The Whitehall Mystery

[RockySullivan]

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 strongly believe the ripper and torso murders are connected. There are a couple of things that lead me to believe this is true. First off, ripper and torso both removed the uterus. The second is the similarity in disposal ie the pinchin torso. Dumped between police beats and no one seen in the area (except for the sweeper "what's on governor" who is a good suspect in my opinion). The pinchin torso was dumped very near to where Schwartz was chased and lipski was written across from the arch. Now for the whitehall torso...it was found with newspaper clippings wrapped up inside the parcel. One of the clippings was from the date after the Tabram inquest and most likely the Tabram inquest verdict would have appeared in print on that day. I believe there is a connection there. Another thing about the whitehall torso it was kept in the vault for a very long time, weeks! It was in a part of the vault that only two workers kept their tools and I believe it was kept there for a specific reason. Probably because it was thought to be safe there. In y opinion it is impossible that the workers would not notice a decomposing torso full of maggots next to their tools I don't care how dark it is that is not a possibility. They must have known it was there. Now the whitehall vault where the tools and torso was kept had tools stolen from it before the torso was found. Stolen tools figure prominently in John Richardsons account of the morning of chapmans murder. He claimed he checked the lock on the basement and that's the reason he was in the yard that morning and what led him to stop and play with his boot with his knife next to where a murder occurred. (He only put the lock on after the tools were stolen...so why check a door if its locked?) in light of the stolen tools from richardsons basement and the vault at whitehall, and due to the inconsistencies in Richardsons story I believe there may be a connection between Richardson, Francis Tyler who worked for his mother at 29 hanbury but was noticeably absent the Morning of the murder and the workers at whitehall. We've also discussed the possibility that the basement and vault could be accessed from the sewer or underground tunnels which would be very interesting and quite scary but would fit with the disposal into the thames. I do believe Richardson and Tyler figure in somehow and perhaps they were involved with some shady characters. Again these two whitehall workers ( the one from battersea and the other) who kept their tools where the torso was found must figure in to this somehow.

[John Wheat]

To Rocky

I don't believe the evidence you speak of that allegedly connects the Torso Killer and the Ripper killings is anything like as strong as you make out. Also why aren't there Ripper murders dating back to 1873?

Cheers John

[RockySullivan]

To Rocky

I don't believe the evidence you speak of that allegedly connects the Torso Killer and the Ripper killings is anything like as strong as you make out. Also why aren't there Ripper murders dating back to 1873?

Cheers John

I didn't say there was any strong evidence did I? I said I believe they are connected. Serial killer can vary in MO between dismemberment and not. In my view the ripper murders and torso dumps are one in the same so the murder in 1873 was a ripper murder....just one that was dismembered

[John Wheat]

I didn't say there was any strong evidence did I? I said I believe they are connected. Serial killer can vary in MO between dismemberment and not. In my view the ripper murders and torso dumps are one in the same so the murder in 1873 was a ripper murder....just one that was dismembered

So you believe the Torso Killer and Jack the Ripper are connected on weak evidence then?

[RockySullivan]

So you believe the Torso Killer and Jack the Ripper are connected on weak evidence then?

I believe it's only logical they are connected. There are a number of coincidences that I think are very unlikely to be only coincidences. Two serial killers going around removing the uterus? That alone is enough for me aside from all the other aspects. But I admit it's nothing close to evidence...just logic

[John Wheat]

I believe it's only logical they are connected. There are a number of coincidences that I think are very unlikely to be only coincidences. Two serial killers going around removing the uterus? That alone is enough for me aside from all the other aspects. But I admit it's nothing close to evidence...just logic

But Jack didn't always remove the uterus? What coincidences?

[RockySullivan]

So you think it's likely two unrelated killers targeted poor women who resorted to prostitution and were sleeping roughing and killed them and removed uterus. Look at the similarities between the way Kelly and Jackson were cut up. The torso was dumped in the railway arch Schwartz was chased to and lipski was written there...is that a coincidence? Why was a newspaper from the date the Tabram inquest verdict appeared in print placed with the whitehall torso? There certainly ARE coincidences with the two cases but the most significant is again it's highly unlikely there were two serial killers operating in London who cut up women and removed their uterus. How many times Jack removed it is irrelevant...the point is he did.

[Debra A]

Berner Street is near Pinchin Street! Mind you, I think that the killer probably had access to a boat. I think the links to the Thames are the key. Thus, body parts thrown into the Thames; Liz Jackson sleeping rough on the embankment; the New Scotland Yard building on the embankment, which could be accessed via a boat- surely a better alternative than carrying body parts over a 9ft fence on at least two occasions!

And,of course, a boat would be a perfect place to carry out the dismemberments.

Hi John
Elizabeth Jackson's body was plugged in a certain way and this led to reports in the papers that she had been murdered by someone with 'marine' knowledge, specifically of how to deal with a dead body at sea.

[Debra A]

That would depend on what they were having their bellies cut open for

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

An illegal appendix removal of course.

Hi Trevor
You seem to be presenting what vivisectionists, back street abortionists and medical students (real or imagined ones) practicing on bodies bought illegally from the workhouse dead-house would do in theory as all one type of scenario now.

You still didn't answer my question from earlier but I'm still interested in your thoughts on this:
Are you proposing that someone made an incision ribs to pubes and removed two flaps of skin from Elizabeth's abdominal wall which included skin from her genitals and buttock, to then make an incision into Elizabeth's uterus to remove the foetus, all while she was still alive in a bid to perform an abortion which are actually performed vaginally anyway? And that this was probably done by someone who didn't know exactly what they were doing and so ended in Elizabeth's death and mutilation, the body being dumped to avoid funeral costs or hide that an abortion had been committed?

I would say that is a murder-why do you think it isn't a murder if that's your scenario of what happened?

[John G]

I strongly believe the ripper and torso murders are connected. There are a couple of things that lead me to believe this is true. First off, ripper and torso both removed the uterus. The second is the similarity in disposal ie the pinchin torso. Dumped between police beats and no one seen in the area (except for the sweeper "what's on governor" who is a good suspect in my opinion). The pinchin torso was dumped very near to where Schwartz was chased and lipski was written across from the arch. Now for the whitehall torso...it was found with newspaper clippings wrapped up inside the parcel. One of the clippings was from the date after the Tabram inquest and most likely the Tabram inquest verdict would have appeared in print on that day. I believe there is a connection there. Another thing about the whitehall torso it was kept in the vault for a very long time, weeks! It was in a part of the vault that only two workers kept their tools and I believe it was kept there for a specific reason. Probably because it was thought to be safe there. In y opinion it is impossible that the workers would not notice a decomposing torso full of maggots next to their tools I don't care how dark it is that is not a possibility. They must have known it was there. Now the whitehall vault where the tools and torso was kept had tools stolen from it before the torso was found. Stolen tools figure prominently in John Richardsons account of the morning of chapmans murder. He claimed he checked the lock on the basement and that's the reason he was in the yard that morning and what led him to stop and play with his boot with his knife next to where a murder occurred. (He only put the lock on after the tools were stolen...so why check a door if its locked?) in light of the stolen tools from richardsons basement and the vault at whitehall, and due to the inconsistencies in Richardsons story I believe there may be a connection between Richardson, Francis Tyler who worked for his mother at 29 hanbury but was noticeably absent the Morning of the murder and the workers at whitehall. We've also discussed the possibility that the basement and vault could be accessed from the sewer or underground tunnels which would be very interesting and quite scary but would fit with the disposal into the thames. I do believe Richardson and Tyler figure in somehow and perhaps they were involved with some shady characters. Again these two whitehall workers ( the one from battersea and the other) who kept their tools where the torso was found must figure in to this somehow.

Hi Rocky,

In the Torso cases the uterus may have been accidentally lost as the killer transported and disposed of the body. In respect of JtR, we cannot know that he specifically targeted the uterus: considering he was operating with very little light, and may not have had anatomical knowledge, he could have been after a different organ and removed the uterus by mistake. Or he could have just been intent on securing a trophy, so that the removal of the uterus was incidental, I.e. it would as just luck that that was the organ he found and removed. In fact, in respect of MJK, there didn't seem to be any targeting of specific organs: the I killer seemed to have just plucked them out on a completely wanton fashion.

[Trevor Marriott]

An illegal appendix removal of course.

Hi Trevor
You seem to be presenting what vivisectionists, back street abortionists and medical students (real or imagined ones) practicing on bodies bought illegally from the workhouse dead-house would do in theory as all one type of scenario now.

You still didn't answer my question from earlier but I'm still interested in your thoughts on this:
Are you proposing that someone made an incision ribs to pubes and removed two flaps of skin from Elizabeth's abdominal wall which included skin from her genitals and buttock, to then make an incision into Elizabeth's uterus to remove the foetus, all while she was still alive in a bid to perform an abortion which are actually performed vaginally anyway? And that this was probably done by someone who didn't know exactly what they were doing and so ended in Elizabeth's death and mutilation, the body being dumped to avoid funeral costs or hide that an abortion had been committed?

I would say that is a murder-why do you think it isn't a murder if that's your scenario of what happened?

Debs
It is wrong to try to specifically theorize as to how these women died.They all have different wounds and different MO`s were used in the course of dismemberment and so there is no specific evidence which points to murder or some other plausible explanation for their deaths. Now I am not saying that perhaps one or more of the victims could not have been murdered, as Dr Biggs says "Anything is possible"

But there is certainly not enough information available for anyone to suggest that JTR and the killer of any of these victims were one and the same, and certainly not enough for anyone to suggest a serial killer was at work.

The case of killers murdering victims at specific locations, and in this case it would have to have been at the killers residence, and then dismembering their bodies and then taking them to dump sites is very rare even with today serial killers.

I again highlight several important factors when considering murder.

1. If the killer killed in the street or at a secluded location there would be no need to risk dismembering, and no need to dispose of the body parts, The killer could leave the body in situ. However if he wanted to dismember the body he could still have done that in situ, but I see no point in him doing this.

2. If the killer went with a victim to their residence and committed the murder there, again no need to dispose of the body or body parts. He could have left them in situ. If he did decide to move them he would have been left with a bloody mess, and sooner or later someone would have missed the victim and would no doubt have discovered the bloody crime scene.

3. That only leaves the killers residence if that be the case then that would have to have been fairly close to the dump sites and fairly close to the river, and the victims as likely as not frequenting that same area. The killer is hardly likely to pick up a victim in North London and then take them to East London.

So adding these three factors to the overall mystery the balance of scales tips towards non murder.

I see this debate/discussion rolling on and on I don't feel I have anything further to contribute. My input is there for all to see and to accept or reject.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Trevor Marriott]

Hi John
Elizabeth Jackson's body was plugged in a certain way and this led to reports in the papers that she had been murdered by someone with 'marine' knowledge, specifically of how to deal with a dead body at sea.

Wasn't this this form of plugging used when medical procedures were being carried out ?

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[martin wilson]

Hi all

This is just background, not a million miles away obviously and
shows another aspect, or should I say, a different aspect, to the paupers dread of the workhouse.

Haverford West and Milford Haven Telegraph. 3rd of November 1880.

THE DISSECTION OF UNCLAIMED DEAD.

The authorities of Guy's Hospital, with a view to perfecting the students in the science of anatomy have issued a request to many of the Metropolitan boards of guardians that the unclaimed bodies of persons dying in the workhouses should be handed over to the hospital surgeons for dissection and promising proper burials once the operation is over.
On the letter being read to the Bethnal Green guardians, it was suggested by the chairman that the request be acceded to.
This met with a vigorous opposition from Mr Smither, Mr Ward, Mr Thurgood, and others, who said the poor would shrink from entering the workhouse if there was the chance that their bodies would be handed over to strangers to be cut and maimed, thus preventing those who really should seek asylum at the hands of the Guardians from doing so.
Mr Jacobs saw no reason against such a use being made of the bodies and reminded the guardians in a case of sudden death the coroner had it in his power to order a post mortem examination.
The Rev. H.G. Henderson pointed out that the proposal was for the benefit of the poor, and that the guardians would be best consulting the interests of those they had to guard by making the concession.
There were at present 250 students at the hospital, who would before long be treating those requiring medical aid; and the more proficient they became in their profession , the better would it be for society in general.
After some further discussion, in which it was stated those who voted for such a thing would be known as "Bethnal green body snatchers" the motion was agreed by six votes to four.
It was decided however, to keep each body three days in the mortuary before parting with it to the hospital authorities, that it might be claimed by any relatives.


All the best.

[Debra A]

Debs
It is wrong to try to specifically theorize as to how these women died.They all have different wounds and different MO`s were used in the course of dismemberment and so there is no specific evidence which points to murder or some other plausible explanation for their deaths. Now I am not saying that perhaps one or more of the victims could not have been murdered, as Dr Biggs says "Anything is possible"

But there is certainly not enough information available for anyone to suggest that JTR and the killer of any of these victims were one and the same, and certainly not enough for anyone to suggest a serial killer was at work.

The case of killers murdering victims at specific locations, and in this case it would have to have been at the killers residence, and then dismembering their bodies and then taking them to dump sites is very rare even with today serial killers.

I again highlight several important factors when considering murder.

1. If the killer killed in the street or at a secluded location there would be no need to risk dismembering, and no need to dispose of the body parts, The killer could leave the body in situ. However if he wanted to dismember the body he could still have done that in situ, but I see no point in him doing this.

2. If the killer went with a victim to their residence and committed the murder there, again no need to dispose of the body or body parts. He could have left them in situ. If he did decide to move them he would have been left with a bloody mess, and sooner or later someone would have missed the victim and would no doubt have discovered the bloody crime scene.

3. That only leaves the killers residence if that be the case then that would have to have been fairly close to the dump sites and fairly close to the river, and the victims as likely as not frequenting that same area. The killer is hardly likely to pick up a victim in North London and then take them to East London.

So adding these three factors to the overall mystery the balance of scales tips towards non murder.

I see this debate/discussion rolling on and on I don't feel I have anything further to contribute. My input is there for all to see and to accept or reject.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Hi Trevor,
Yes, but just as you insist on popping in and saying these women could have died as a result of abortion or have been medical specimens etc. based on not much supporting evidence of that, then others have exactly the same right to come along and suggest a link between the torsos or explore a link to the Whitechapel murder, if they feel that way inclined.

As an aside-I believe that dismemberment after domestic murder is extremely common if not with serial killers?

[Debra A]

Wasn't this this form of plugging used when medical procedures were being carried out ?

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

According to a few detailed newspaper reports it was something done to bodies when a person had died at sea. Most newspapers only alluded vaguely to the plugging but one described it exactly.
There is some mention of medical procedure associated with it in one of the medical jurisprudence book I researched in which I have mentioned before- archaic and possibly pregnancy and abortion related (where abortifacients were used.) This was used by professional medics in legitimate abortions and copied by back street abortionists, particularly the 'herbalists' variety who didn't always introduce instruments into the procedure but sometimes killed women by poisoning.