|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Chris Michetti
Police Constable
Username: Pl4tinum
Post Number: 8
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Monday, February 23, 2004 - 11:50 am: |       |
If that is true, that makes it all the more shocking that he got away with all these murders. If JTR didn't care whether or not people knew who he was, why would he be so meticulous at the crime scene and leave no traces of bloody footsteps or ensure that the blood didnt spatter on him by angling the victims away from him, etc?
Chris 
|
Sarah Long
Chief Inspector
Username: Sarah
Post Number: 718
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Monday, February 23, 2004 - 11:56 am: | |
Sorry for butting into the conversation here but I just wanted to add some things.
One of the things that would make me think that Martha was one of Jacks is that there were no murders recorded at all in 1887 in Whitechapel and so even though it was quite a criminal place murder itself was very rare and so for a one off terrible murder like this to happen a few weeks before the first canonical victim was killed would be a considerable coincidence.
Also, the 3" cut in the lower part of her body sounds to me like her killer attempted to cut her open. Wasn't the knife used on Martha different to one used on the others? If so then isn't is possible that he tried to open Martha up but upon finding he couldn't with that particular knife chose to leave it and get a better knife. Just a thought.
Sarah |
Monty
Chief Inspector
Username: Monty
Post Number: 768
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Monday, February 23, 2004 - 12:05 pm: | |
Chris,
Whoa there big lad.....Im not being clear here.
There is a difference between not giving a damn about about people knowing him and getting caught.
Im just talking about the actual moment of killing. From reading your post I felt (and I may be wrong, if so Im sorry) you felt Martha was a 'tester'. I dont think that the case. I think his primary concern was with killing, not with being cautious and leaving no clue. That said, I dont think he was totally unware of blood splatter, footprints ect.
Just out of curiosity, meticulous at the crime scene ? angling his victims away? how do you know this ??
Monty
 |
Monty
Chief Inspector
Username: Monty
Post Number: 769
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Monday, February 23, 2004 - 12:09 pm: | |
Sarah,
I agree about coincidence.
The 3 inch cut. Its possible that this was the start of mutilation but it was not carried through due to the murderer being disturbed....just as some feel Jack was interupted during the Stride murder.
Monty
|
Chris Michetti
Police Constable
Username: Pl4tinum
Post Number: 10
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Monday, February 23, 2004 - 12:15 pm: | |
One would think that letting people know who you are somehow would lead them to you, and lead to your getting caught, right? Sorry if I misunderstood something, I was just putting two and two together.
There was some discussion about how the Ripper angled his victims away from him while cutting their neck so as not to cover himself with blood. And, in the police report for the Tabram killing I am pretty sure they remarked that there were no blood drips on the steps leading up to where Tabram was found, nor was any noise made during the killings (people slept right next door without hearing a peep).
Maybe he thought stabbing her 39 times was enough.
Chris
|
Sarah Long
Chief Inspector
Username: Sarah
Post Number: 719
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Monday, February 23, 2004 - 12:22 pm: | |
Is it possible maybe that when he killed Martha (if he did) that he had a tiny peek inside (if that was possible with the wounds he inflicted on her) and then thought he's like a better look next time.
Thats probably makes no sense and was probably not possible either but just thought I'd throw it out there.
Sarah |
Monty
Chief Inspector
Username: Monty
Post Number: 771
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Monday, February 23, 2004 - 12:38 pm: | |
Chris,
I do see your point, and its a valid one. Its just that I dont think that it was a 'conscious' thing....but what do I know ?
Re the angling. I believe that Jack used a good quality Browman reel and used, as ground bait...nah, Im joshing.
Seriously. The reason I asked was because Im more concerned with the blood flow...or rather the lack of it. Strangulation and all that. Wouldnt that account for lack of blood and silence ?
Monty
|
Neil K. MacMillan
Detective Sergeant
Username: Wordsmith
Post Number: 71
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 24, 2004 - 5:01 pm: | |
Chris: My understanding is that the medical examiner ruled out a bayonet. While two people doing in Tabram is certainly possible, I would think it unlikely. There would be too many hands and too little trust. Suppose one of the two soldiers got piched for something else such as another murder or a rape that would warrant the Queen's Bench giving him the rope. You can rest assured the one about to get his neck stretched would sing out on the other to save himself. I still believe that all the wounds were caused by one blade and the difference accountable by having to work the blade back and forth but like much about this case it is speculative and I am open minded about it. Kindest regards, Neil |
Joseph Paul Jackson
Sergeant
Username: Paulj
Post Number: 12
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 25, 2004 - 9:55 pm: | |
Hi All,
I agree with Neil about the single knife theory.
The thought of two suspects stabbing one individual at the same time is a little far out.
The theory that the killer used two different knives is also a little far fetched. If two men killed Martha, it seems easier that one would hold her while the other did the hacking...or whatever... and I also doubt that the suspect was counting as he was stabbing. Just a thought.
Paul |
esm
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Thursday, March 04, 2004 - 5:00 am: | |
Hi everyone,
since Mr Ryder doesn't reply my email-request I put it into the message board,
hoping that someone of you guys can help me out.
After taking a closer look at the press reports dealing with the Tabram murder,
I was astonished to find out that not a single local (London) newspaper
mentioned the wounds at her throat. Though lot of wounds are mentioned explicitly
(in liver, spleen, etc.), not a single word about the throat can be found in the local newspapers. Why?
There is just the Manchester Guardian, in which one can read about nine wounds at the throat.
Is it just a coincidence that none of the local newspapers published on the casebook dont mention
the wounds?
The official documents also keep pretty much in the background with the wounds at the
throat. There is just a very short note in MEPO 3/140 p.37 (Swanson) |
Erguk
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Sunday, March 21, 2004 - 10:22 pm: | |
I'm new here, so please forgive me if I've rehashed an old idea. After reading through much of the Casebook site, I do have the opinion that Trabram was indeed a JTR victim.
I have a two weapon theory to point out. Perhaps a larger weapon was used to make the initial kill. I'd imagine that a swift strong stab through the sternum and to heart would produce quick results with little noise. (Strangling, would of course, be less messy, which would give reason to alter an MO.)
However, after the inital kill, a large weapon would not necessarily be ideal for mutilation handiwork us close, such as multiple stab wounds to key body parts.
Anyway, just a thought.
-Eric |
Neil K. MacMillan
Detective Sergeant
Username: Wordsmith
Post Number: 80
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, March 25, 2004 - 4:20 pm: | |
Eric;
If you'll scroll up you'll see my theory about the weaponry. I doubt that JtR was a walking arsenal and as I said, I don't beleive he had an accomplice. The wound to the sternum could well be the last wound inflicted in which case the other 38 would appear different in that he had to work the knife back and forth to extract it. Kindest regards. Neil PS- No harm in rehashing old stuff. Sometimes it helps to see it again from someone else's perspective. |
RosemaryO'Ryan
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Thursday, March 25, 2004 - 6:41 pm: | |
Dear Erguk,
Sounds as if you have been giving the Tabram murder some deal of thought, in that you are sequencing a number of observations, examples being, lack of noise, lack of blood flow, and of the two sequences of attack, namely, the 39 stab wounds (pretty slow and noisey!) and the rapid despatch of the victim, the 'bayonet' thrust to the heart (instant death with no noise). All seem to point to the scenario you describe.
So why use TWO weapons on an unconscious woman?
Rosey :-) |
Paul Jackson
Detective Sergeant
Username: Paulj
Post Number: 84
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, March 25, 2004 - 10:08 pm: | |
I agree with Neil on that point. I doubt that the attack was a two blade thing. Who takes the time to change weapons after the attack begins?
All the best.
Paul |
Lisa Turner
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 14, 2004 - 8:04 am: | |
I am wondering if anyone can trace any information on the most tenuous of links I might have to 2 characters in the case.
Martha's long term partner, Henry Turner has been also named as William in some reports.
Also Viper named a William James Turner as landlord of the Blue Coat Boy, a pub in Dorset Street.
My grandfather and unfortunately that strain of the family I know least about, was called James William Turner and his family were from the East End. Of course my grandad wasn't born until about 1914, but having the names and place in common is making me wonder if these might be somehow related.
Lisa |
Michael Raney
Inspector
Username: Mikey559
Post Number: 286
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Friday, April 16, 2004 - 1:59 pm: | |
Lisa,
Sorry, I can't help you, but there are a number of people on the boards that might be able to. Be patient. I'm sure someone will reply.
Paul,
I totally agree. I think it was one knife. I don't believe that anyone would change knives midstream.
Everybody else,
I totally believe Martha was JTR's first actual murder. Anyone care to comment?
Mikey |
Chris Michetti
Detective Sergeant
Username: Pl4tinum
Post Number: 123
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Friday, April 16, 2004 - 3:01 pm: | |
I think so too. Maybe something Martha did to him that enraged him enough to stab her 39 times also got him so riled up that he had to kill again, and again, and again...
Chris
|
Richard Brian Nunweek
Chief Inspector
Username: Richardn
Post Number: 796
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, April 16, 2004 - 3:23 pm: | |
Hi Chris,
Yet he stopped stabbing the 39 year old, after 39 times?.
What a coincedence, considering what was to happen.
Richard. |
Chris Michetti
Detective Sergeant
Username: Pl4tinum
Post Number: 125
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Friday, April 16, 2004 - 3:31 pm: | |
Well, I don't think anyone can say for sure that JTR would even have known how old she was. Probably half of those prostitutes didn't even know how old they really were (lol).
I've heard much more convincing coincidences than that to be honest!!
Chris
|
Richard Brian Nunweek
Chief Inspector
Username: Richardn
Post Number: 798
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, April 16, 2004 - 3:41 pm: | |
Hi chris,
My imfamous 39 theory, is not so silly as some may believe, It cannot be denied that many serial murders in the past , and i would say in the future, follow a pattern that the killer finds suitable in his own twisted mind.
Richard. |
Chris Michetti
Detective Sergeant
Username: Pl4tinum
Post Number: 126
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Friday, April 16, 2004 - 3:43 pm: | |
Does it apply to any of the later killings? I've never heard about it until now.
Chris
|
Richard Brian Nunweek
Chief Inspector
Username: Richardn
Post Number: 800
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, April 16, 2004 - 4:07 pm: | |
Hi chris,
It applies to every single one, if you go into search, you will find every single comment I and believers and non believers , have made.
To dismiss all the relevance , is at least in my mind irresponsible.
Richard. |
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 1544
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Friday, April 16, 2004 - 4:10 pm: | |
I don't want to close the door completely, but personally I don't think Tabram was a Ripper victim.
The dissimilarities are in my view considerable. Not only does the weapon not fit the one that's been used in the Ripper murders, but the method is also different. She was stabbed, obviously in a frenzy, a great number of times (I couldn't care less about the 39 theory) but most importantly: her throat wasn't cut. Yes, there was a focus on the abdominal area, but that is not unusual in stab murders anyway.
The notion that we must consider the Ripper, because murders were unusual in 1888, is not only misleading, it is also false. We have during 1888--1890 a number of murders that we normally don't attribute to the Ripper. Prior to Tabram, we have Emma Smith, for example, and I believe there are others. And after Mary Kelly we have Alice MacKenzie and Frances Coles, who (although the debate will continue to rage about them) probably had nothing to do with the Ripper. And then we have the Torso and Whitehall murders, not to mention the domestic murder in Westminster the same night as the "double event". Even without the Ripper, I would say the span of years showed a murder rate that can't be dismissed.
In my belief the Tabram murder was a result of a sex deal with a client, that went wrong and there maybe was some disagreement about the payment and possibly the offender was drunk and obviously also extremely violent (which also could be the case regarding Stride). But just because it was a violent murder doesen't mean that it must have been the Ripper. I can't disregard the possibility of the soldier trail being a likely opening, although the culprit wasn't identified.
Anyhow, to me the Tabram case show little mark of a Ripper murder, as far as I am concerned.
All the best
Glenn Gustaf Lauritz Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Richard Brian Nunweek
Chief Inspector
Username: Richardn
Post Number: 801
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, April 16, 2004 - 4:31 pm: | |
Hi Glenn,
To me Tabram shows every sign of a ripper attack, she was attacked in a frenzy,[ excluding Stride] a characteristic of all the other murders.
We should remember that Tabram would have been the first of the series, and the confined space that the killer had to work in , the first floor landing was extremely limited in space, judging by photographs.
The killer of all these poor souls, was a deranged person, who was in a state of coldness, and just hacked, and stabbed, until for want of a better word , his climax subsided[ not sexual].
Also regardless if your a member of the 39 fan club,or not it is a starting point...
Regards Richard. |
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 1546
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Friday, April 16, 2004 - 4:42 pm: | |
Hi Richard,
I am sorry, but the fact that the murder was made in a frenzy doesen't cut it (if I may use the expression here ...) way enough -- that could hardly be considered as a personality trait we only can apply to the Ripper exclusively.
Obviously the Ripper wasn't the only deranged, violent character in East End at this time, and that must be taken in consideration.
Then I must add, that I find it a bit curious that you refer to the Tabram murder as showing "every sign of a Ripper attack", when there in fact are no similarities whatsoever, apart from the fact that Tabram was a prostitute. The method is different, the weapon is wrong, the wounds on the victim of a completely different character... etc. etc.
Once again, strong indications show that the Ripper wasn't the only one responsible for the murder statistics in the area at the time. The fact that we want to see Tabram as a Ripper victim has got nothing to do with that reality.
All the best
Glenn Gustaf Lauritz Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
|
Use of these
message boards implies agreement and consent to our Terms of Use.
The views expressed here in no way reflect the views of the owners and
operators of Casebook: Jack the Ripper.
Our old message board content (45,000+ messages) is no longer available online, but a complete archive
is available on the Casebook At Home Edition, for 19.99 (US) plus shipping.
The "At Home" Edition works just like the real web site, but with absolutely no advertisements.
You can browse it anywhere - in the car, on the plane, on your front porch - without ever needing to hook up to
an internet connection. Click here to buy the Casebook At Home Edition.
|
|
|
|
