render her unconscious, then stabbed her in the neck to kill her. He then plans to carry out some kind of post mortem mutilations. However the stabs to the neck have not been effective and Martha is still alive (and possibly kicking). He then, in a panic stabs her multiply times and thus no mutilations. Following from this for his next victims he changes his MO to slashing rather than stabbing the neck.

Any thoughts?


Tristan