Things which don't make sense (to me)

[Patrick S]

"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.

Agreed. Didn't intend "home" to be literal. "Home" = some place the killer had some connection to. I agree, as well, that the killer was unlikely to have lived in a common lodging house.

[Patrick S]

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.

I agree with that, Sam. I'm not proposing or subscribing to anything. Just presenting it as is. As well, I enjoy exercises such as this.

[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.

[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.

[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/

[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.

[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.

[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]

"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]

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.

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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...