The Whitehall Mystery

[Debra A]

Anyway, Trevor has got something going for him when he says that the question whether bodies meant for medical explorations are put on the slab clothed or unclothed is stupid.

In a sense, it is: we all know that bodies meant for medical purposes are put on the slab with no clothes on.

Which is why I would like to point to the inquest after the Pinchin Street victim. At it, inspector Charles Pinhorn spoke of the cloth wrapped over parts of the torso, originally thought to be two or three pieces of cloth:

The chemise was entire, although it first had the appearance of being in pieces, as it had been cut open from top to bottom. The armholes were cut right up to the neck.

Yes, absolutely so, and the Whitehall leg was still 'wearing' a woollen stocking and Elizabeth's remains were wrapped in all her clothing and her bag, recognised by her family and friends.

[Debra A]

Hi Debra
Thank you so much for pointing out to me which torso you thought was most similar to the ripper. And I agree, Jackson and Kelly similarities are striking.

Would you please advice which torsos you think are most similar to each other and could possibly be the work of the same man?

Thank you in advance!

Anyone else who wants to weigh in on this please do! : )

Thanks, Abby, I'll have to come back tomorrow.

[John Wheat]

If you ask me there's a lot of guff in this forum about the Ripper and Torso Killer being one and the same. Where's the evidence of this? If the Ripper and the Torso killer were one and the same why aren't there Ripper murders dating back to 1873?

[John G]

If you ask me there's a lot of guff in this forum about the Ripper and Torso Killer being one and the same. Where's the evidence of this? If the Ripper and the Torso killer were one and the same why aren't there Ripper murders dating back to 1873?

Hello John,

I have consistently argued that they are not the same. I believe the Torso murders form part of a separate series.

[Trevor Marriott]

Yes, absolutely so, and the Whitehall leg was still 'wearing' a woollen stocking and Elizabeth's remains were wrapped in all her clothing and her bag, recognised by her family and friends.

So do those facts alone lead you to conclude that they were both murdered ?

If they died on some back street table of course all evidence would need to be got rid of including clothes, and personal effects.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[John Wheat]

Hello John,

I have consistently argued that they are not the same. I believe the Torso murders form part of a separate series.

Unfortunately John you seem to be wasting your breath. There seems to be several posters on this forum who for some bizarre reason seem to think Jack and the Torso killer were one and the same. Again where is the evidence of this?

Cheers John

[John G]

Hi Debra
Thank you so much for pointing out to me which torso you thought was most similar to the ripper. And I agree, Jackson and Kelly similarities are striking.

Would you please advice which torsos you think are most similar to each other and could possibly be the work of the same man?

Thank you in advance!

Anyone else who wants to weigh in on this please do! : )

Hi Abby,

I would definitely include Rainham, Pinchin Street and Liz Jackson. I believe that Debra has provided excellent information to illustrate how they were cut and mutilated in very similar ways: see post 189. Personally I would also include the Scotland Yard and Tottenham cases, partly because of the extreme and totally unnecessary risks the perpetrator took when disposing of the bodies, which I believe is a signature characteristic, and also because of the lack of any other sensible explanation as to how these victims died.

The earlier cases are more problematic. Battersea, for example, was definitely a case of murder-the cause of death was two violent blows to the head and a verdict of wilful murder was recorded. However, the problem, of course, is that this case dates from 1873, 11 years before the next torso at Tottenham.

Very little is known about the Putney Torso (1874), although as with the Tottenham case lime appears to have been used to aid decomposition.

Trow argues that all the cases can be linked, on the grounds that the same tools were used to effect the dismemberment and the same degree of skill is apparent. However, having read Dr Biggs' opinion, I'm not sure that such an analysis can be relied upon.

[Abby Normal]

Hi Abby,

I would definitely include Rainham, Pinchin Street and Liz Jackson. I believe that Debra has provided excellent information to illustrate how they were cut and mutilated in very similar ways: see post 189. Personally I would also include the Scotland Yard and Tottenham cases, partly because of the extreme and totally unnecessary risks the perpetrator took when disposing of the bodies, which I believe is a signature characteristic, and also because of the lack of any other sensible explanation as to how these victims died.

The earlier cases are more problematic. Battersea, for example, was definitely a case of murder-the cause of death was two violent blows to the head and a verdict of wilful murder was recorded. However, the problem, of course, is that this case dates from 1873, 11 years before the next torso at Tottenham.

Very little is known about the Putney Torso (1874), although as with the Tottenham case lime appears to have been used to aid decomposition.

Trow argues that all the cases can be linked, on the grounds that the same tools were used to effect the dismemberment and the same degree of skill is apparent. However, having read Dr Biggs' opinion, I'm not sure that such an analysis can be relied upon.

fascinating. Thank you JohnG!

[Fisherman]

Thank you fish
The date is interesting as it falls in approx. the same time frame of the ripper murders, and Bradford is not that far from London.

Have you established any links between lech and Bradford?

There was a Charles John Lechmere living in Bradford in the mid 1800:s, a man who fathered a number of boys who went on to become famous entertainers under the name The Livermore Boys - but it would seem that these were not of the Lechmere branch that our carman belonged to.

[Fisherman]

Hi fish
Trevor might not be interested in what your trying to get at, but I am. Please continue with what your getting at.

Well, listen to what Pinhorn said: the chemise was cut from top to bottom, and the armholes were cut right up to the neck.

So three cuts.

Now, imagine a woman lying on a slab/bed/floor, stretched out on her back, wearing a chemise only. How many cuts would it take to reveal the body totally, and where would these cuts be applied...?

Ergo, in all probability, the chemise was cut when on the victim, and it was performed in order to get full and uninhibited access to the body.

Which begs the question why the woman was dressed in a chemise only.

Which in it´s turn implies - at least to my mind - that the woman and her killer were intimately related. Or she was under the impression that this was so.

The other option is that he attacked her in her own home during nighttime, killed and dismembered here there, and brought the parts with him as he left, dumping the torso in Pinchin street while holding back the other parts.

I find that much less likely, but not impossible.

An abduction with the woman in a chemise only seems out of the question, since we would have had that reported in the press and by the police.

What remains is a woman who would not be reported as missing when she disappeared - so quite likely a prostitute. And either the killer took her in, or he killed her as she had dressed down to her chemise during a sex purchase ruse.

Either way, he must have inspired trust. And apparently, so did the Ripper.

[Abby Normal]

There was a Charles John Lechmere living in Bradford in the mid 1800:s, a man who fathered a number of boys who went on to become famous entertainers under the name The Livermore Boys - but it would seem that these were not of the Lechmere branch that our carman belonged to.

interesting fish-thanks.
Needless to say Lechmere is not that common a name. Id be surprised if there was actually no family connection, maybe lost to us but still known to them at the time?

Keep it up!

[Fisherman]

If you ask me there's a lot of guff in this forum about the Ripper and Torso Killer being one and the same. Where's the evidence of this? If the Ripper and the Torso killer were one and the same why aren't there Ripper murders dating back to 1873?

I don´t think there is a single poster on this thread who would say that they were probably the same. There are, though, those who would say that they were possibly the same. And a lot of likenesses have been mentioned to bolster that take, as you will see if you go through the posts.

Why do the Ripper murders not go back to 1873? You tell me! Why is there a gap from 1874 to 1887? That´s thirteen years. How do we explain that? Should he not kill one woman per year, all in the exact same fashion ...?

Have you noticed that the torso killers deeds are mostly concentrated around 1888? Could it be that it was one killer only, whose urges peaked at this remove in time? Was that why he went on to kill out in the streets too, for a shorter, high-heated period?

It´s anybody´s guess. And it´s anybody´s right to explore too.

[John G]

I don´t think there is a single poster on this thread who would say that they were probably the same. There are, though, those who would say that they were possibly the same. And a lot of likenesses have been mentioned to bolster that take, as you will see if you go through the posts.

Why do the Ripper murders not go back to 1873? You tell me! Why is there a gap from 1874 to 1887? That´s thirteen years. How do we explain that? Should he not kill one woman per year, all in the exact same fashion ...?

Have you noticed that the torso killers deeds are mostly concentrated around 1888? Could it be that it was one killer only, whose urges peaked at this remove in time? Was that why he went on to kill out in the streets too, for a shorter, high-heated period?

It´s anybody´s guess. And it´s anybody´s right to explore too.

Hi Fisherman,

Not quite 13 years. There's the Tottenham Torso (1884), which I believe to be part of the same series.

[Trevor Marriott]

I don´t think there is a single poster on this thread who would say that they were probably the same. There are, though, those who would say that they were possibly the same. And a lot of likenesses have been mentioned to bolster that take, as you will see if you go through the posts.

Why do the Ripper murders not go back to 1873? You tell me! Why is there a gap from 1874 to 1887? That´s thirteen years. How do we explain that? Should he not kill one woman per year, all in the exact same fashion ...?

Have you noticed that the torso killers deeds are mostly concentrated around 1888? Could it be that it was one killer only, whose urges peaked at this remove in time? Was that why he went on to kill out in the streets too, for a shorter, high-heated period?

It´s anybody´s guess. And it´s anybody´s right to explore too.

And still you are trying to pin the tail on the donkey !

[Abby Normal]

Well, listen to what Pinhorn said: the chemise was cut from top to bottom, and the armholes were cut right up to the neck.

So three cuts.

Now, imagine a woman lying on a slab/bed/floor, stretched out on her back, wearing a chemise only. How many cuts would it take to reveal the body totally, and where would these cuts be applied...?

Ergo, in all probability, the chemise was cut when on the victim, and it was performed in order to get full and uninhibited access to the body.

Which begs the question why the woman was dressed in a chemise only.

Which in it´s turn implies - at least to my mind - that the woman and her killer were intimately related. Or she was under the impression that this was so.

The other option is that he attacked her in her own home during nighttime, killed and dismembered here there, and brought the parts with him as he left, dumping the torso in Pinchin street while holding back the other parts.

I find that much less likely, but not impossible.

An abduction with the woman in a chemise only seems out of the question, since we would have had that reported in the press and by the police.

What remains is a woman who would not be reported as missing when she disappeared - so quite likely a prostitute. And either the killer took her in, or he killed her as she had dressed down to her chemise during a sex purchase ruse.

Either way, he must have inspired trust. And apparently, so did the Ripper.

Nice.
lets see-mary Kelly found mutilated in a Chemise and the pinchin street torso also. interesting.

I would say I agree with the following scenario=prostitute goes to a punters place for that purpose and is killed and cut up there. I would also posit that it was somewhere near Pinchin.