May 1996
There has been much dispute as to the number of victims the Ripper claimed, varying from only four to more than eighteen. How many victims do you think there were? Specifically, what credence do you give to the deaths of Fairy Fay, Martha Tabram, Emma Smith, Alice MacKenzie, and Francis Coles -- the victims most often deleted by Ripperologists? What evidence do you think supports your opinion?
1.
Date: Thu, 18 Apr 1996 08:41:03 +0100
From: Matthew Fletcher
By now all readers of the conference should know that Fairy Fay was a phantom. Emma Smith was probably attacked by a gang who assaulted her in a completely different way to the Ripper attacks. She was also left able to walk home. Martha Tabram is a far more interesting possibility. She was killed in the early hours of Monday August 6th which would make her the first recognised victim. The bank holiday and date fit naturally into the later sequence and she was a prostitute operating similarly to the other victims. The only reason why she is discounted is that she was stabbed (39 times) rather than cut or ripped. The medical examination did reveal that she had apparently been attacked by two weapons and had suffered one knife cut. The author Philip Sugden makes a highly convincing case for Tabram based on these points and I believe her consideration as the first known victim is long overdue.
The differences between this and subsequent cases are much less than between several of the universally acknowledged victims. Of course by then everyone knew that a maniacal killer was on the prowl so these differences were glossed over. In the Tabram case no-one knew what was going to happen in the forthcoming weeks. Opinion at the time was evenly divided about Tabram and the modern trend to dismiss her is unfounded. I think the murderer simply brought the wrong sort of knife along, or discovered he preferred ripping to stabbing.
Alice McKenzie and Frances Coles were discounted at the time by the police (who admittedly would not want the murders starting again) on the basis of the medical examinations. This was not unanimous but the doctors felt that the victims had not been killed by the same man - although they may have been copy-cat crimes inspired by the earlier killings. They were killed some time after the Autumn of Terror and cannot be reliably counted as true Ripper victims.
2.
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 1996 15:02:35 -0400
From: Michael Rogers
I've never been completely convinced that Stride was a true victim. Everyone has always just assumed that the body wasn't mutilated because the killer was interupted. That's a hell of a leap. Anyone could have cut her throat. Murders were a dime a dozen in Whitechapel. Until someone comes up with a little more solid eveidence, I'm going to remain skeptical as hell about the number of murders.
3.
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 96 02:47:09 EST
From: Tom Saupe
The more I read and think about the case, the more inclined I am to include Martha Tabram as a victim and the less inclined I am to consider Elizabeth Stride as one.
Tabram "fits" in so many ways. The timing works with all the other murders. The place in which she was attacked and the apparent hours of the attack is similar and certainly the frenzy of the attack all seem to fit with what we know of the other murders. What has generally excluded her from the canon is the nature of the wounds. She was stabbed 39 times and apparently by two different weapons, one assumed to be a bayonet.
The bayonet wound takes on greater importance when it is remembered that she was in the company of soldiers earlier in the evening. However, the medical evidence only states the it was a weapon which "could have been a bayonet." Even if it was, that doesn't mean it was a soldier wielding it. Bayonets could be purchased freely.
As to the actual nature of the wounds, the medical evidence does state that there was, among the puncture wounds, one three and one half inch rip in the abdomen.
It is beginning to seem to me that the Tabram murder shows the same murderer not yet sure of his MO.. The Nichols murder also contained very little (comparatively) abdominal mutilation either, and there is no question as to her place in the canon. If you look at the Tabram murder within the context of a progression, it fits very nicely.
Again, thinking in terms of a progression of mutilation, Stride becomes an aberration. There will always be a doubt regarding this murder. It is quite possible that the killer was interrupted and made his escape in the confusion and darkness only to find Kate Eddowes later on. This could also explain the differences in the wound in the neck from the earlier victims.
But what waves a red flag for me is the apparent lack of strangulation of the victim. I think it has been shown beyond any doubt that the victims were strangled, at least into unconsciousness prior to any cuts being made. This would mean that it was the killer's first action, and yet there is no evidence of it on Strides body. The bruises are on her shoulders, as if someone was forcing her down to the ground, but not of strangulation.
Of course, it must be noted that her kerchief had been pulled very tight, apparently from behind, and this may have had the same effect. But Eddowes and Chapman also wore kerchiefs and on these the bruising evidence clearly shows someone grabbing their throats.
As with many of the questions revolving around the murders, I suppose we'll never really be sure, but for me, count Tabram in and put Stride down as very questionable.
4.
Date: Thu, 09 May 1996 09:13:00 -0700
From: Tommy Reynolds
I believe there to only be six victims of the Ripper:
1.Mary Ann Nichols (August 31, 1888)
2.Elizabeth Ann Chapman (September 8, 1888)
3.Elizabeth Stride (September 30, 1888)
4.Catharine Eddowes (September 30, 1888)
5.Mary Jeanette Kelly (November 9, 1988)
6.Alice McKenzie (July 17, 1989)
Emma Elizabeth Smith was followed by four men as she walked the streets as a prostitute. The men stopped Smith in Osburn Street and physically abused her. The men forced an extremely blunt instrument into her vagina, which torn the perineum. The men then fled and were never found.
I BELIEVE THIS WAS NOT A RIPPER ATTACK BECAUSE: The Ripper was a solo operator and not part of some gang/group of men. Plus the mutilation of the body of such a victim was not present. If this was a Ripper slaying, why did he allow her to live?
Martha Trabram and another prostitute had picked up two Grenadier Guards and had seperated, both taking one of the Guards with them. Trabram was found dead on the first floor landing of the George Yard buildings. She had been savagely attacked with a sharp balded instrument. She was stabbed nearly forty times. Most of the stab wounds were in the area surrounding the vagina and the torso. There is no doubt that the killer had some grievance against prostitutes due to the number of stab wounds and the strength it wound take to inflict that number. As far as the Ripper is concerned, this particular crime was most influential in the development of several myths of further killings. This crime was not in MY determination committed by the Ripper because the particular traits of his killings are absent; for instance, the carotid artery was not cut, the body was not mutilated, and the depth of the stab wounds were consistent with that of a bayonet.
Francis Cole is found by a police constable on Feb. 13, 1891 on a road near Chambers St. Her throat had been cut, and Thompson, the ploice constable, thought he interrupted the killing because he thought he heard someone running from the scene. Cole also had abdominal injuries. She was alive when found but died shortly thereafter. This killing may very well be a Ripper killing. Maybe if Thompson would have arrived a few seconds earlier the identity of the killer would be known. Maybe if he would have arrived a few seconds later all the characteristcs of a Ripper slaying/mutilation would have been there. Who knows? Without more evidence, I would have to say that this was not a Ripper slaying.
Alice McKenzie was found dead on July 17, 1889. Her throat was cut and clothing disarranged. The left side of McKenzie's neck was incised with a jagged cut. She also had adbominal injuries which were not deep enough to open the cavity. Bruising was also found on her chest which during post-mortem was recorded as being caused by the attacker kneeling on her chest while cutting her throat. Dr. Brown recorded that he did not believe this slaying to be a job of the Ripper. He had examined two of the prior Ripper slaying victims and felt he was qualified to make this opinion. A second opinion was requested and was conducted by Dr Bond. Bond concluded that the Ripper was responsible for the slaying due to similarites in the cutting of the throat and the mutilation of the abdomen and sexual organs. It is theorized that a pimp had a grievance against Alice and was responsile for the slaying. I believe that this slaying was that of the Ripper. I feel that Dr Brown may have been attempting to prevent another scare amongst the people of the community. Can you blame him?
Well this is just my opinion. I have only read several Ripper volumes and have not read enough about Fairy Fay to remember any true details. So I shall not commit myself to any opinion that I cannot defend.
5.
Date: Tue, 28 May 1996 16:21:51 -0700
From: Nicholas A. Racht
I doubt that Martha Tabram was the first Ripper victim due to the marked differences between her injuries and those of the other commonly accepted victims. While the attack on her was extremely brutal it just does not seem consistent with a progression to the later attacks.
Murder by means of simply stabing (albeit multiple times) and the grotesqe mutilations of the later killings seem to suggest killers of distinctly different methods of attack as well as fortitude. As far as the Tabram attack being a form of MO development the evidence is just not there. Stabing a person and tearing someone open with a knife are very different operations (no I'm not a homicidal maniac but I do work part time as a police officer and I spent ten years in the light infantry at times working as a combatives instructor). Almost anyone can muster sufficient strength/force to stab or slash a person but the type of deeply penetrating cutting (ripping) injuries to the body cavity require a great deal more strength/force to accomplish. Also whereas a person might be willing to stab someone to death the leap to actually gutting someone and removing their internal organs after only one "practice" attack would be quite a leap.
6.
Date: Mon, 03 Jun 96 11:25:13 -0700
From: Kent Conwell
Some sources report Martha Tabram was stabbed thirty-nine times. In Sugden's book on page 17, the autopsy report accounts for only twenty-two. Is there anyone who can explain the discrepency?
Back to Previous Topics for Debate
Back to the Conference Main Page