Archive through August 5, 1999

** 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 August 5, 1999

Casebook Message Boards: Ripper Victims: Specific Victims: Martha Tabram: Archive through August 5, 1999

Author: Stephen P. Ryder Monday, 02 August 1999 - 10:18 am
I don't understand... If we have a biological clock of 25 hours, and a day actually consists of 24, wouldn't one be 7 hours off, one week later, instead of 37? Where did you get the "25 x 5.25" equation? Just wondering! (By the by, there was a great article in last month's "Discover" magazine about an illness in which people do not have any sense of time). Again apologies for the tangent (perhaps we should continue this via e-mail, Jill?)
Author: Rotter Monday, 02 August 1999 - 12:22 pm
I wouldn't dismiss all of the observations about time made by the Ripper witnesses but I agree that you have to be careful about taking them as absolute. I'm sure there were accurate timepieces in Whitechapel--the police station, perhaps--but how that time filtered down to the rest of the neighborhood is a subject for study. The 1880's were also the decade when watches became almost mass-produced, although the $1 Ingersoll watch was still a few years away. Did the police, for example carry watches?
Author: Jill Monday, 02 August 1999 - 12:30 pm
Yep Stephen is right: What I learned 7 years ago (wrote in some paper back then and seem to have lost it; sorry, I'll keep looking) was that after 2 week isolation tests, people were "thinking it was night while it was midday". That's how it was told me by 2 teachers, a fylosofy and ergonomics one, each seperately. This means after 14 days that people are about 14 hours off. The 25hrs biological ritm is called "circadian" and regulated by bodytemperature (active/up or non-active/down) To keep up with the 24hrs day we use two outside timetellers: Physical: sun, natural sounds, ... Social: clock, time to eat, streetnoise, ... Cheers Jill (even red behind the ears now)
Author: Rotter Monday, 02 August 1999 - 01:03 pm
I read about the 25 hr rhythm in an article in the Sunday NY Times, which I believe was an excerpt from a book.
Author: Alex Chisholm Monday, 02 August 1999 - 03:53 pm
Evening All Standardisation of time became necessary with the growth of the railways and their requirement for reasonably �reliable� timetables. Greenwich Time was adopted as the standard in Britain in 1852. As an aside, while I certainly agree that witness testimony can only be taken to give approximate times, I don�t think �the Victorians� - with their almost obsessive aspirations for uniformity and regulation - were as careless of time as seems to have been suggested. It may even be the case that the lives of the poorer working classes were more structured and constrained by time than any other sector of society. Best wishes Alex
Author: Jon Monday, 02 August 1999 - 05:22 pm
Rotter Policeman on the beat are not on record as carrying watches, detectives possibly, I would expect likely even. Doctors certainly. Regards, Jon
Author: Bob Hinton Tuesday, 03 August 1999 - 12:16 am
Dear All, I think some of you are missing the point here. Let me say again I am not querying the ACCURACY of watches available then (Harrison chronometers built in the 18th century had an accuacy that compares well with quartz watches of today) what I am querying is the synchronisation of such timepieces. I think its a bit far fetched to expect breweries, local businesses and parish churches to have a man on standby to check and adjust the clock every hour. Some of these clocks only received a weekly winding and if they were roughly in the area of the correct time they were left alone. My grandfather ran the Woolpack in Slad for many years and he never altered the clock, just wound it once a week. In the end it was hours out! He used to say it was running on Stroud time. I also concede that it is possible for people to estimate the time reasonably accurately WITHIN limits. What I don't accept is the possibility of being able to construct a theory based on these limits. As previously mentioned someone had written about one of the murders and was using such phrases as it must have been 1243 because at 1247 so and so was in the street and at 1242 Fred was coming round this corner because only fifteen minutes ago he had seen a clock in some window saying the time was ......... Time like quality is valueless unless you have some standard to compare it to. Today I'm going to test my theory, I'm going to ask 100 people what they estimate the time is, check it with their watches and then check that with my radio adjusted watch - should be interesting. all the best Bob Hinton
Author: Jill Tuesday, 03 August 1999 - 04:59 am
Hello Bob, Jon, All Bob- The reason why I actually wanted to draw this timing out, is because it helps you to try and think about the scenes that are possible, that could have occured but didn't. It helps to visualise happenings more accurate than when just reading them unhinged from each other, as the statements from the Mahoneys actually hold more content than just telling us that Martha wasn't killed already. ALL- In the revised scenario I keep in calculation that times can be mentioned unprecise (Bob, you must admit that even in the first one I rounded the minutes, I never said anything about 2:22). I only trusted the Mahoneys' timing and set a range for every other witness' timing (plus/minus 5-10mins). I've put argueable time between brackets. As for the soldier's chum and Dr. Killeen stating there hadn't been recent intercourse, I have taken into account that Martha had a manner of safe sex (having no factual intercourse or even maybe using a condom). REVISED TIMESCALE 2.0 At 1:40 AM the Mahoneys return home and see nothing special. At 1:45 AM Elizabeth Mahoney goes to Thrawl Str (through the north of the alley) At 1:55 AM Mrs. Mahoney returns with supper; she sees noting unusual inside. If the soldier questioned by Barrett was already there, she would have met him entering the alley, since he's waiting at the north side of the alley, and would have seen the couple there. This is not the case. (2:10-2:30) AM Jon, you mention about a quarter of an hour for supper. So they make themselves ready for bed around 2:10. 2-3 minutes to turn in chattering about the nice evening they had, thus in bed around 2:15 AM. The fastest time you can fall physically asleep is 10 mins. Actually this would be the time that they would be most aware of sounds surrounding them, natural physical awareness so that you know if you can go to sleep safely. So between 2:15 and 2:30 they would have heard something. (c. 1:55-2:10) Barrett questions a soldier (at the north of the alley), who wouldn't have been standing there before 1:55. The soldier says he's waiting for a chum who went off with a girl into George Yard. The chum and girl couldn't be off in the alley before 1:55. (see Mahoneys) (1:55/2:10 - 2:25/2:50)-How long would it take for the whole meeting between chum and girl? I assume 30-40 mins from the half hour it took for Pearly Poll. So the chum and girl would split up between 2:25/2:50 AM. (2:30-2:45 AM) Time of death is estimated between 2:30 and 2:45. It would take min 3-5 min to stab Martha 39 times. About 5-7 minutes to come from the street in the alley and the building to the first floor without to much noise. This means that Martha and her killer entered the alley at the latest at 2:35 AM. (2:05-2:20 AM) If the girl with the chum is Martha, then chum is a very likely the killer. If the intentions were to kill her from the beginning, wouldn't the chum also have been with her shorter than half an hour? She then would have died earlier than estimated: 2:05-2:20AM. Remember the Mahoneys are chattering, making noise of their own, a muffled struggle wouldn't surpass their noise level, only when they were particularly listening to be warned by such noises as when you are lying in your bed to go to sleep. Thus IF girl=Martha and IF chum=intention to kill, then she was probably killed between 2:05 and 2:15. (2:25-2:50 AM) If his was a passionate kill, after having some safe intercourse, the time of death falls neatly into the proposed split up timing. If the girl ISN'T Martha the 2 couples maybe would have come accross each other either just when the first one left and the others entered, or while they still were coupling. Now how could the Chum and girl have fun after 2:25 without noticing a murder happening? Would Martha have accepted that another would use her spot of that night? I don't really think so, so there would have been a fighting of harsh words and shrieks at least, what others should have heard. Since this isn't the case, the first couple was already gone from the alley and Martha and her killer entered just after them (c. 2:30AM), resulting to her death around 2:45AM. Still a lot of choices left, anything is still possible (Bob, JtR is still in the running). She was either killed by the chum before 2:15AM or after 2:30AM ; or killed by another man (maybe even JtR) around 2:45AM. Now don't call me nitpicky, I haven't even made a choice between these 3. Now I'll search for material more than time, like the MO , like the victim herself, ... that can help between the choice of one of the 3. Cheers, Jill
Author: Bob Hinton Tuesday, 03 August 1999 - 08:06 am
Dear Everyone, Here are the results: 100 people were asked the question 'Without looking at your watch can you estimate the time to the nearest minute?' The people were selected at random. The ages were at or estimated at over 18. There was no selection as to sex The odds against getting the correct time to the minute (assuming everyone knows what hour it is) is 60 to 1 against, therefore by sheer luck at least one person should be spot on. The people were then asked to check the time using their own watch. This time was then checked against a radio controlled watch guaranteed accurate to the second. The results are as follows: 28% of watches were correct 20% of people were not wearing a watch 1 person estimated the time correctly The average inaccuracy was 9.24 minutes. The lowest differential was 2 minutes.(apart from the 1 correct answer) The highest differential was 48 minutes. 25% were 15 minutes or more wrong. I also checked 7 public clocks. None were accurate to the minute. Four were within five minutes, two within ten minutes, one was stopped. I hope this is of some interest. all the best Bob Hinton PS Jill I wasn't actually referring to you, sorry if I gave that impression.
Author: Pascal GIN Tuesday, 03 August 1999 - 08:11 am
Good Afternoon First off all,I'm French (Sorry), so would you be so kind enough to forgive my poor English. Let me introduce myself. Aged of 38 years old,I'am a new one on Internet. Today, I inqueries about JTR and especially about Marta Tabram, because one year ago I wrote (for myself)a "th�orie" about MT and the George Yard Building, and I found your wrote about this particulary case, that for my a real treasure!! So even the fact that I need one hour and a Harrap's to read 10 lines, I'm really happy to find people who are true "Ripperologue", has we say in France. I'm very interesting in JTR story, as you know now. SInce a year, i'm convince that the key or one of the key of the mystery is hiding in the case of Martha Tabram and especially in George Yard Building. When I wrote my "th�orie", i didn't know all the details you wrote this last days, but of cause some of them, and I'm very surprise to see that this details make my theorie stronger. Of cause i'm not holding the final solution, even the true identity of JTR, but some knew questions about this case. Imm�diately after reading the story of Marta, I smell something "bizarre" in this case. 1) Why two diff�rents weapons, a bayonet and a "Ordinary knife" for only one victim. 2) Why nobody saw Marta between the moment when she lived Pearly Poll and the moment when her body was found. 3) How can separate a very special weapon, a bayonet, with the last guy who was saw whith the victim, a soldier. I think i have the answer in my th�orie. To resume, MT was shoot by the soldier, but not killed (One shot by bayonet, by left handed man) and lied K.O on the floor). Why ? The prostitute don't want to do something special, the price is too high, the private don't have enough money and has he paid before in differents pubs, he wants do it for free. There are together certainely drunk, the private can't do what he wants to do and she laught at him. There is one hundred (bad)reasons to do that. You can object than,if he hurt Marta why the constable saw him quiet at the entrance of the building.The constable saw A private, may be not THE private. And she was killed later by JTR. Mrs Mahoney said that she saw nothing unsual, that not prove that MT was not on the floor, may be she not saw her, or didn't want to saw her. Or may be she lied in a very dark place,K.O and after the passage of Mrs Mahoney be awaken and tried to "creep" to found some help. How can JTR saw her? For a simple reason, JTR live in George Yard Building, lived it for going to work for example or to locate his futures victims, he wanted to kill since several times but he didn't do it. He found MT lied on the floor K.O or too weak to move or shout, he took his knife from his pocket and shoot the unfortuned Marta. For him, a gift of God, he wants to kill a prostitute and he find one on the floor, help yourself mister Jack. Nobody can see him, and no problem for after, he didn't shed the first blood. That's may be the reason why nobody in the street saw something or someone. I hope sincerly you can help me. I need your advise about this. Why it's possible or not possible. That's just a "th�orie", I did not proclaim that is the truth. But if it's possible story, it would certainly interresting to recherch a personne who died or kept in Hospital just after the last murder AND WHO WAS LIVING IN George Yard Building. Of course, my wrote about this is more longer and exhaustive, but it's in French, and it's really a too busy work for me now to translate it I hope my English is understandable, sorry for that, I was at school 20 years ago. Waiting for your answers, questions or suggestions. Regards. PS: Je serai tr�s flatt� d'avoir l'avis du Ma�tre es Jack l'�ventreur Fran�ais: St�phane Bourgoin.
Author: Caz Tuesday, 03 August 1999 - 10:09 am
Bonsoir Pascal, Bienvenu au Casebook de Jack l'eventreur. Nous vous souhaitons de bon chance avec votre theorie! A bientot, Caz
Author: Jill Tuesday, 03 August 1999 - 11:04 am
Hello Bob, Caz, Pascal, All Bob- Now try the experiment with only people not wearing watches. Or look at the results of the 20% you got now. I said that after half a year I could come very close, but since I'm back wearing a watch, I know as a certainty that my guesses would be way off now. I'm very curious to those results! Thanks for your experiment. Bienvenu Pascal- Il ny a rien de probl�me d'etre Fran�ais. Je suis Belge moi meme. Now about your theory: 1)If she was stabbed in the heart first (heart = breastbone stab) she would have died before Jack had found her according to Dr. Killeen's post mortem "the puncture in the heart was enough to kill her". But as Jon kindly referenced Dr. Killeen also said that all wounds were brought on during life, so actually it would have been one of the LAST stabs. From an abdomen wound you can die very slowly and painful, but not in the heart. 2)A resident of the Building would have been questioned, his worktime hours would be easily traceable. If he wasn't there at the moment when Reid came to George Yard to hear their testimonies, others could have told about him. 3)If he wasn't a resident, then how was Jack to know she was lying on the landing so he could go and kill her? Mais peut-�tre vous avez du contre points? Au revoir, Jill
Author: Rotter Tuesday, 03 August 1999 - 01:47 pm
Pascal, a very interesting post. Have you tried using the translation site http://babelfish.altavista.com ? You can cut and paste paragraphs from here into it and get translations back and forth between English and French. For example, I will use it now to translate this paragraph. Pascal, un poteau tr�s int�ressant. Avez-vous essay� d'utiliser le site http://babelfish.altavista.com de traduction? Vous pouvez des paragraphes de d�coupage et de d�placement d'ici dans lui et obtenir des traductions de va-et-vient entre anglais et fran�ais. Par exemple, je l'emploierai maintenant pour traduire ce paragraphe.
Author: Villon Tuesday, 03 August 1999 - 05:15 pm
Hello everyone. I'm sorry to have to say this after Rotter went to the trouble of finding that translation site, but I'm afraid it's either a practical joke or just a really lousy utility. 'Un poteau' is the kind of post that holds a fence up ('A very interesting fence-support, Pascal'), and the third sentence is grammar-free gibberish. For Heaven's sake don't anyone else use it except for a laugh. Moi aussi, Pascal, je vous souhaite bienvenue au Casebook et bonne chance (chance is a lady, Caz :-))avec vos recherches. Si vous trouvez de la difficulte en mettant vos postes en anglais je serais heureux de les traduire. Pardon lack of accents on my keyboard. Au revoir Maitre Francois aka Mike
Author: Rotter Tuesday, 03 August 1999 - 09:10 pm
I was wondering about that. But it's still better than my French!! Thanks for pointing it out --we already have enough miscommunication here.
Author: Jill Wednesday, 04 August 1999 - 12:53 am
Bonjour Pascal, Je trouvais un contre point moi meme. In my response to your theory I had 3 points. Point 3 falls away when 2 is discredited. Point 2 seems a good one, but if I myself have difficulty to believe some alibi's of the soldiers ID'd by PC Barrett and even find examples of sloppiness on the account of the police, I can assume the same for every resident interrogated by Reid. Thus Jack maybe could have been a resident. But point one about the heart still stands. A la prochaine, Jill
Author: Caz Wednesday, 04 August 1999 - 01:14 am
Merci Mike. I should have known that 'luck be a lady tonight' :-) I'll leave the Gallic to the experts from now on. :-( Ta ta. Love, Caz
Author: Jill Wednesday, 04 August 1999 - 06:05 am
Hi All, I tried to make a schematic visual of how the stabs would have looked on Martha. They are randomly placed along the roughly locale of the organs that were wounded: the throat(9), left lung(5), right lung(2), heart/breastbone(1), liver(5), stomach(6), ripperly like stab in abdomen(1) Cheers, Jill
Author: Jill Wednesday, 04 August 1999 - 03:16 pm
Oops ..., Forgot to mention the stabs of the spleen(2 next to the stomach). Sadly enough I didn't found a picture of the position of the organ, so I'm not sure if it's right.
Author: Edana Thursday, 05 August 1999 - 05:14 am
Chilling..thank you Jill. Very good work. Now which wounds were caused by the bayonet type weapon and which by the penknife type weapon..or was it just the stermun wound that was a bayonet/dagger type wound? Edana