The Whitehall Mystery

[Abby Normal]

Hi Abby,

I think that most of the Torso cases suggest the signature of a serial killer. Thus, the perpetrator appeared to have a macabre sense of humour and was clearly taunting the police. He also took enormous risks, which would be completely unnecessary if the motive was simply one of body part disposal, i.e. as a consequence of an abortion gone wrong.

Thus, in the case of the Tottenham Torso, the Girl with the Rose Tattoo, body parts were disposed of in an area almost constantly observed by police, during a shift change, and close to a military drill hall.

The Whitehall Mystery involved body parts left in pitch black dark catacombs in the under-construction Scotland Yard building. the perpetrator may also have scaled a 9ft fence, whilst carrying a human trunk.

The Pinchin Street Torso was placed between two sleeping drunks, possibly by the exact same arches that Schwartz ran to after the incident with with BS man. The victim may also have been killed on the anniversary of Annie Chapman's death. And written in large chalk letters on a black railing opposite the arch was the word "Lipski", an obvious reference to BS man and possibly a pastiche of the GSG.

Elizabeth Jackson's Thigh was found in the garden of Sir Percy Shelley's home, the son of Mary Shelley, the author of Frankenstein, after being thrown over the wall. This, of course, also suggests a macabre joke.

I don't, however, believe that the crimes are linked to the JtR murders because, as Dr Biggs pointed out, the MO is vastly different. For instance, JtR didn't use dump sites and made no effort to disguise the identity of his victims. He also operated exclusively in Whitechapel and the surrounding area, which strongly indicates that he was not a commuter killer, unlike Torso.

I also think it possible that the perpetrator could have dismembered his victims on a boat, which would be an ideal place to operate in seclusion-away from the preying eyes, and ears, of neighbours. This would also explain why some body parts were discarded in the Thames and how the killer gained access to the Scotland Yard building, which was on the embankment. It may also explain the choice of Elizabeth Jackson as a victim, a she had been sleeping rough on the embankment.

Hi JohnG
Thanks. I think if you take into consideration my possible explanation for the apparent change in MO you will see that there is not much difference. As a matter of fact, the main motivation-the signature if you will,of both torso man and the ripper seems to be the same. Mainly post mortem mutilation that involves the cutting open of the abdomen and the removal of internal organs, and a secondary motivation of seemingly wanting to shock the public.

[John G]

There will never be any precedent for any behaviour, when going into detail. That is something that anybody who suggests a suspect will be endlessly reminded of.
Lechmere, for example, would not be the killer, since we have no precedent of somebody killing while walking to his work.

Brilliant stuff.

Of course, there are major differences. To me, however, the theatralic element is a possible solution to these things. What was the aim for the killer? Was it something he did to satisfy himself only, or was there an element of communication involved? Because if there was, then you involve another target group, be that the police, the press or community as a whole. And then you look at how a message is best delivered.

Maybe the killer did not think that he got enough press coverage for the torso murders. Maybe he sought out something different, that would attract more interest? And then he returned to his old ways when he had had that interest.

Just an outlining of how we may understand things like these.

I would also like to point out that I have often said that the Pinchin Street torso could have been an imitation effort on behalf of the Ripper, sort of "Look, I can do this too!". That murder differs from the others since there was no apparent effort to scatter body parts all over town - none of the remaining bits and pieces were found.
It was also a murder where the body was apparently carried manually to the dumping site, whereas the other murders took a horse and cart for the scattering.

All in all, though, what I am saying is that we have great similarities, we have a geographical correlation and we have a time schedule that moulds the two series together.

And we have a candidate who is perfect for both. And there are no other candidates.

So when it comes to the Ripper/Torso murders combination, Lechmere is the best candidate, the prime suspect. Thatīs what happens when there is nobody else.

Hi Fisherman,

Personally I don't see any good reason to connect JtR with the Torso Murderer, particularly as there are clearly significant, not to say dramatic, differences in MO and signature. The fact is it would be far from unprecedented for two different serial killers to be operating at the same time on a city of 5.5 million people.

[Abby Normal]

Hi Fisherman,

But doesn't evidence suggest that the Torso Murderer selected victims from a significantly higher social class than JtR? For instance, the liver, spleen and kidneys of the Whitehall victim were all normal, unlike many working class women of the period who suffered from alcoholism. In respect of the Pinchin Street victim, the hands were delicate, suggesting that she had not been involved in manual work. In fact, there was a small circular hardening on the right little finger, which might indicate that she was a writer. The Tottenham Court victim had a smooth face, delicate arms, hands and well-manicured nails, suggesting the appearance of a gentlewoman, according to Dr Lloyd. She also had a tattoo: According to Trow (2011) the only women of the period that would have themselves tattooed were th a avant-garde, i.e. society women such as Jenny Jerome, or higher class prostitutes.

Moreover, several of the victims, I.e Pinchin Street, Rainham, had never giver birth, unlike many working class women of the period, who tended to have large families.

Hi JohnG
Yes but would a higher class woman go Unidentified? I doubt it.

Did you see my previous post about this to you? If he is killing a high end prostitute, or any woman for that matter, all he would need to do was get them back to his place.

[John G]

Hi JohnG
Thanks. I think if you take into consideration my possible explanation for the apparent change in MO you will see that there is not much difference. As a matter of fact, the main motivation-the signature if you will,of both torso man and the ripper seems to be the same. Mainly post mortem mutilation that involves the cutting open of the abdomen and the removal of internal organs, and a secondary motivation of seemingly wanting to shock the public.

Hi Abby,

As I've noted, I think it perfectly possible that a serial killer could evolve from mutilating their victims to dismemberment. However, it seems highly unlikely to me that they would simply alternate between the two. Moreover, JtR focussed on an extremely small geographical area, as Batman has pointed out in the past. That suggests to me that he did not have access to transport. Conversely, the Torso Murderer was clearly a commuter killer, suggesting that he did have access to transport.

Serial killers who use dump sites, and disguise the identity of their victims are normally categorized as being organized killers: this is something that the Torso Murderer did, but the less organized JtR did not.

You also have to consider motive: this was something that puzzled Professor Alison. Thus Keppel (2005) concluded that JtR was a lust killer, partly because his knife attacks focussed on the genitalia. However, the Torso Murderer clearly wasnt. As Trow points out:" Where is the frenzy, the removal of sexual organs, the focus on genitalia which we associate with sexual serial killers and which was very obvious the Ripper murders themselves?" (Trow, 2011)

[John G]

Hi JohnG
Yes but would a higher class woman go Unidentified? I doubt it.

Did you see my previous post about this to you? If he is killing a high end prostitute, or any woman for that matter, all he would need to do was get them back to his place.

Hi Abby,

Yes, to be fair I would agree that victimology is not decisive. However, JtR clearly targeted lower class victims because his activities were confined to the Whitechapel area, unlike the Torso Murderer.

I did read your theory about why he might choose to disguise the identity of higher class victims. However, that doesn't explain why he decapitated Liz Jackson-Dr Biggs has pointed out that that is usually for the purposes of concealing a homicide- a street prostitute who was sleeping rough on the embankment. Nonetheless, your idea is quite creative, although a simpler solution is that they were different killers.

[Fisherman]

Hi Fisherman,

Personally I don't see any good reason to connect JtR with the Torso Murderer, particularly as there are clearly significant, not to say dramatic, differences in MO and signature. The fact is it would be far from unprecedented for two different serial killers to be operating at the same time on a city of 5.5 million people.

All very true - today. But how many serialists did the Victorian police discover? And how many of them were post-mortem mutilators?

I donīt disagree as such that there are differences. But I think we must explore the grounds very carefully when we have the sort of correlation that seems to be around here. And it calls for serious attention when it is found that one of the suspects in the Ripper killings - the by far best one to me - has a clear-cut connection to the dumping spot of one of the victims. Plus he has a catīs meat woman for a mother, living a stoneīs throw away from the dumping site.

It ought not be all that hard to see where I am coming from ...

[Fisherman]

...JtR clearly targeted lower class victims because his activities were confined to the Whitechapel area, unlike the Torso Murderer.

There is also the matter of time to weigh in. The Ripper was at work at hours when the more "decent", if you like, women of Whiechapel were not out and about.
As for the torso killer, he may not have had that restraint.

I would also press that it is unlikely that prostitutes was what he was after in the first place. In all probability, WOMEN was his target. The prostitutes will reasonably have offered the safest path to that goal, like for so many other serialists.

[Abby Normal]

Hi Abby,

As I've noted, I think it perfectly possible that a serial killer could evolve from mutilating their victims to dismemberment. However, it seems highly unlikely to me that they would simply alternate between the two. Moreover, JtR focussed on an extremely small geographical area, as Batman has pointed out in the past. That suggests to me that he did not have access to transport. Conversely, the Torso Murderer was clearly a commuter killer, suggesting that he did have access to transport.

Serial killers who use dump sites, and disguise the identity of their victims are normally categorized as being organized killers: this is something that the Torso Murderer did, but the less organized JtR did not.

Hi JohnG

As I've noted, I think it perfectly possible that a serial killer could evolve from mutilating their victims to dismemberment. However, it seems highly unlikely to me that they would simply alternate between the two.

But what if as I noted before, the killer was forced to change his MO, based on his personal conditions? Like the reason I provided in my previous post explaining this possibility?

Moreover, JtR focussed on an extremely small geographical area, as Batman has pointed out in the past. That suggests to me that he did not have access to transport. Conversely, the Torso Murderer was clearly a commuter killer, suggesting that he did have access to transport.

Again, what if hes forced to change his MO? In this case, it would be that he dosnt have access to a cart when he commits the ripper murders.

I see only a change in MO in the way the ripper/torso man leaves/dispose the bodies, and this does not even take into account his MO in how he found, lured and killed his victims, which as far as we know might have been the same MO in both.

I see a change in MO only, not in signature-which again is post mortem mutilation and organ removal.

Serial killers who use dump sites, and disguise the identity of their victims are normally categorized as being organized killers: this is something that the Torso Murderer did, but the less organized JtR did not.

[/QUOTE]

This is true, but if you take into account my above explanations-it explains this away. By the way, many people have pointed out that the facial mutilations of Eddowes and Kelly may have bee an attempt at disguising identity.

[Debra A]

Thus, in the case of the Tottenham Torso, the Girl with the Rose Tattoo, body parts were disposed of in an area almost constantly observed by police, during a shift change, and close to a military drill hall.

Hi John,
I have been looking for a source for the rose tattoo you mentioned (I take it this information is from Mei Trow's book?) as the only description I'd ever seen of it previously was that it was filled in with red and was a 'bracelet' style tattoo. Lower class prostitutes often had strings of letters tattooed around their wrists and I had wondered if it was something similar. Anyway, I came across this newspaper report which seems to clear the matter of the tattoo up:


Lloyd's Weekly Newspaper (London, England), Sunday, November 9, 1884

Also, does anyone know if Mei Trow mentions the find on the vessel Picton Castle of a hand severed from the wrist and little finger missing? This was in 1889 and thought to have been dredged up from the Thames foreshore but not discovered until the vessel reached Middlesborough.

[Debra A]

I would also press that it is unlikely that prostitutes was what he was after in the first place. In all probability, WOMEN was his target. The prostitutes will reasonably have offered the safest path to that goal, like for so many other serialists.

Excellent point, Fisherman.

[John G]

Hi JohnG


But what if as I noted before, the killer was forced to change his MO, based on his personal conditions? Like the reason I provided in my previous post explaining this possibility?



Again, what if hes forced to change his MO? In this case, it would be that he dosnt have access to a cart when he commits the ripper murders.

I see only a change in MO in the way the ripper/torso man leaves/dispose the bodies, and this does not even take into account his MO in how he found, lured and killed his victims, which as far as we know might have been the same MO in both.

I see a change in MO only, not in signature-which again is post mortem mutilation and organ removal.

Hi Abby,

Well there may have been occasions when he didn't have access to his cart, but a simpler explanation is that they were different killers: one had access to transport, the other didn't. The Torso Killer must also have had access to a property where he could carry out the dismemberments undisturbed. The fact that JtR risked murdering his victims in public areas infers that he didn't have access to suitable accommodation.

I also believe that the two killers did have different signatures. Keppel, for instance, believed that JtR was a lust killer, I.e because his knife attacks focussed on the genitalia. However, Professor Alison, who wrote the forward to Trow's book, was puzzled as to the Torso killer's motive. As I noted in my updated previous post Trow opined: "Where is the frenzy, the removal of sexual organs, the focus on genitalia which we associate with sexual killers and which was very obvious in the Ripper murders themselves." (Trow, 2011).

Different MO. Different signature. Different Killers.

[Debra A]

Thank you Debra
very interesting. Can you point me in the right direction where I can read up more on the torso case/s?

Hi Abby
If you haven't read them -Rob Clack has recently written two excellent reference articles, one on the Whitehall case and one on the Pinchin St case, both published in Ripperologist.

[Abby Normal]

Hi Abby
If you haven't read them -Rob Clack has recently written two excellent reference articles, one on the Whitehall case and one on the Pinchin St case, both published in Ripperologist.

Thanks!!

[Trevor Marriott]

There is abundant evidence to suggest a torso serial killer, Trevor. But no absolute proof. The general consensus - then and now - is that there was indeed such a killer.

The exact same goes for Jack - abundant evidence, but no absolute proof. It could have been multiple killers, right?

Not exactly earthshattering.

Consensus by only those who want to believe in one, not us realists

And yes, Jack did not kill all of his attributed victims

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Fisherman]

Consensus by only those who want to believe in one, not us realists

And yes, Jack did not kill all of his attributed victims

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

1. Iīm perfectly happy to be "unrealistic" in this context. And I really donīt think that anybody "wants" to believe in the kind of man the torso killer is outlined as - the evidence as such, however, commands that belief.

2. I donīt propose to know which victims were killed by the same man. I have a belief, but I market it as nothing more than that.

Enough said.