Casebook: Jack the Ripper - Main
   

Introduction
Victims
Suspects
Witnesses
Ripper Letters
Police Officials
Official Documents
Press Reports
Victorian London
Message Boards
Ripper Media
Authors
Dissertations
Timelines
Games & Diversions
Photo Archive
Ripper Wiki
Casebook Examiner
Ripper Podcast
About the Casebook

Most Recent Posts:
Elizabeth Stride: Elizabeth's murder and the double event - by Madam Detective 20 minutes ago.
Conferences and Meetings: American Jack the Ripper - True Crime Conference, Baltimore, April 7-8, 2018 - by ChrisGeorge 24 minutes ago.
Motive, Method and Madness: Same motive = same killer - by Fisherman 32 minutes ago.
Tumblety, Francis: Tumblety - Hermaphrodite. - by mklhawley 53 minutes ago.
Tumblety, Francis: Tumblety - Hermaphrodite. - by jmenges 1 hour and 2 minutes ago.
Witnesses: Why doubt a soldier murdered Tabram? - by Paddy 1 hour and 8 minutes ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Tumblety, Francis: Tumblety - Hermaphrodite. - (16 posts)
A6 Murders: A6 Rebooted - (14 posts)
Conferences and Meetings: American Jack the Ripper - True Crime Conference, Baltimore, April 7-8, 2018 - (10 posts)
Maybrick, James: Acquiring A Victorian Diary - (9 posts)
Motive, Method and Madness: Same motive = same killer - (6 posts)
Witnesses: Why doubt a soldier murdered Tabram? - (4 posts)

Wiki Updates:
Robert Sagar
Edit: Chris
May 9, 2015, 12:32 am
Online newspaper archives
Edit: Chris
Nov 26, 2014, 10:25 am
Joseph Lawende
Edit: Chris
Mar 9, 2014, 10:12 am
Miscellaneous research resources
Edit: Chris
Feb 13, 2014, 9:28 am
Charles Cross
Edit: John Bennett
Sep 4, 2013, 8:20 pm

Most Recent Blogs:
Mike Covell: A DECADE IN THE MAKING.
February 19, 2016, 11:12 am.
Chris George: RipperCon in Baltimore, April 8-10, 2016
February 10, 2016, 2:55 pm.
Mike Covell: Hull Prison Visit
October 10, 2015, 8:04 am.
Mike Covell: NEW ADVENTURES IN RESEARCH
August 9, 2015, 3:10 am.
Mike Covell: UPDDATES FOR THE PAST 11 MONTHS
November 14, 2014, 10:02 am.
Mike Covell: Mike’s Book Releases
March 17, 2014, 3:18 am.

Go Back   Casebook Forums > Ripper Discussions > Motive, Method and Madness

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #961  
Old 10-21-2017, 02:05 PM
Abby Normal Abby Normal is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 5,266
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trevor Marriott View Post
Hi Debs

But there is another scenario, just as plausible, that being that there perhaps was a combination of the two scenarios you mentioned.

After all the dismemberments were done to hide the identities. If these were prostitutes why would the killer want to hide their identities, why would he not simply leave them were they were murdered, as with the WM, and this is one major flaw in the theory that these torsos were the work of the same killer. Why the need to dismember in any event. Why risk getting caught disposing of the body parts? All point are against a serial torso killer.

The level of knife skill is something that is being over exaggerated on here by some, who have come up with their own assessment, based on them having no surgical experience whatsoever.

All this clap trap about being able to identify one butchers skills from one part of the country against one from another. I cannot see what butchery skills has to do with the dismembering its another false trail.

I refer to Dr Biggs yet again, and it is he who stated that much of Victorian doctors opinions given back then, can now be proved to have been nothing more than guesswork, yet people believed what they said back then, and is seem some still do today


"Another observation that is usually quoted in historical cases is that the 'quality' of the dismemberment somehow points towards a skilled individual. Whether this is medical / surgical / anatomical knowledge, or just prior experience of butchery / abattoir work varies, but the observation is often cited. I can see how it is tempting to jump to this conclusion, but I have to say that I would usually regard the quality of dissection as an indicator of a lack of prior knowledge or experience! Anyone who has taken the legs off a roast chicken can probably work out that the legs will come off a human with the right encouragement...

Dr Biggs - Jack the Ripper- The Real Truth http://www.trevormarriott.co.uk/jack-ripper-real-truth/

www.trevormarriott.co.uk
Hi Trevor
I don’t think the dismemberment was done to hide the identies per se. It goes more to the SIG IMHO, or overlapping with MO for ease in moving.

Also you say why not leave where they were murdered. They were more than likely murdered in a private place of the killer where they were also mutilated and dismembered. So he couldn’t leave them where they were murdered, needless to say the smell in his place would have been unpleasant as well as risky, no?
__________________
"Is all that we see or seem
but a dream within a dream?"

-Edgar Allan Poe


"...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

-Frederick G. Abberline
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #962  
Old 10-21-2017, 02:54 PM
RockySullivan RockySullivan is offline
Chief Inspector
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 1,630
Default

Quote:
After all the dismemberments were done to hide the identities. If these were prostitutes why would the killer want to hide their identities, why would he not simply leave them were they were murdered, as with the WM, and this is one major flaw in the theory that these torsos were the work of the same killer. Why the need to dismember in any event. Why risk getting caught disposing of the body parts? All point are against a serial torso killer.
What? How? So...let's get this straight Trevor. If they were prostitutes then the killer wouldn't care about hiding their identities..(unless he knew them, or was seen with them, or their identities could point to him in anyway) then why would he have not just left them where they were murdered? Because they were killed inside, most likely in the killer's abode or someplace where he could kill, dismember and prepare a body for disposal safely. So how would he just leave the body where it was murdered now? Why risk getting caught dismembering and disposing when you can just leave the body where you killed it in your house or your work.
Quote:
All point are against a serial torso killer.
right so because the killer used dismemberment to dispersal to prevent identification therefor these could not be murder victims? Is that your argument now?
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #963  
Old 10-21-2017, 03:02 PM
Trevor Marriott Trevor Marriott is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 4,776
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Abby Normal View Post
Hi Trevor
I don’t think the dismemberment was done to hide the identies per se. It goes more to the SIG IMHO, or overlapping with MO for ease in moving.

Also you say why not leave where they were murdered. They were more than likely murdered in a private place of the killer where they were also mutilated and dismembered. So he couldn’t leave them where they were murdered, needless to say the smell in his place would have been unpleasant as well as risky, no?
But if that had have been the case then that must point to the killer living . close, or having a place close to the Thames, because all the body parts could not have been disposed of in one go by one person, and the more time a person was walking around with parcelled up body parts for disposal or seen disposing of parcels in the Thames, made the likelihood of capture greater. So that theory really doesn't stand up to close scrutiny. Many known factors also dont point to the same place of disposal, which you would expect if the same killer and the killer lived near the Thames.

If it is suggested that the Pinchin St torso was part of a series where the torsos were dumped in the Thames, why did the killer hide the torso where he did? Surely if the killer of that victim had have been responsible for the other torsos, would he not dispose of that Pinchin St torso in the Thames? Much easier to dump it in the Thames than to dispose of it in Pinchin Street.

Equally had the Pinchin Street killer been responsible for the other torsos he could have disposed of the body parts in parcels of those victims at any secluded land based location, and not in the Thames. It is clear in my opinion that they are not connected.

And I say again for the umpteenth time that murder in the true sense cannot be proved in most of these torsos,despite the controversial coroners court verdicts, none of which in any event were able to show a specific cause of death to warrant wilful murder verdicts in several cases.

And the purpose of a coroners court was to determine a cause of death. In Victorian coroners courts when no specific cause of death could be ascertained the verdict was "found dead" which was in fact recorded against some of the torsos.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #964  
Old 10-21-2017, 03:15 PM
Trevor Marriott Trevor Marriott is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 4,776
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RockySullivan View Post
What? How? So...let's get this straight Trevor. If they were prostitutes then the killer wouldn't care about hiding their identities..(unless he knew them, or was seen with them, or their identities could point to him in anyway) then why would he have not just left them where they were murdered? Because they were killed inside, most likely in the killer's abode or someplace where he could kill, dismember and prepare a body for disposal safely. So how would he just leave the body where it was murdered now? Why risk getting caught dismembering and disposing when you can just leave the body where you killed it in your house or your work. right so because the killer used dismemberment to dispersal to prevent identification therefor these could not be murder victims? Is that your argument now?
Did JTR dismember victims ? No
Did JTR attempt to hide their identities-No
Did JTR leave the bodies where they were killed- YES

If JTR killed the Torsos then why change his MO ?

My point is that the torsos were dismembered why was that ?
To Hide their identities

Why hide their identities if they were random killings did JTR try to hide their identities? No

And I say again for the umpteenth time that murder in the true sense cannot be proved in most of these torsos,despite the controversial coroners court verdicts, none of which in any event were able to show a specific cause of death to warrant wilful murder verdicts in several cases.

And the purpose of a coroners court was to determine a cause of death. In Victorian coroners courts when no specific cause of death could be ascertained the verdict was "found dead" which was in fact recorded against some of the torsos.

Yet we have those on here who still wont accept these facts and still keep rambling on about a serial killer at work, when there are other plausible explanations ruling out a serial killer.

You can only postulate a serial killer if a series of three or more murders can be connected by reason of a number of similar traits which cannot be identified with regards to the torsos.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Last edited by Trevor Marriott : 10-21-2017 at 03:21 PM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #965  
Old 10-21-2017, 04:34 PM
Sam Flynn Sam Flynn is offline
Casebook Supporter
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Wales
Posts: 8,867
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trevor Marriott View Post
Did JTR dismember victims ? No
Did JTR attempt to hide their identities-No
Did JTR leave the bodies where they were killed- YES

If JTR killed the Torsos then why change his MO ?
Spot on.
Quote:
My point is that the torsos were dismembered why was that ?
To Hide their identities
Probably - the heads were never found. Presumably to hide any trail that might lead back to the killer, and to delay/confound any police investigation.
__________________
Kind regards, Sam Flynn

"Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #966  
Old 10-21-2017, 05:37 PM
RockySullivan RockySullivan is offline
Chief Inspector
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 1,630
Default

Quote:
If it is suggested that the Pinchin St torso was part of a series where the torsos were dumped in the Thames, why did the killer hide the torso where he did? Surely if the killer of that victim had have been responsible for the other torsos, would he not dispose of that Pinchin St torso in the Thames? Much easier to dump it in the Thames than to dispose of it in Pinchin Street.
The Whitehall torso

Quote:
But if that had have been the case then that must point to the killer living . close, or having a place close to the Thames, because all the body parts could not have been disposed of in one go by one person, and the more time a person was walking around with parcelled up body parts for disposal or seen disposing of parcels in the Thames, made the likelihood of capture greater. So that theory really doesn't stand up to close scrutiny. Many known factors also dont point to the same place of disposal, which you would expect if the same killer and the killer lived near the Thames.
How are you suggesting the parts were dumped?

Last edited by RockySullivan : 10-21-2017 at 05:40 PM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #967  
Old 10-21-2017, 05:40 PM
MrBarnett MrBarnett is offline
Inspector
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Romford
Posts: 1,308
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trevor Marriott View Post
Hi Debs

But there is another scenario, just as plausible, that being that there perhaps was a combination of the two scenarios you mentioned.

After all the dismemberments were done to hide the identities. If these were prostitutes why would the killer want to hide their identities, why would he not simply leave them were they were murdered, as with the WM, and this is one major flaw in the theory that these torsos were the work of the same killer. Why the need to dismember in any event. Why risk getting caught disposing of the body parts? All point are against a serial torso killer.

The level of knife skill is something that is being over exaggerated on here by some, who have come up with their own assessment, based on them having no surgical experience whatsoever.

All this clap trap about being able to identify one butchers skills from one part of the country against one from another. I cannot see what butchery skills has to do with the dismembering its another false trail.

I refer to Dr Biggs yet again, and it is he who stated that much of Victorian doctors opinions given back then, can now be proved to have been nothing more than guesswork, yet people believed what they said back then, and is seem some still do today


"Another observation that is usually quoted in historical cases is that the 'quality' of the dismemberment somehow points towards a skilled individual. Whether this is medical / surgical / anatomical knowledge, or just prior experience of butchery / abattoir work varies, but the observation is often cited. I can see how it is tempting to jump to this conclusion, but I have to say that I would usually regard the quality of dissection as an indicator of a lack of prior knowledge or experience! Anyone who has taken the legs off a roast chicken can probably work out that the legs will come off a human with the right encouragement...

Dr Biggs - Jack the Ripper- The Real Truth http://www.trevormarriott.co.uk/jack-ripper-real-truth/

www.trevormarriott.co.uk
Dr Biggs makes a very valid point.

As I understand it what he is saying is that very few surgeons would have been experienced in human joint disarticulation. Butchers or slaughtermen would have been more so in respect of food preparation, as would, presumably, chefs/cooks. But then anyone who'd often eaten chicken would also have had a familiarity with the mechanics of a fowl's joints which could have been drawn upon when disarticutaling an altogether different species.

Last edited by MrBarnett : 10-21-2017 at 05:51 PM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #968  
Old 10-21-2017, 05:42 PM
RockySullivan RockySullivan is offline
Chief Inspector
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 1,630
Default

Quote:
Did JTR dismember victims ? No
Did JTR attempt to hide their identities-No
Did JTR leave the bodies where they were killed- YES

If JTR killed the Torsos then why change his MO ?
but that doesn't mean the torsos weren't serial murders
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #969  
Old 10-21-2017, 06:05 PM
MrBarnett MrBarnett is offline
Inspector
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Romford
Posts: 1,308
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RockySullivan View Post
but that doesn't mean the torsos weren't serial murders
Who was JTR? Was he responsible for the Pinchin Street deposit?
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #970  
Old 10-21-2017, 09:53 PM
Abby Normal Abby Normal is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 5,266
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RockySullivan View Post
but that doesn't mean the torsos weren't serial murders
Hi rocky. Don’t worry they were, the only question that remains is if the torsos and the ripper series where the same.

And they, probably were too.
__________________
"Is all that we see or seem
but a dream within a dream?"

-Edgar Allan Poe


"...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

-Frederick G. Abberline
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:17 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.