|
 |
 |
|
|
|
** This is an archived, static copy of the Casebook messages boards dating from 1998 to 2003. These threads cannot be replied to here. If you want to participate in our current forums please go to https://forum.casebook.org **
Archive through May 8, 2000
Casebook Message Boards: Ripper Victims: Specific Victims:
Martha Tabram:
Archive through May 8, 2000
Author: Diana Comer
Thursday, 05 August 1999 - 05:25 am |        | | Would Big Ben be the solution to the time problem? I'm just an ignorant Yankee but doesn't it sound the hour, half hour, quarter hour? Isn't it audible over large sections of London? |
Author: Jill
Thursday, 05 August 1999 - 05:49 am | | Hi Edana, Jon, Diana, All
Edana-The bayonet/dagger type wound is the sternum/heart wound: it was long and deep (the reason for not being it a clasp knife) through the sternum into the heart, killing her.
Jon-To those who'll see signs in my drawing: I decided the random place of the wounds in the organs, it is NOT copied from a post-mortem. And I can also show them something else
Here the wounds are not evenly radom placed over the particular organ, but concentrated. The difference of the look of concentration is the difference between a premeditated killer or a momentaliry one.
Diana- I've been thinking the same thing transmitted to a church bell, like the one in the cathedral in Antwerp can be heard (also sounds one time every quarter and half an hour, but I always seem to forget which one it is sounding so that I check my watch). And if one thing can be said about Big Ben it is that it's BIG.
Cheers,
Jill |
Author: jill
Wednesday, 25 August 1999 - 06:01 am | | Hello All,
Is there anybody who knows where the 8 leftover stabs were located? I remember that Dr.Killeen mentioned that the stabs were concentrated around the upper torso, the throat, the abdomen and the vagina.
This doesn't seems accurate: both the upper torso and throat are clearly most heavy attacked. But the abdomen only received 1 riplike stab (I would not call it concentrated). And suddenly the vagina is mentioned without previous decleration that there were any wounds in that area. He only mentions blood at the legs, NO wounds.
Were there 8 stabs around the genitals being the source of the blood at the legs? Why doesn't he mention them in the post mortem report then? Probably this was a press exageration of the inquest of Tabram!?!
Or were the 8 stabs inflicted at the abdomen area? How come then that other organs have no wounds? All the healthy organs Killeen mentions at his report are packed in this area. If you stab someone in the abdomen, you will hurt some organ for sure.
So that leaves the possibility that all the wounds were concentrated around the throat and upper torso. This also could explain why not all 39 wounds are accounted for. At the upper torso there is enough muscle tissue that can be stabbed without hurting an organ: somewhere around the shoulders or the collar bones. Since it is less important tissue, Dr. Killeen only mentioned the total number of wounds and described only those that hurted the organs.
Any suggestions anybody?I'm puzzled by it?
Cheers,
Jill |
Author: R.M. Gordon
Thursday, 26 August 1999 - 12:18 pm | | Hello Pascal
R. Michael Gordon here.
I happened to look on this site and saw your layout on how Martha was killed. My heart felt congratulations to you. You nailed it right on the nose! I look forward to reading your words on the next few murders.
Good Work All the best, R. Michael |
Author: ChrisGeorge
Sunday, 19 September 1999 - 09:09 am | | Hi!
Just a reminder that we'll be having a discussion this afternoon on "Martha Tabram - Is she a grey area?" in the CP chat room http://venus.beseen.com/chat/rooms/a/432561/
at 3 PM, EST.
If anyone has any difficulties obtaining a handle for this BeSeen chat room please e-mail prior 3PM Dave Yost at dyost@hky.com
We hope to see a number of you there!
Best regards
Chris George, Treasurer
Casebook Productions
http://business.fortunecity.com/all/138/ |
Author: jill
Monday, 22 November 1999 - 03:16 am | | Hello All,
After pondering some more on the implications of the stab wounds, and the discussion on Chapman board helped to speed up some more ideas (thanks Michael). Here's a post about how I think Martha was killed, the order of the wounds, the state of the killer's mind (yep, I know: very subjective). Any other suggestion is welcome.
Observations (sketches posts August 4 and 5, 1999 / 8 missing wounds post of August 25, 1999):
1.The most wounded area 'seems' to be the upper torso (there are still 8 wound descriptions missing, see post for possible explenation).
2.There isn't a preference for left or right positioned wounds. Instead the opposite seems to be true: the lay-out is quite symmetrical.
3. The 9 throat wounds look out of place. Anyway that's how I always perceived them.
4. According to the report of Dr. Killeen all wounds were inflicted during life. The puncture in the heart (aka breast bone wound, aka bayonet wound) was enough to kill Martha.
5. All wounds, except (!!!) the heart thrust, were right handed stabs.
6. The found body position was "on her back".
Filling in the picture:
1. The killer of Martha was straddled on her hips during the inflictions (symmetrical and upper torso wounds, killing wound is central) not left or right from her.
2. To keep his victim from making noise his first focus is the throat. Nine times he stabs without 'slicing' any life threatening artery. Thus she is silenced but not killed. Possibly the killer first could have cuffed her mouth with his left hand to keep her from screaming when he thrusted her for the first time.
3. After the throat wounds, Martha could probably do nothing more than gurgle, pardon my expression.
Now he can proceed downwards, concentrating on the torso. Probably starting with, as the knife is in his right hand, the right lung above (positioned on the left side of the killer) or maby the unidentified 8 wounds, proceeded further to the left lung and went further down.
Because of the number of stab wounds, the murder appears to me a frenzied rage attack aimed to kill and hurt before the kill. Since all wounds were inflicted during life and have no further purpose than forfilling the stabbing motion, it has nothing to do with ritual maiming of a victim after the kill.
The number of stabs, the symmetry and the concentration on the upper torso, suggests a monotonously stabbing motion, which let me prefer the sketch of August 5 more: little islands of concentrated motion, after a few stabs just changing the position.
4. When the killer tired of the stabbing and dazed out of his frenzy, he grabbed for his bayonetlike weapon (or any other weapon that could inflict an injury that reminds of a bayponet). Thrust it upwards with the hand he picked his weapon (left hand this time) and thrust it in the highest point of the torso right in the middle, killing the poor woman. The choice of weapon, the position (from where the killer was) and the fact he chose for another hand has the knack of a finale, IMHO.
-> It was only one person who did the killing. He clearly wanted to silence his victim (did she enrage him?) and in his rage could not stop stabbing. The last thrust has a sense of drama (Caz, you would like this comment, wouldn't you?), it comes with the moment when the killer finished his rage.
The killer did not want to maim his victim, certainly not ritualistic. I don't even think he wanted to inflict pain. He wanted to silence her, and so he did.
Peace,
Jill |
Author: Caz
Monday, 22 November 1999 - 04:37 am | | Hi Jill,
So do you think this was the first occasion Martha's killer had ever taken a human life? And could he have gone on to kill Nichols, Chapman, Eddowes and Kelly, or was it just Tabram he wanted to eliminate for some motive other than enjoying the kill?
Every one of the apparent 'stranger' murders of 1888, not just the canonicals, appeared to have its own very individual sense of drama, from poor Emma Smith's horrific injuries prior to her death from peritonitis, to the way a woman's torso was deliberately placed in a part of the new Scotland Yard building. The press obviously made the most of each case but the uniqueness of the bones of each story (so to speak) were already in place for the media to work with. They simply embellished or added a few fictional bits to the basic crime facts.
But, there again, I tend to see drama and intrigue where perhaps none exists, but I think I'm getting better :-)
Love,
Caz |
Author: jill
Monday, 22 November 1999 - 05:30 am | | Hey Caz,
Hmmm ... Now I will be treading total subjectivity. But if I think about the way she was killed, I am first inclined to think that her murderer was a customer (a one-time customer at that and a stranger).
The stabbing frenzy relating to rage indicates a spur of the moment kill. That the killer of Martha Tabram did not went along with her with the intent to kill her, but just as a needy customer.
The need to silence her and the rage manner of how to silence her, shows it was very personal intended to Martha Tabram. Thus I believe she had said some very nasty things to her last customer. She personally had hurt and enraged her customer either with words or acts just previously before the attack.
There are some indications of personality of the killer, IMHO.
It was a person who had the need to carry 2 weapons, a normal pen knife AND a longer bayonetlike weapon. For his occupation, maybe?
It was a person who could become enraged by the comment of a lady of the night. Some sexual problem, maybe? A feeling of inferiority? A proud character?
He must have appeared to Martha as a person she could insult easily without danger, inferior looking, for her to do so. If indeed she did, of course.
It was a person who could be dangerously aggressive by bottling up a lot of his frustrations, and unleashing them all in one time opportunity. So probably most of the time, known as a silent character.
Was it JtR? Sorry Caz, I still can't answer this conclusive for myself: I do not know, there are indications he could have been, and other things that scream "No way, José". Thus "no comment" from me at this point.
Cheers,
Jill |
Author: Caz
Monday, 22 November 1999 - 08:50 am | | Hey Jill,
You make some interesting points. I too cannot decide if Martha's killing was related to the ripper series. Could that frenzied attack really be the handiwork of the same cool cunning fiend who appeared to plan the next campaign to hit Whitechapel between the eyes? Or were there at least two men (three if we discount Stride as one of Jack's) who resorted to murder within a very small geographical area and a very short period of time in a fit of apparent woman-hating pique? Must have been something in the air.
If Martha's and Liz Stride's deaths were 'spur of the moment' crimes and, as some people believe, JtR chose random victims whenever an opportunity presented itself, it does seem incredible that not one but possibly three killers with different motives and MOs were all swift and silent and lucky (and clever?) enough to get away with their murders in 1888.
If you add in Emma Smith's attackers and the nut who did the torso killings it doesn't say much for the poor police's murder clear-up rate, does it? It's just as well they managed to solve the Lipski case the previous year! I'd say a policeman's lot was a far from happy one in 1888 Whitechapel.
Love,
Caz |
Author: jill
Tuesday, 23 November 1999 - 02:58 am | | What's the saying again? "Violence breads violence".
We are so focused on JtR, that we rather think about the canonical JtR crimes with all the other mysterious murders becoming the extra. But actually the other horrendous crimes are the to be expected occasional ones (2-3 murders) with JtR's (4-5 murders) praying on top.
Cheers,
Jill |
Author: Nicolas
Tuesday, 23 November 1999 - 07:32 pm | | Hi,
were there ever similar murders reported in other parts of the world, in years just before or after the Ripper's murders.
Also,was there ever another serial killer with a similar signature that could help explaining the Ripper's (naturess of the wounds, position of the bodies, etc.)
Thanks,
Nicolas |
Author: Melanie Johnson
Wednesday, 05 January 2000 - 11:39 am | | Nicolas -
I have one similar murder for you, in relation to the suspect George Chapman. In 1891, Carrie Brown was murdered in a Manhattan hotel. The stab wounds were very similar to those of the Ripper, and her killer was never caught. A man was convicted of her murder, but he was later released, saying that the evidence was not enough. Brown was seen with a man on the night of her murder that bore a strong resemblance to Chapman. No one has been able to prove that he was in New York at that exact time. But if they can, there will be a very strong link between them. =)
Cheers,
Mel |
Author: Jill
Thursday, 06 January 2000 - 10:19 am | | Melanie,
The 'stab' wounds of Martha Tabram are not similar to the 'cuts' known by JtR.
Cheers,
Jill |
Author: Melanie
Thursday, 20 January 2000 - 06:39 pm | | Jill -
I might be misconstruing your response but I was talking about Carrie Brown, I never mentioned Martha Tabram. =)
Mel |
Author: Melanie
Thursday, 20 January 2000 - 06:43 pm | | And incidentally, (I just thought of this after I hit send) judging by the contemporary response, that Martha's murder was not like any ordinary killing. Everyone was shocked at her death, and the manner of it. That tends to tie it to the Ripper murders. And if you accept any of the attacks on Annie Millwood or Ada Wilson, you can see the Ripper's development: a "casual, botched attack", then a "frenzied attack" on Tabram, then the development of his mature M.O. with the Nichols murder. At least, that's what makes sense to me. Go figure. =)
Cara |
Author: Jon
Thursday, 20 January 2000 - 07:03 pm | | Cara
How do you progress from frenzied stabbing to systematic mutilation without any inbetween steps?
(Aug 7th - Aug 31st, 24 days with no practice?)
I know what your saying......but do you know what I'm saying?
Jon |
Author: Jill De Schrijver
Wednesday, 12 April 2000 - 04:37 am | | Hello All,
I believe I had mentioned it once, but the thread seems to have dissapeared. So I will repeat this possibility and question.
When trying to visualise this attack and murder in my mind, I cought myself in a closed way of thinking: I was stuck on the idea that the 2 weapons only had one owner. Why? Could the bayonet (or similarlike knife) maybe have been the posession of Martha? Did many prostitutes, before the ripper time, carry knives on their body for protection? Is it possible a customer would pay with objects instead of money?
I'll try to explain: the bruises on Martha indicate to me that she was harshly forced down to the ground, I would rather say pushed. While being pushed she had a knife in her hand, that fell to the ground... The killer tires and is coming out from a daze, drops his own knife, searches for it again, gropes the other one and pushes it right into the heart.
Jill |
Author: Jim Leen
Tuesday, 02 May 2000 - 11:47 am | | Hello Anybody,
Does anyone know if Martha Turner had some connection with the city of Manchester. Also if she had a son of around 18 years old at the time she was murdered.
Thanking you
Jim Leen |
Author: Jill De Schrijver
Wednesday, 03 May 2000 - 04:03 am | | Hi Jim,
To answer yout question of her sons: Frederick John, born in February 1871 and Charles Henry, born in December of 1872. Meaning that frederick was 17 in August 1888 and Charles was a little bit older than 15,5. |
Author: Julian Rosenthal
Monday, 08 May 2000 - 12:02 am | | G'day guys,
Tabby was a great fan of Manchester United. Never missed a game:-)
Jill, I couldn't get a hold of you in time to see if we could use your diagram for Ripperoo so Leanne made another one very similar to yours. Hope you don't mind.
Could you email me so we can send you a copy?
Our address is ripperoo2000@yahoo.com
Jules |
|
|
|
|
