Things which don't make sense (to me)

[Ausgirl]

There's quite a bit about Martha Tabram's murder, the autopsy and its findings, all on their own and as well in conjunction with several theories regarding her death that make very little sense to me. I'm not a Martha expert, so I'm more than happy to be corrected by facts (rather than theories, please) where applicable. I'm actually thinking out loud, so reserve the right to answer my own questions as I go, heh..

1. Martha was clearly strangled or suffocated while still alive, or a/ there'd be no point doing it, and b/ her face would not be swollen. Strangulation isn't all about lack of oxygen, it can also include pressure on the large arteries of the neck (particularly during ligature strangulation), restricting blood flow to the brain (producing cerebral anemia, which might make perfect sense of Tabram's notably "pale" looking brain tissue). Also, veinous congestion of the jugular, perhaps by a wider ligature (such as a piece of cloth) causes rapid rise in blood pressure in the head - causing swelling and discoloration of the face. I'm not sure whether this would cause a "pale" looking looking brain, though.

What doesn't make sense to me here is, if Martha was strangled *so hard* that it caused her face to bloat and discolour, how did this not also kill her? Why should we assume that it didn't? Which leads me to ...

3. If Martha lived for any amount of time after she was strangled, and then also survived for any amount of time after 9 stabs to the throat, two stabs to one lung and then five to the other -- if she was still breathing, or attempting to breathe, after any and all of that, then WHY was there no blood in her mouth?

It doesn't make sense to me that if Tabram was alive and attempting to breathe with two perforated lungs and a throat stabbed nine times, there's no blood in her mouth.

It makes much more sense, if I consider that she might have already been dead for the stabbing. Which leads me to:

4. The finding that she died from "exsanguination". Blood loss. Not the strangulation that made her face swell up like a big purple balloon. Not the stab wound to her heart, or the 7 collective stab wounds to her lungs, or aspiration of blood from the 9 stab wounds to her throat. Killeen posits that she somehow survived past all of that, and bled to death?

5: These things, in the autopsy report:

the heart was stabbed once, which was rather fatty; except for stab wound nothing about the heart to cause death;
So why isn't cause of death "fatal stab wound to the heart?"

there was a lot of blood between her legs
But no examination of what what caused it? No mention at all in the inquest report of where that blood came from? The location and type of wound that caused it? Why? Yet we're told:

the breasts, stomach, abdomen, and vagina seemed to have been the main areas
Of what? Stabbing? Can we eke from this the suggestion that Martha was stabbed in the vagina? Why not just say so? How is this not strongly suggestive of the Ripper? Why is Tabram, with these injuries to those areas of her body, NOT up there in the c5, but Stride is? That makes no sense to me.

Why did he stab in a bunch of clusters, around major organs, and not just randomly all over the place? The chest wounds. okay, I can see breasts being the target there. But lower down -- was he maybe after stabbing the ovaries and womb?

the stab wound to the heart might have been made by a dagger or bayonet by a left-handed person.
Or someone right-handed, crouching at the opposite end of her body... How'd he come to these left/right conclusions, anyway? Show your reasoning man!

death was due to hemorrhage and loss of blood
Already mentioned above. But let me just say here: REALLY? At what stage. please? How 'bout a wild guess, Dr. Killeen? No?

sexual intercourse had not recently taken place
Then what the heck had her 'date' been doing with her that night? Enjoying her scintillating conversation?

no evidence of a struggle; except for the wound on the chest bone
She's supposed to have survived being strangled blue in the face, stabbed in a bunch of vital organs, stabbed in the heart (in whatever order one chooses ot place those)... then went on, according to Killeen, to bleed to death... yet there's no signs of struggle. No drag marks, no great sloughs of blood indicating she tried to crawl away.

She was attacked, it seems, in situ and it seems, was quite quickly and utterly overcome, probably rendered unconscious (via severe strangulation/lack of blood to the brain), before that long series of potentially fatal injuries didn't kill her and she bled out...

Or just maybe Tabram was killed outright via strangulation, and all the stabbery was post mortem. Which leads me to:

6: HOW can people insist her stab wounds could not possibly be postmortem due to the blood loss, when less than 20 seconds of Googling can pull up a whole slew of documents proving that according to forensic science, bodies can and do bleed after death?

Phew. This has likely all been argued and argued.. but at least I feel better after venting. Also, a deal more convinced JtR might have this, and Tabram was dead for all the stabbing.

Except.. 7:
If this was Jack, why'd he quit stabbing and start 'ripping', just a few weeks later? Was the womb-level stab/slice on Tabram the beginning of it?

[Damaso Marte]

Except.. 7:
If this was Jack, why'd he quit stabbing and start 'ripping', just a few weeks later? Was the womb-level stab/slice on Tabram the beginning of it?

The Nichols abdomen wounds could be seen as being on a spectrum ranging from Tabram to Chapman. They're not quite classic Ripper stuff, even though that's an undisputed Ripper murder.

[Pcdunn]

To Ausgirl:

Interesting questions.

I wonder if she was already insensible before she was strangled? Would this be a case of her attacker finding a sleeping or drunk woman and striking while she was particularly vulnerable? Would that account for the lack of signs of struggle? Just a thought...

[Batman]

I don't think it really mattered to JtR how he rendered them unconscious as long as they got unconscious. Dead or unconscious, didn't matter, as that was never the focus of his attack, just a means to an end. So the MO here can deviate quite a bit.

In Nichols case it looks like she has been punched out cold first. Chapman seems to have gone the same way. Schartz literally describes Stride being hard slammed into the concrete. Thrown down. Not pushed down. All of this stuff seems like pretty random violent blitz type attacks done when the victim is off-guard. MJK may have had a sheet pulled over her face before she was killed. There seems little in the way of there being a solid pattern in how the blitz is done, but the brusing to the face, neck and chest shows it was done and there is some.

Tabram was stabbed in the throat. She was not slashed. So that isn't really like JtR.

However the time/location and position of the body is all in line with JtR. There is obviously some attempt at sexual mutilation, like Nichols.

I postulated awhile ago on the board that the positioning is not completely sexual at all, but aids exsanguination, like someone who was feeling faint, putting their legs up helps blood flow back to the head while on your back.

As correctly stated, Tabram's death is all odd and strange. The stabs to the neck may not have been enough to kill her. Maybe the killer thought she was dead only to find her coming too during the mutilation and then having to strangle her to finish her off. So that's a mistake he won't make again. No more stabs to the neck. Next time he slashes.

What I am getting at is that it doesn't seem to matter to JtR what killed them as long as they where horizontal, unconscious and where not going to bother him any more.

[YankeeSergeant]

Very good questions all! There may not have been two knives and in fact my THEORY is that there was one knife, likely a stout and very sharp dagger. I'm not inclined to believe it was a clasp knife unless it locked like some today do because with no hilt the killer would likely have injured himself. I rule out a bayonet because their length makes them unwieldy if not on the front of a rifle.
I'm not surprised that there were no signs of sexual intercourse. It is possible that her last customer did not penetrate and instead she placed him literally between her legs rather than in her vagina.
In spite of Television and movies showing strangling as easy, it is not. It is possible that she was still alive though comatose when the killer started stabbing her.
There were 39 stab wounds She would have leaked like a sieve. Given the proximity of the abdominal wounds to the vagina that would account for the blood and if the vaginal area was not actually wounded, the coroner would not mention it.
All in all you pose some intriguing questions. Thank you for the post it was entertaining and illuminating.

[Patrick S]

I've always felt that Tabram was "Ripper" victim. Recently, I've begun looking at the crime more closely. In London recently, I did some rather informal mapping of relevant sites and I've been using a few tools to calculate rough distances, etc. It's all been done before but it's interesting and I enjoy doing it. In any event, as an American who has studied the crimes for 30+ years but never actually visited the area, I was struck by the small size of the area across which the sites are located.

A perimeter can be drawn by connecting five sites: Buck's Row (Nichols), Hanbury Street (Chapman), Berner Street (Stride), Mitre Square (Eddowes), and Miller's Court (Kelly). Within the perimeter are two sites: Goulston Street/Wentworth Model Dwellings (Eddowes' Apron/Graffito) and George Yard (Tabram). George Yard lies very near the center of the perimeter. The Wentworth Model Dwellings in Goulston Street are located some 270 yards from George Yard. Estimated distances to the canonical murder sites and Goulston Street to George Yard are:

George Yard to Bucks Row = 892 Yards
George Yard to 29 Hanbury Street = 478 Yards
George Yard to Berner Street = 545 Yards
George Yard to Mitre Square = 621 Yards
George Yard to Miller’s Court = 427 Yards
George Yard to Goulston Street (Wentworth Dwellings) = 273 Yards

Thus, if one subscribes the theory that serial killers often take their first victim close to home, then one might theorize that killer may have lived in or near George Yard or in or near Goulston Street.

[Abby Normal]

I've always felt that Tabram was "Ripper" victim. Recently, I've begun looking at the crime more closely. In London recently, I did some rather informal mapping of relevant sites and I've been using a few tools to calculate rough distances, etc. It's all been done before but it's interesting and I enjoy doing it. In any event, as an American who has studied the crimes for 30+ years but never actually visited the area, I was struck by the small size of the area across which the sites are located.

A perimeter can be drawn by connecting five sites: Buck's Row (Nichols), Hanbury Street (Chapman), Berner Street (Stride), Mitre Square (Eddowes), and Miller's Court (Kelly). Within the perimeter are two sites: Goulston Street/Wentworth Model Dwellings (Eddowes' Apron/Graffito) and George Yard (Tabram). George Yard lies very near the center of the perimeter. The Wentworth Model Dwellings in Goulston Street are located some 270 yards from George Yard. Estimated distances to the canonical murder sites and Goulston Street to George Yard are:

George Yard to Bucks Row = 892 Yards
George Yard to 29 Hanbury Street = 478 Yards
George Yard to Berner Street = 545 Yards
George Yard to Mitre Square = 621 Yards
George Yard to Miller’s Court = 427 Yards
George Yard to Goulston Street (Wentworth Dwellings) = 273 Yards

Thus, if one subscribes the theory that serial killers often take their first victim close to home, then one might theorize that killer may have lived in or near George Yard or in or near Goulston Street.

Yup,
and especially if one subscribes to the theory that a serial killers first kill is sometimes the "trigger" kill. One that he didn't necessarily plan, but something set him off-which might explain the apparent "angry" nature of the attack and lack of mature MO and sig.

[Sam Flynn]

Thus, if one subscribes the theory that serial killers often take their first victim close to home, then one might theorize that killer may have lived in or near George Yard or in or near Goulston Street.

I agree, although - as you know - the whole area is so compact that virtually all the canonical murder sites were "close to home". I have little doubt that he was based somewhere in the immediate vicinity.

[Wickerman]

"Home" is perhaps too literal; a rented room, a place of refuge, somewhere only he has access to, must be included. He may actually live elsewhere.
Unlikely, in my opinion, to be consistent with a 'dosser' as the murderer.

With regards to this thread, I'm not convinced Tabram was a Ripper victim.

[Sam Flynn]

"Home" is perhaps too literal; a rented room, a place of refuge, somewhere only he has access to, must be included. He may actually live elsewhere.

Possibly, but we must accept that the Ripper would almost certainly have had many nights where he was unsuccessful. A "meagre" tally of 4 or 5 victims over a period of four months suggests that he would have been in the neighbourhood on several other occasions in between, when he didn't strike it lucky.

Unlikely, in my opinion, to be consistent with a 'dosser' as the murderer.

Could residents of the Victoria Home (or similar establishments) be considered "dossers" in the strictest sense?

With regards to this thread, I'm not convinced Tabram was a Ripper victim.

Totally agree.

[Wickerman]

Possibly, but we must accept that the Ripper would almost certainly have had many nights where he was unsuccessful. A "meagre" tally of 4 or 5 victims over a period of four months suggests that he would have been in the neighbourhood on several other occasions in between, when he didn't strike it lucky.

Absolutely, how to formulate a meaningful theory after a handful of lucky hits?

Could residents of the Victoria Home (or similar establishments) be considered "dossers" in the strictest sense?

The communal surroundings and absence of privacy do not lend themselves to being the refuge of such a killer.
Any lodging-house is the wrong place to look for someone of this type.

The police went through the lodging-houses, but that I believe was primarily because these places were where the majority of people were gathered together under one roof, not because they believed the killer lived there.
Hundreds could be interviewed, and every man was watching his neighbor, whereas to interview the same number of people in the street would take days, going door to door.

[John G]

Possibly, but we must accept that the Ripper would almost certainly have had many nights where he was unsuccessful. A "meagre" tally of 4 or 5 victims over a period of four months suggests that he would have been in the neighbourhood on several other occasions in between, when he didn't strike it lucky.Could residents of the Victoria Home (or similar establishments) be considered "dossers" in the strictest sense?
Totally agree.

There could have been a number of non-fatal attacks. The first five Yorkshire Ripper victims were attacked over a period of more than 6 months. However, the first three attacks were all non-fatal.

[Trevor Marriott]

I agree, although - as you know - the whole area is so compact that virtually all the canonical murder sites were "close to home". I have little doubt that he was based somewhere in the immediate vicinity.

Or he might not have been a local with the docks being so close by !

Chief Inspector Henry Moore
The Police Review magazine 1913.

"Well so far as I could make out he was a mad foreign sailor, who paid periodical visits to London on board ship. He committed the crimes and then went back to his ship, and remembered nothing about them"

Now I wonder what suspect that might fit?

Author-Jack the Ripper-The real Truth

http://www.trevormarriott.co.uk/jack-ripper-real-truth/

[Sam Flynn]

There could have been a number of non-fatal attacks. The first five Yorkshire Ripper victims were attacked over a period of more than 6 months. However, the first three attacks were all non-fatal.

Indeed so, John.

[Sam Flynn]

Chief Inspector Henry Moore
The Police Review magazine 1913.

"Well so far as I could make out he was a mad foreign sailor, who paid periodical visits to London on board ship. He committed the crimes and then went back to his ship, and remembered nothing about them"

This possibly goes back to Edward Larkins' suggestion, made in 1888, that the Ripper was a merchant seaman. The problem with this theory is that it presupposes that the killer had a better strike-rate than most killers enjoy. The idea that our mad sailor nipped into Whitechapel during a brief period of shore-leave, and successfully killed whenever he was in town before sailing away again, somewhat stretches the bounds of credibility. If so, we shouldn't be looking for a normal human predator, but the flesh and blood equivalent of a guided missile.