Elizabeth Jackson, JTR victim?

[corey123]

Smezenen,

No problem.

[smezenen]

The "Torso" series started befor the "Ripper" series and lasted well after that.

Thanks for pointing that out. I dont know why but I was under the thought that 3 of the 4 torso murders where done after Eddows but i just re-read the case for the whitehall mystery and see that it was estimate that the victim could have been dead up to 3 months before discovery (July). It would mean that I was incorrect in saying that MJK's killing taught him to kill indoors but then that was only speculation. Im sorry if I mislead anyone to believe I was using that as proof positive that the torso killing where commited by Jack. thats still another subject I'm on the fence about. Thats why I stated at the bottom of my post that more evidence would be needed to include these murders.

[smezenen]

Smezenen –

While I’ve been lurking on the casebook site for a while, I’m not as well versed as many of you are. I am of the mistaken impression that the Ripper murders and the Torso murders were concurrent. Were the two series consecutive? If so, there may have been an “evolution” to the madness.

Respectfully,
Edward

Im not as well versed as you think. LOL welcome to the boards.

[corey123]

Norma,

You are exactly correct.

You are also correct that the Torso murders need more research, although I doubt it will help in trying to connect the "Torso Killings" and the "Jack the Ripper Murders".

Yours truly

[Natalie Severn]

Corey,
The Torso killer was thought by some doctors to have surgical knowledge and to perhaps be a medical student.The killer of the canonical victims was thought by some doctors to have had surgical knowledge and to perhaps have been a medical student.
Other doctors disagreed.It sometimes seemed to depend on whether the first victim they had seen was Mary Kelly who was totally butchered.
But in both sets of murders doctors had different views on whether the killers skill was that of a man trained in surgery or a man trained as a butcher.Those whose first sight of a ripper victim was Mary Kelly thought the Ripper had no skill whatsoever!
Cheers
Norma

[corey123]

Edward,

The heads in the C5 were most likely never ment to be sawed off. If the killer of the C5 wanted to chop the heads off he would have. The killer of the C5 showed some anatomicle knowledge and the Torso killer showed the knowledge of a butcher, cutting by the joints.

The reason behind the "Missing organs" in the Torso killings is obvious, they came out when they were cut in half.

They were thrown in the river, and I dont believe those organs would stay intact the whole time they floated in the Thames.

Like I said, the only way it was the same killer, was if he had two different fantasies(Not likely) and two COMPLETLY different M.O.s(Not likely).

The ONLY torso murders that should even be looked at from the view of a ripper murder is those AFTER November 9th.

Yours truly

[Natalie Severn]

Edward,
The truth is that the matter has still not been researched sufficiently.
There are a number of features regarding the Whitechapel "canonical" murders of 1888 and those of the "torso" murders,that are similar.
The first is that several doctors saw skill and anatomical knowledge in both the canonical murders and the Torso murders; they also noted missing internal body parts and that heads were nearly severed in the canonical murders.The Torso murders began with body parts being found in the river in May /June [some found in Victoria Embankment] 1887 continued in September 1888 [corpse found in Whitehall near River] and again in June 1889,torso found in Battersea Park near river,other parts in river,and again in September 1889 in Pinchin Street, close to Berner Street, Whitechapel.

The jury is out.

Best

Norma

[corey123]

Edward,

Oh sorry. Well the timelines as I said are intersecting. It is rare to get two serial killers hunting in the same city at one time. That is exactly what was happening during the laiter part of the 19th century.

As I have said before, only four torso victims were found, however, due to that killers disposal methods I can bet there were more victims. I would feel it safe to double, even tripple the victim count from the Torso killer.

It is even possible that Mary Ann Nichols and Whitehall torso were killed on the same day.

Yours truly

[Edward]

corey123,

Thanks. As I wrote in post #66, to me, it seems to be the work of two murderers (for the reasons that I stated). I just wasn't clear on the timelines of the two series.

Edward

[corey123]

Edward,

The "Torso" series started befor the "Ripper" series and lasted well after that. They were two different killers.

Let me help you with picturing the two different murder sprees.
The torso murders where starting before Mary Ann Nichols died and ended well after Mary Kelly was killed.
The two different killers showed two distinctive M.Os.
And two differnet methods of disposal.
The victim type was the same.
In the torso murders, the abdominal wounds found were far less prominant than the wounds found in the C5.
There was no evidence to suggest in the torso killings that the victims died from a throat wound.
The ONLY way I would connect any of the murders were to be if the killer had multi personality disorder, one being Jack the Ripper, the other being the Torso killer.
That is not very likely, even less likely that both of the persons personalities were murdering.

So, the conclusion would have to be, most likely no.

Yours truly

[Edward]

Evolution?

Smezenen –

While I’ve been lurking on the casebook site for a while, I’m not as well versed as many of you are. I am of the mistaken impression that the Ripper murders and the Torso murders were concurrent. Were the two series consecutive? If so, there may have been an “evolution” to the madness.

Respectfully,
Edward

[smezenen]

Hello All,
Jack killed his victims very near where he encountered them (in the open). If Kelly is truly a Ripper victim, he got lucky with an indoor killing field (and took full advantage of it).

On the other hand, the torso killer most probably had a private (secluded, indoor) place in which to lure, kill and dismember the victims. To me, this is a huge difference between the two murderers. If Jack had secluded locations in which to do his "work", I believe that there would be more Kelly-like victims.
Best Regards,
Edward

Edward,
It could be argued that Mary Kelly's murder taught Jack that he would have more time and could fully explore his obsession indoors and that’s why we don’t see any more outdoor murders. It may be that Saucy Jack began taking his victims to his place after MJK. Naturally if he takes them home and kills them there he would have to dump the bodies somewhere. Carrying an intact body around the East End to dump in the river, under a bridge, or in a basement under construction, would likely get him caught so he cut them into smaller pieces and transported them to his dumpng places. The fact that we dont find the head, legs, and trunk in the same places may be explained by saying he dumped those on different nights maybe over the course of a week.

There where abdominal mutilations on Liz's torso to include some interaction with the uterus. That organ specifically warrants at the very least a closer look.
See Debra Arif's excellent article. Http://www.casebook.org/victims/jackson.html
"The uterus had been opened on the left side by a vertical cut, six inches long, through the left wall."

While it was left in the body in this case, the uterus was seemingly one of Jacks favorite organs in the other killings.
Taking these possiblilities into account I don’t think it’s really such a long stretch to include the torso killings as POSSIBLE Jack the Ripper victims. It would however take more hard evidence to be positively proven.

[smezenen]

Hello-
I believe that Jack did pose his victims. Just not as "eloquently" as some others have. I believe that some of Jack's "posing" was a consequence of his "work". His desire to reach the abdomen (most likely from between the vicitim's legs) necessitated drawing the legs up, and raising the clothing. A hand in the empty abdomen is fairly consistent.

Edward

Edward,
That’s my view also.

I think it helps when we make a distinction between posing and positioning.

Posing is to put the body into a position that would increase the horror effect or send a message or in other words to put the body in an purposely unnatural position . An example of posing would be to nail the corpse to a wall in the form of a cross or place it in a seated position at a dinner table.

Positioning is who the killer moves the body or body parts in order to accomplish his goal. In other word putting the body or parts of the body in a naturally incidental position. An example is the arm across the abdomen the intestines placed beside the body or tossed over a shoulder.

But as Cory mentioned this thread is for discussing whether Jack the Ripper murdered Liz Jackson. So I will start a fresh thread for the posing question.

[smezenen]

I would have to say, that is a really confusing post. Some of the highlights are my posts and some are yours.

I however can answer one question clearly, the reason why we SHOULDN'T discuss weather Jack posed the bodies or not is because this is a thread about weather Jack killed Liz Jackson.

Yours truly

Sorry for the confusion I was trying to show the entire conversation so that it could not be said I took anything out of context. So as to clear it up, the dark red comments where my original questions and comments about YOUR post concerning the POSING of bodies Jack -VS- Dahlia Killer. The black are your replies to those comments, and the bright red are my rebuttals.

As for the discussion YOU are the one that started the Possing conversation on this thread See post #16, I understand you where using the posing comparison as evidence to show that in your opinion Jack did not kill Liz Jackson. I was only trying to point out that your evidence was flawed becouse you cant prove beyond a reasonable doute that Jack posed any of his victims bodies.

[Edward]

Hello-
I believe that Jack did pose his victims. Just not as "eloquently" as some others have. I believe that some of Jack's "posing" was a consequence of his "work". His desire to reach the abdomen (most likely from between the vicitim's legs) necessitated drawing the legs up, and raising the clothing. A hand in the empty abdomen is fairly consistent.

Edward