|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Richard Brian Nunweek
Chief Inspector
Username: Richardn
Post Number: 803
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, April 16, 2004 - 4:48 pm: |       |
Hi Glenn,
I appreciate that the wounds were not in characteristic, but the murder of Tabram showed obvious signs of frenzy.
Not a likely murder for a disagreeing client.
But a sign of Jack in his novice stages.
Richard. |
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 1547
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Friday, April 16, 2004 - 5:12 pm: | |
Hi Richard,
"...but the murder of Tabram showed obvious signs of frenzy.
Not a likely murder for a disagreeing client."
What? Why not?
Unfortunately that is a point I can't see. Prostitutes lived -- and live -- in a violent environment, and loonies (maybe with some glasses of gin inside their vests) do exists; Jack the Ripper was hardly alone in that regards. The Ripper can hardly be considered being the only one capable of frenzied attacks; that would be a constructed piece of argument totally unexplainable to me. I can appreciate the Ripper doing practice exercises, but at least I would like to see some examples of corroborating points in the MO. In Tabram's case, they are very few, and if there are, they are microscopic. The fact that her throat wasn't cut, is to me a big problem but also the different choice of weapon.
I have no idea why her inclusion among the canonical victims is being uncritically stressed, when we also have other victims in the same span of years and in the same area to consider, and that hardly were performed by the Ripper anyway. So why should Tabram be?
Well, frenzy... you wouldn't believe what people who've had too much to drink and maybe already having temper in the first place, is capable of -- not to mention turn into a complete deranged behaviour. Why on earth should the Ripper be the only one committing a murder in a frenzy?
All the best
Glenn Gustaf Lauritz Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Paul Jackson
Detective Sergeant
Username: Paulj
Post Number: 121
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Friday, April 16, 2004 - 8:02 pm: | |
Hey Everybody,
Lisa- you might want to talk to Chris Scott...
If there is info out there, Chris is like a bloodhound. No pun intended.
Glenn- Whats up Buddy? Let me disagree with you if I might. The Tabram murder itself(the M.O.)
is different...but what makes me think that ole Jacky boy killed her is the circumstances. Hooker, weekend (the 1st weekend of the month),
the time, the viciousness of the attack...etc.
The fact that a slightly different knife was used means nothing. Jack probably had quite a few. It was his first(that we know of), maybe he didnt like the way he did it....maybe he cut the hell out of his hand when he was stabbing her and decided that slicing would be better.
Its a good debate, though. Talk to ya later.
Paul |
Dan Norder
Police Constable
Username: Dannorder
Post Number: 6
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Friday, April 16, 2004 - 9:21 pm: | |
Some comments for this often hashed and rehashed topic (all of which have probably been said before):
First up, the idea that someone in a "frenzy" is going to count out stabs as he's doing it strikes me as self-contradictory. He's either stabbing repeatedly out of rage or he's methodically enumerating the wounds as he does them for some bizarre reason, not both. It also seems unlikely that a serial killer is going to ask prostitutes their ages before killing them and even more counterintuitive to think that they would give accurate answers about their ages if asked.
Beyond all that, I'm not sure how much stock should be put into the statement that there were 39 wounds anyway. Unless the killer is doing a fine job of spacing them out all over the body (and I can't see that being done in a frenzy either) so that they don't overlap at all, it seems to me that it'd be very hard to get an accurate count. The "bayonet" wound could have been two or more knife wounds to the same general area, for instance.
As far as whether she is a Ripper victim or not, I don't know, but I lean toward that possibility. The Polly Nichols kill was a very silent and efficient method, and unless he had prior experience slaughtering animals (which he may very well have) I can't see her being the first victim. Tabram would make a lot of sense as a previous killing in which he is still testing how to efficiently dispatch his victims and also learning what it is he gets out of it.
Beyond just the idea that there may have been earlier victims, this is a knife attack with multiple wounds, more than just an average knifing. In fact, I'd say there's more to make this a Ripper killing than Stride, at least on the face of it (barring the interruption theory on Stride).
Plus the time frame is compelling. It's shortly before the first canonical killing and also fits the weekend/bank holiday that the others fall into. It seems to me that the only way you can dismiss her as a likely candidate is to come up with hard and fast rules that serial killers always kill in the exact same way, and that seems counter to what we know of other real life serial killers.
Of course it's also entirely possible she was killed by someone else, but then it's certainly not a given. |
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 1548
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Friday, April 16, 2004 - 11:13 pm: | |
I agree, Dan.
There is certainly a possibility, and that can't be disregarded. I used to lean on the "early offense" argument myself earlier regarding Tabram.
And I am indeed aware of the fact that serial killers may change their modus operandi for different reasons.
But I would at least expect to see some similarities; here there really are none (if you disregard the disturbance of the clothes and the concentration on the lower part of the body, and that the victim was a prostitute). Besides that, there are no corrolation whatsoever, so we're not talking hard rules here. It really has nothing of a Ripper crime to it.
I am not by all means sure, but it just doesen't feel right. I get the impression that most of us here wants desperately to see Ripper victims everywhere, like Jack the Ripper was the only one who were capable of violent murder in East End in 1888. If we consider other victims belonging to the murder statistics of 1888 and a couple of years onwards, like I've pointed out earlier, such an assumption is a complete fallacy.
Stride is hard to compare, because in her case, we "only" have a cut throat, which will always put her in doubt whether she was a victim of the Ripper and that he in such a case was disturbed or not.
In Tabram's case we know we have a completed murder, and I really don't see any resemblance between her and the others. My best bet would be to keep an open mind at the possibility that it could have been performed by someone else.
All the best
Glenn Gustaf Lauritz Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 1549
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Friday, April 16, 2004 - 11:32 pm: | |
Hey Paul.
Yes indeed you may disagree. What's up in your end? I am at the moment preparing to ship off my book-keeping to the accountant for the annual income tax return. Fun indeed... yeah...
The fact that she is a prostitute really means nothing; their trade was, as we know, fairly dangerous and violence and quarrels connected to it was -- and is -- somehow a natural part of it, especially in poor and high criminal areas as Whitechapel and Spitalfields. Here I just believe she met one of those "wrong" guys. And there are certainly enough of those around without any of them being Jack the Ripper. I am actually surprised that more events like this didn't take place.
And as I said, why should Jack the Ripper have monopoly on vicious attacks?
However, the weekend is a good point. I can appreciate that and it's interesting. Still, if we consider a sailor or a soldier, a weekend would be the obvious choice for such a client to appear anyway.
I disagree with you, however, regarding the importance of the weapon used. If we disregard Stride, there is a consistency regarding this in the slayings of the other canonical victims. To walk around that argument by saying that he "probably had several" is too easy and if we should take such an approach, it would make all forensic evidence and facts totally worthless. We must make assumptions based on the facts we have, and as far as we know regarding the accepted Ripper victims, there is a certain weapon used. And the one used in Tabram's case doesen't fit. However, if Stride for some reason should prove to be a Ripper victim in the end, that argument of course may be challenged. But so far it's what we've got.
Tabram was stabbed; the fact that it was done a good number of times doesen't matter; the fact that her throat was not cut and that she stabbed instead of ripped, and with another type of knife, is in my view of greater importance. But of course, nothing can be taken for granted here. Just my two cents worth.
All the best
Glenn Gustaf Lauritz Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Dan Norder
Police Constable
Username: Dannorder
Post Number: 7
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, April 17, 2004 - 5:22 am: | |
Glenn wrote:
"But I would at least expect to see some similarities; here there really are none (if you disregard the disturbance of the clothes and the concentration on the lower part of the body, and that the victim was a prostitute). "
And the numerous excessive gaping knife wounds, and the date (both nearness to the start of the series and weekend/bank holiday), and the geographic location (this alone is quite compelling, as it's smack dab in the middle of Ripperville), and the time of night the murder happened, and the pose of the body when found, and the clenched fists indicating possible strangulation...
Sure, if you ignore all of those then I suppose there are no similarities.
Yes, the the weapon type and the lack of neck wounds are significant differences. On the other hand, if there were going to be major differences, the place I'd expect to see them would be before the main series (and perhaps to a lesser extent at the end one series and potentially on to another death or series of deaths).
It's not that I'm "desperately" trying to assign every killing in the area to the Ripper, it's more that I know from studying other serial killers that often there are whole other sets of deaths that investigators didn't think to connect with the string and that only come out after the killer is caught. Tabram seems like a very good fit, in some ways better than Stride even (Stride has neck wounds, but ones that appear to be different than the canonical deaths before and after).
And I'm not ashamed to be open to the idea that Jack might have attacked a number of others as well. |
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 1550
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, April 17, 2004 - 7:10 am: | |
Hi Dan
Ah, there it came: "Glenn wrote: >..." 
When I said that I see desperate attempts of interpreting Ripper victims everywhere, I clearly meant in general, not you in particular.
"And I'm not ashamed to be open to the idea that Jack might have attacked a number of others as well."
No, you shouldn't be either. I used to be an "inclusionist" myself. However, I am not ashamed of taking the position today as an exclusionist.
I agree that it's natural to assume that a killer somehow starts off with less extensive attacks (or at least less extensive signature). But it's not always the case.
"And the numerous excessive gaping knife wounds..."
These knife wounds bears absolutely no similarities whatsoever with those on the other Ripper victims. Those are actually what speaks most against it being the Ripper, besides the throat not being cut and the different weapon used.
The area is totally insignificant, since we have a lot of other killings in the same area that is officially not attributed to the Ripper. So that means nothing. There is no such thing as "Ripperville", especially since we can't possibly know for sure how many of the Whitechapel murders that were made by the Ripper anyway.
And furthermore, it was a violent area - I would have been more surprised if we'd seen the same "pattern" in West End or Westminster.
But there are points that are interesting to consider that of course could link her to Jack the Ripper, and you also mention them:
-- the strangulation (probably the most important one, in my view)
-- the pose of the body
-- The holiday dates. However, as I said, the weekend dates are interesting, but not conclusive; there could be natural explanations for why Tabram was murdered on a holiday that may not have something to do with a pattern. If we consider a sailor or a soldier, the holidays would be the most likely dates for those types of customers, and the time of day really isn't that exclusive. The prostitutes generally worked late at night and this was the time when they had most of their clients. Nothing odd about that.
Neither is the pose of the bodies in the case of the Ripper or Martha Tabram especially unique in serial killing. I have seen exactly the same thing in several other murder cases, also here at home.
Well, I think we have to disagree about that. Because I don't buy it. I know that one usually finds new strings of murders in the trail of a serial killer, but I think the MO differs too much here. But that's just my opinion.
I believe the Ripper only killed four or five victims (of those we know of) -- the others I don't think have anything to do with him the slightest (note the word "think"). At least I'll keep an open mind about them in any case and won't attribute them to the Ripper without serious doubts.
All the best
Glenn Gustaf Lauritz Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Jennifer D. Pegg
Inspector
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 259
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, April 17, 2004 - 8:04 am: | |
Hang on.
Don't get me wrong but aare you arguing that isn't it a conicidence he stabbed a 39 yr old 39 times AND that the victim was stabbed in a frenzy!??? How can that be compatible. It is either one or the other surely.
Jennifer D. Pegg
|
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 1551
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, April 17, 2004 - 8:28 am: | |
Who are you addressing, Jennifer?
Was it Richard?
All the best
Glenn Gustaf Lauritz Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Richard Brian Nunweek
Chief Inspector
Username: Richardn
Post Number: 805
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, April 17, 2004 - 11:01 am: | |
Hi,
I Quess you are refering to my post Jennifer, obviously I would assume if it was preplanned to stab the body exactly thirty nine times, it was achieved in a non frenzied state, that appears to be fenzied by the amount of wounds inflicted.
Richard. |
Paul Jackson
Detective Sergeant
Username: Paulj
Post Number: 123
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, April 17, 2004 - 3:07 pm: | |
I just wanted to add that Annie Milwood was attacked in a similar manner as Tabram. A lot of people think she may have been an early ripper victim as well. Any thoughts?
Paul |
Dan Norder
Police Constable
Username: Dannorder
Post Number: 8
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, April 17, 2004 - 5:12 pm: | |
Glenn wrote:
Ah, there it came: "Glenn wrote: >..."
Well, I didn't want to disappoint you.
When I said that I see desperate attempts of interpreting Ripper victims everywhere, I clearly meant in general, not you in particular.
Well, yeah, but as someone who might have been labeled with that general description I thought I'd explain my thoughts on it.
These knife wounds bears absolutely no similarities whatsoever with those on the other Ripper victims.
And just how did knife wounds have to look to have similarities. I'm not trying to exaggerate them, but to me the mere fact that they are knife wounds is already a similarity. Then add in the fact that it wasn't just whatever it would take to kill the woman, it was well beyond that. After about the 10th wound or so we are no longer talking about hurting or killing her, we are talking pure emotional bloodlust.
The area is totally insignificant, since we have a lot of other killings in the same area that is officially not attributed to the Ripper. So that means nothing.
You seem to go from "not conclusive" to "totally insignificant" with nothing in between. That doesn't make any sense.
There is no such thing as "Ripperville", especially since we can't possibly know for sure how many of the Whitechapel murders that were made by the Ripper anyway.
Even if you take a strict minimalist view to the Ripper killings and only choose to concentrate on the three the fewest people argue over, Tabram was killed in the center. Add Stride or MJK and Tabram was still in the middle. Add in the direction from Mitre Square to where the bit of apron was found and you are nearly on top of where Tabram was found.
Whether Tabram was or was not a Ripper victim, she's practically at ground zero of his stomping grounds. Jack had a fairly clear working area (if Stride is included it dips down a bit more but otherwise not so much). I don't understand how you can claim that you don't know where it is or that the area is insignificant.
|
Dan Norder
Police Constable
Username: Dannorder
Post Number: 9
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, April 17, 2004 - 5:34 pm: | |
Paul wrote:
I just wanted to add that Annie Milwood was attacked in a similar manner as Tabram. A lot of people think she may have been an early ripper victim as well. Any thoughts?
Well, it might belong better on a different part of this board, but Annie's death does seem pretty similar, yes. And I've always been partial to Ada Wilson as a possibility too. Emma Smith doesn't seem like she fits, but there could be scenarios that might work. I don't know. |
Paul Jackson
Detective Sergeant
Username: Paulj
Post Number: 124
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, April 17, 2004 - 5:59 pm: | |
Hey Glenn,
Do we have another Mark Starr? haha
Dan- My comparison of Tabram to Annie Milwood belongs right where it is. Ada Wilson's guy
burst into her house and demanded money. I dont think that really fits with Jack. Emma was attacked by 3 young punks, I can't think of a scenario that would include Her as a Ripper victim.
But, to agree with you....I know where Ripperville is, and I know what you meant by the term. I liked it by the way.
Another point I want to throw in...Tabram was examined by Dr. Kileen, Where was ole' Bagster when you needed him? Not that this means anything, but who uses a bayonet to stab someone 39 times? Regards.
Paul |
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 1554
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, April 17, 2004 - 8:08 pm: | |
Dan wrote (I couldn't resist...):
> "And just how did knife wounds have to look to have similarities."
It's pretty simple. Tabram was stabbed with multiple stab wounds -- Nichols, Chapman and Eddowes was not; they were ripped and their throats were cut. There are no similarities.
"... we are talking pure emotional bloodlust."
Yeah ... like the Ripper would be the only one. Why should it be so difficult to grasp the idea that a prostitute could fall victim of a drunken and violent customer, going crazy with the knife? Like that would be a news flash. And not to mention in a violent area. Yes, it happened in the vicinity of the other murders and in the same year. Big deal. There were other murders as well, and probably not Ripper related.
"You seem to go from "not conclusive" to "totally insignificant" with nothing in between. That doesn't make any sense."
The area is insignificant. I don't know how many times I've stated that particular point on this thread, but we do have other victims in the area during this time, and those were probably not done by the Ripper. So why should Tabram be included, if the forensics doesen't fit? There is no logic in such reasoning.
I hear what you say about the central focus on the murders, but I think geographical patterns are too uncertain to base any conclusions from at this stage, where we don't even have a true account of who is a Ripper victim or not. Most of the Ripper sites are scattered quite far off from one another and it's really hard finding a real pattern. The environment and the Ripper locations can be interpreted in any way you want, depending on which result you want to obtain. I walked those places two months ago and their locations made less sense in real life than they do on the map.
But it's true that the Tabram site lies in the middle of things. But does it mean anything? We can't say at this point. Mitre Square is quite far off in the west direction and Buck's Row is way off track in the east, quite far from everything.
Fact is that we don't know where the Ripper lived! If the murder sites are going to make some sort of sense you must have some idea of the possible base for the killer. What if he lived further east from Buck's Row? Or north of Dorset Street? Sure, Tabram's site would still lie in the middle of the murder spots, but we don't know where it lies in relation to his own residence. That is also significant if we want to turn geography into an issue here. Call it minimalism; I can live with that. But I prefer not to use geographical profile analyses on this stage. I believe the forensics do tell us more about the truth than constructed geographical analyses.
I am not saying that it is impossible for tabram to be a Ripper victim, but the few evidence we have does point at other possibilities as well.
All the best
Glenn Gustaf Lauritz Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 1555
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, April 17, 2004 - 8:24 pm: | |
Hey Paul,
"Do we have another Mark Starr? haha"
Ouch! That hurts.
Annie Millwood -- maybe, could be but probably not; the thing that is interesting with Millwood is the similarities in the wounds compared to Tabram, which could indicate a repeat killer, and also strengthen the reasons for including both her and Tabram among the canonical Ripper victims. But don't forget that Tabram was strangled first -- Millwood was directly attacked with the knife. Just a note to ponder.
Ada Wilson -- Highly unlikely; seems like robbery was the motive, not lust murder. Can't be totally ruled out, but my bet would be a negative answer.
Emma Smith -- Absolutely not. No way! Attacked and killed by a gang of hooligans who put a stick of some sort up her abdominal area. There is no evident reason to believe she lied about that information. Those who claim that she might be a possible Ripper number, belongs to the strange group of armchair detectives that thinks the Ripper was part of a gang. No comments necessary.
"Not that this means anything, but who uses a bayonet to stab someone 39 times?"
As far as I remember, it was not the alleged bayonet that was used 39 times, but something like a pen-knife. The bayonet would only have been used in one of the wounds, but even that is under debate. Some say it could have been the same knife, but only pressed in deeper on that occasion. I can't say whether that's a probable description or not, though.
All the best
Glenn Gustaf Lauritz Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Paul Jackson
Detective Sergeant
Username: Paulj
Post Number: 125
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, April 17, 2004 - 8:55 pm: | |
Glenn,
I wasnt referring to you, I was referring to Dan
and the "Glenn wrote...."
Paul |
Dan Norder
Police Constable
Username: Dannorder
Post Number: 10
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, April 17, 2004 - 10:00 pm: | |
Paul wrote:
Do we have another Mark Starr? haha
I wasnt referring to you, I was referring to Dan
and the "Glenn wrote...."
Putting "So-and-so wrote:" (or "said") before quoting text is standard practice on messageboards and newsgroups so people know who it is you are referring to. This forum doesn't have a quote button to automatically do that, so I do it by hand. And I've been doing that on these boards for at least two years, long before "Mark Starr" got here. I don't know if Mark was copying how I did it or was also used to doing the same thing elsewhere before he showed up here.
I don't get the humor or even why it's something to take notice of. But then Richard Nunweek once got all bent out of shape about me starting replies to his posts that way as if it were some huge insult, so maybe I'm missing something.
Glenn wrote:
they were ripped and their throats were cut. There are no similarities
Knife wounds are a similarity. Going from stabs to rips could be a progression. Saying that knife wounds that are somewhat different means there are no similarities at all is a huge exaggeration. Drowning would be no similarities. Bullet through the brain would be no similarities. Excessive and messy knife wounds to a torso is a similarity. It's not an exact match, but it's nowhere near as different as you try to make it out to be.
Why should it be so difficult to grasp the idea that a prostitute could fall victim of a drunken and violent customer, going crazy with the knife?
It's not that it's difficult to grasp, it's that saying something "could" have happened is not the same as proving it *did* happen.
"You seem to go from "not conclusive" to "totally insignificant" with nothing in between. That doesn't make any sense."
The area is insignificant.
:Sighs:
Other than stating it as if it were a fact, you have said nothing that shows that it isn't significant. The location is something showing a possibility that it's related, and a very real one. Just because you wish to ignore it doesn't mean that you are automatically right in your assumption.
So why should Tabram be included, if the forensics doesen't fit? There is no logic in such reasoning.
But the forensics could fit, assuming Jack changed his MO slightly as he went along. There's no logic in dismissing all the potential similarities and declaring them "insignificant" based solely upon your gut feeling.
For something that you admitted as a possibility earlier you sure do get caught up using vehement language arguing against it. |
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 1556
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, April 17, 2004 - 11:41 pm: | |
Hi Dan,
"Putting "So-and-so wrote:" (or "said") before quoting text is standard practice on messageboards and newsgroups so people know who it is you are referring to."
I know, Dan. It's just that it's become something of your trade-mark. I've actually started to copy it myself, but only when I am attacking someone; the phrase seems appropriate when one wants to keep a personal distance to a certain writer, since I think it's rather formal. Besides that, I prefer myself to start with a greeting or hello phrase of some sort, just for the sake of politeness, but that's just me.
I agree, though, that I miss some sort of quoting button, although I think I've seen some way of creating quotes by using special formatting codes, but I am not sure and even if there were I wouldn't find it worth the trouble.
Well, we apparently differ in our views in what a "similarity" is in this context. You seem to think, that just because a knife is used, it probably is the same guy. That I absolutely can't go along with. How you use the weapon is an equally important part of your MO or signature, as the kind of weapon used. And here we don't even have a knife that fits anyway.
This has absolutely nothing to do with a "gut feeling" -- merely a deduction based on what the factual evidence say. Martha Tabram's inclusion is based on that the Ripper was a progressive killer (which naturally can't be excluded) but I personally think it differs to much just the same. I agree that the strangling in Tabram's case is a good point, though.
You can sigh all you want, Mr. Norder. It can't -- for the millionth time -- hide the fact that other killers were active in that particular area during the same period of years, and especially in 1888. Some might have been Ripper victims, some not -- but hardly all of them. And not just ordinary murderers -- we have the Whitehall mystery and the Pinchin torso as well. I am sorry if that isn't enough to make you even consider the possible fact that the Ripper wasn't alone on his hunting ground, but that is your call. To claim that I am trying to state a rigid truth is your usual agenda, but I can't write "possibly" and "maybe" between every damned word in a sentence. That kind of arguing is just a way to avoid the point, but of course we all have our methods.
If I feel the area is insignificant on basis of that the Ripper probably wasn't the only one that roamed there, I won't hesitate to say so, since that's my opinion. It doesen't mean that I force people to agree with me.
Still, I can't say with 100% accuracy that Tabram and Millwood weren't Ripper victims; I am just saying what I think speaks against it.
All the best
Glenn Gustaf Lauritz Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 1557
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, April 18, 2004 - 12:09 am: | |
Hi Paul,
Sorry. Though you referred to me for my stubborness.
Let me just add, that I don't think Dan Norder really have that much in common with "you know who" -- In the debates concerning Sickert and Patsy Cornwell for example, I believe Dan belongs to those who have contributed with the best posts, that are spot on.
That must be acknowledged even though I don't always agree with him on other issues.
I'd rather fight with someone who's intelligent and a bit rough in the edges, than people that are completely obsessed with all kinds of strange and funny ideas, and totally non-receptive to opposing arguments concerning those.
I know that's not what you meant, Paul; I just wanted to clarify it, since it could be taken the wrong way.
Like Dan says, that phrase is quite well used on other forums (which is probably why Mark Starr uses it as well), although I believe it has set a new trend here on this particular Board. Well, enough about that.
All the best
(Message edited by Glenna on April 18, 2004)
Glenn Gustaf Lauritz Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Jennifer D. Pegg
Inspector
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 260
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, April 18, 2004 - 5:40 am: | |
Yes Richard
It was you i was referring too. Thanking you for not getting me wrong and clearing that up for me. You are suggesting it may have appeared frenzied because of the number of wounds (and this is how many interpret it) but in fact it was pre planned and by someone who knew Martha as they knew her age. Though I do not agree with this I do believe it makes a lot more sense than how i originally interpreted (falsely) your post.
I guess apologies are in order,
Thanks
Jennifer D. Pegg
|
Paul Jackson
Detective Sergeant
Username: Paulj
Post Number: 126
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, April 18, 2004 - 12:13 pm: | |
Hey Glenn,
Yes I agree that it is a bit formal to quote someone like that...and I have gotten the impression on this board that when people do that, others tend to think they are being attacked. Even though this may not be the case.
As you said, A greeting...and a reference to whatever it is youre referring to is the best way not to get folks riled up.
Dan- I understand that its your style to quote people in the beginning of your posts. My apologies for the Mark Starr thing. He does it and it gets on everyones nerves. So, anyway..
This argument has nothing to do with Martha Tabram....so with all that said....Lets get back to the hacking.
Paul |
Dan Norder
Sergeant
Username: Dannorder
Post Number: 11
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, April 18, 2004 - 6:15 pm: | |
Glenn said:
You seem to think, that just because a knife is used, it probably is the same guy.
:Sighs again:
I've really got to wonder if you are even reading the posts. That is not it at all.
I've said because a knife was used in an overkill fashion to breasts and torso of a prostitute shortly before the first canonical killing in an area in the middle of the affected region on a night that is similar to other nights of killings at a time that matches other killings and left a body lying in a pose very similar to other killings with signs of strangulation that it might be the same killer and that ruling her out based upon the incorrect assumption that serial killers don't change their MOs enough to possibly account for the differences in the Tabram murder is foolhardy.
That's about as far away from "just because a knife is used, it probably is the same guy" as you can get.
Now, if I were saying that someone in a different place, different year, different pose, different occupation, killed at a different time of night and so forth was probably a Ripper victim just because he or she was killed by a knife, yes, that'd be a fair complaint against me. But you've ignored 95% of what I've said and pretend that I think that the 5% by itself proves something.
I am sorry if that isn't enough to make you even consider the possible fact that the Ripper wasn't alone on his hunting ground, but that is your call.
When did I ever say anything even remotely similar to what you just claimed? I've not only considered it, I've admitted that there were other killers out there! But that in and of itself doesn't mean Tabram was killed by someone other than Jack.
Obviously there were some other killers out there, but what matters are the similarities in these specific deaths. I find a number of compelling but inconclusive similarities between Tabram and the canonical Ripper killings. You disagree. Fine. But wildly exaggerating my position so you can insult something I never said nor implied is completely uncalled for.
To claim that I am trying to state a rigid truth is your usual agenda, but I can't write "possibly" and "maybe" between every damned word in a sentence.
Nobody is asking you to. But there's a lot of middle ground between that and the level of hostility shown in your posts. |
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 1564
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, April 18, 2004 - 9:52 pm: | |
Oh yes, Dan, I am reading your posts. I wouldn't miss them for the world.
And as usual you are claiming that you didn't say this and that and that I've "exaggerated your position" bla bla bla. Fine. Whatever. Never mind. Go figure.
I don't even want to go into the immature debate concerning who's most hostile here, although you probably must be the most defensive guy I have ever come across on a forum. In contrast to you I try to separate the writer as a person from the position he or she has, but with you it's damned hard since you're really not trying to acknowledge when I am not critizising you.
You didn't even bother to see my positive post above, clearly indicating that I have no hostile issues here, which I also think my posts on the Pub Talk implied. But it's all in vain; you're obviously only interested in the negative things people say and disregard everything else. It's your own problem, though, not mine.
"I've not only considered it, I've admitted that there were other killers out there! But that in and of itself doesn't mean Tabram was killed by someone other than Jack."
Well, I think it's a reasonable enough ground to consider such a possibility. If the forensics were more convincing I would see no problem. But I don't think the evidence fits. If we have a killer (or more) that chops heads, arms and legs from their torso, I can easily imagine that the area would also inhabit someone besides the Ripper who uses his knife in an over-excessive fashion. We also have Frances Coles and MacKenzie who had their throats cut in a similar way of the Ripper, but who probably not were connected to him (even though that's not fully established). Frenzied knife works are in this manner are not that uncommon and it really goes beyond me why such a high-populated but small area -- also quite violent and destitute -- should only harbour one killer, especially when the similarities between the murders are slim, to say the least.
The victim was a prostitute really is nothing to be surprised about, considering their dangerous and vulnerable trade and the timing of night is rather unsurprising. Night time was their usual working hours.
"But wildly exaggerating my position so you can insult something I never said nor implied is completely uncalled for."
Yeah sure... coming from someone who have made twisting and critizising everything I say into an art. I rest my case.
Most of our discussions are wasted on who said and did not say what. The fact that you meant that a knife was used in an overkill fashion, I think is rather self-written. How about reading between the lines? Sigh indeed ...
Now, regarding the facts. Something like a pen-knife was used -- not the long-pointed weapon we see in the other Ripper killings. If you don't find that at all important, it's quite OK. I do think it is, though. A serial killer can change his MO, but in Tabram's case we see ultimate stabbing, no throat cuts and a different kind of attack, although the viciousness is the same and no mutilation (in spite of the fact that the killer was not disturbed). You may be bold enough to call it "incorrect"; why am I not surprised?
In Tabram's case I would at least see throat cutting as a Ripper mark, not necessarily mutilations on this stage. I still don't see why it is such a surprising thing that these types of murders could occure in this violent area, without them being attributed to the Ripper. Yes, it is a coincidence, but stranger things have happened. I only look at the forensic evidence, and they tell me that Jack hardly was involved in that one. Can I prove it or do I believe on my white fluffy cloud that it's stated fact? No. But it's my opinion. I hope I am allowed to have one, in spite of what Mr Norder thinks.
You're really wearing me out, Dan. As usual. Once again, I can't resist having respect for people who loves cats, so I'll leave it at this for a while. I don't think we'll get any further anyway. As usual in our discussions there are boundaries for when the arguing becomes less constructive. I have said all that I have to say anyway on the matter. To continue would only become repetitious.
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.
|
|
|
|
