The Whitehall Mystery

[Debra A]

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.

Re. red tape- I wonder what this was used for in everyday life. John Gill's killer had used red tape for some purpose and fragments of it were found inside his dismembered body.

[John G]

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.

Hi Debra,

Yes, Mei Trow's book refers to a rose tattoo found on the arm of the victim. Unfortunately, no reference is cited. There is no reference to the Picton Castle incident in Mei's book.

[Debra A]

Thanks, John.

[Trevor Marriott]

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.

There is no evidence to which you refer, other than the Torso Killer myth created a long time ago and kept alive by researchers like you who keep peddling the serial killer myth, in tandem with the myth that JTR was responsible for all the Whitechapel murders.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[John G]

There is no evidence to which you refer, other than the Torso Killer myth created a long time ago and kept alive by researchers like you who keep peddling the serial killer myth, in tandem with the myth that JTR was responsible for all the Whitechapel murders.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Hello Trevor,

I agree that we need to maintain a sense of perspective. The fact is we do not know for certain if any of the Torso victims were murdered, let alone by the same person. Therefore, attempts to connect these victims to JtR, taking into consideration the vastly different MO and signature, seems to me to be quite fanciful.

However, I personally believe that they are part of a different series, carried out by a thrill seeking serial killer. What is decisive in my opinion is the enormous risks the perpetrator took when disposing of the bodies, which would have been completely unnecessary if the motive was simply one of body disposal, i.e. as a consequence of an illegal abortion.

If you consider Liz Jackson and the Tottenham, Whitehall and Pinchin Street victims, for example, the evidence points to a cunning perpetrator, with a macabre sense of humour, who is clearly taunting, and possibly even seeking to humiliate, the police.

Moreover, there is no evidence that these types of crimes were common- I'm not aware of any such incidents occurring in London between 1873 and 1884- which to my mind would tend to make it unlikely that they were the result of any other cause other than murder.

[Fisherman]

John G: ...I personally believe that they are part of a different series, carried out by a thrill seeking serial killer. What is decisive in my opinion is the enormous risks the perpetrator took when disposing of the bodies, which would have been completely unnecessary if the motive was simply one of body disposal, i.e. as a consequence of an illegal abortion.

Has it not occurred to you that the Ripper murders are very much the epitome of what a thrill seeker could try for? Killing in the open streets, eviscerating there?

If you consider Liz Jackson and the Tottenham, Whitehall and Pinchin Street victims, for example, the evidence points to a cunning perpetrator, with a macabre sense of humour, who is clearly taunting, and possibly even seeking to humiliate, the police.

And what would be more taunting and humiliating for the police than a killer stalking the streets, killing at his own leisure directly on police beats?

Moreover, there is no evidence that these types of crimes were common- I'm not aware of any such incidents occurring in London between 1873 and 1884- which to my mind would tend to make it unlikely that they were the result of any other cause other than murder.

Neither type of crime is common - they are both extremely uncommon, but they are nevertheless both committed in the same town, and even in the same exact area at times, they are both series where women are killed and then cut into and used as personal belongings of the killer.

You may be onto something here. With the exception of your own good self, it could well impress people...

[Fisherman]

There is no evidence to which you refer, other than the Torso Killer myth created a long time ago and kept alive by researchers like you who keep peddling the serial killer myth, in tandem with the myth that JTR was responsible for all the Whitechapel murders.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

The exact passage where you say that I "keep peddling the serial killer myth" is the place where our debate came to an end.

A civil debate or no debate at all is what I have on offer.

[Abby Normal]

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.

Hi JohnG
The ripper just didn't focus on the "genitalia" or the "removal of sexual organs"-he also cut into limbs, flayed off flesh, cut throats,cut off breasts,removed internal organs including the heart and mutilated faces.

Same as torso man.

And just off the bat, Torso man also removed the uterus of the Whitehall victim, so there goes that (Trow) argument.

The only difference in MO is the dismemberment, the signature is the same.

Do you know how rare post mortem mutilator serial Killers are? rarer still are ones who remove and take away internal organs. Theres been only a handful of those in the history of serial homicide and the ripper and the Torso man are two of them (or one).

Have you noticed the uncanny resemblance in the mutilations of Mary Kelly and Elizabeth Jackson that Debra has pointed out?

Also, I think you are getting waaayyy to stuck on:

Whether torso man and the ripper were "lust murderers". its an outdated term to begin with-you need to think more along the terms of post mortem mutilator. some have more sexual motive-like Dahmer, some less so-like Gein. we really don't know how much of the "LUST" factor was involved in either the ripper or torso killings. One thing we can be sure of though is that both were POST MORTEM MUTILATORS who liked to cut up and cut out organs of the women they killed.

Also, you need to take the FBI work on the ripper with a grain of salt-first of all they don't seem to take into consideration the time period of the ripper murders and the changes that it could affect and secondly I don't really think they took there analysis of the ripper all that seriously nor are they experts on the ripper murders at all. I think that Me, you and half the people on these boards know more about the ripper murders than the FBI "experts".

Also-Mei Trow. Isnt he the guy who has like ten different suspects/theories on the ripper? I saw a documentary on one of his candidates who was Joseph Denny? a mortuary attendant?!?Give me a break. By far the worst documentary Ive seen on the ripper. He does not impress me. nope. not one bit. It seems like his theories/suspects change with the wind with whatever he thinks can make him money. He strikes me as one of these ripper parasites, not a real researcher, historian or ripperologist for that matter.

Whats his latest book about-the one you keep referencing?

Also, Id be interested in what you think that Torso mans motive was since you think its so different from the rippers but haven't said what it was.

[RockySullivan]

Re. red tape- I wonder what this was used for in everyday life. John Gill's killer had used red tape for some purpose and fragments of it were found inside his dismembered body.

Wow debs good work! I do not think it is out of the question that john hills murder might be connected to the torsos in light of the red tape

[John G]

Hello Abby,

First of all there is absolutely no forensic evidence that any of the Torso victims were even murdered, therefore, in my opinion to try and link these victims to the Whitechapel murders is wildly speculative.

And as Dr Biggs, the forensic pathologist points out, the MO is "vastly different" from that of JtR: see Marriott, 2013. These are dismemberment cases, which according to Dr Biggs are not uncommon, the purpose usually being to conceal a homicide-something JtR was unconcerned about.

And, as I've noted before, the Torso perpetrator used dump sites, whereas JtR didn't. He also operated in a different geographical area to JtR-only one of the victims was found in Whitechapel. Of course, it is also very likely that the Torso perpetrator had access to transport as well as secure accommodation to dismember the victims-on fact, I've speculated that he may have had access to a boat. JtR was not a commuter killer,so probably didn't have access to transport. I also doubt he had access to secure accommodation.

My belief is that the Torso Murderer, if indeed he was a murderer, was a thrill seeker. That's why he took substantial and unnecessary risks. Evidence also suggests that he had a macabre sense of humour, and was effectively taunting the police, perhaps mocking their failure to catch him.

The fact that mutilation occurred with the Torso victims is clearly incidental. I mean, how could you dismember a body without mutilating it? Conversely, the mutilations in the JtR cases were clearly fundamental to the killer's signature.

[RockySullivan]

All that aside you need to take into account that both torso and ripper removed from the uterus and according to deb the heart(?) which I wasn't aware of. Elizabeth Jackson could have easily been a ripper victim

[Debra A]

Wow debs good work! I do not think it is out of the question that john hills murder might be connected to the torsos in light of the red tape

Hi Rocky,
I just wondered if the red tape might point to some particular occupation or was in general use at the time but haven't come across anything yet. When I was in touch with a researcher who was looking at the Gill murder a long time back he had mentioned this red tape to me and sent me a copy of the official post mortem on Gill but I hadn't seen it in connection with any of the other cases before. I wouldn't want to cultivate another myth as Trow seems to have done with the rose tattoo and class of the victims! But just thought I'd point it out.

Newborn and infant murder and dismemberment for concealment were shockingly common and there are some cases of child murder and dismemberment after sexual attack, in the era. I think John Gill's murder may fall in to the last category.

Now the 'exotic' rose tattoo seems to be a fallacy, I wonder if the odds stack up more in favour of lower class women for the torso cases?
The doctors certainly made observations which pointed that way in the Rainham and Pinchin St cases and we know Elizabeth was an unfortunate. Only the Whitehall case seems to have been a more 'fashionable' woman in that a dress frame (bustle frame) was found with her remains, although the fabric of her dress was quite a cheap make.

I was also looking at the Tottenham cases again and there was some police investigation into an abortionist operating in the area as far as I can gather.

[John G]

Hi Rocky,
I just wondered if the red tape might point to some particular occupation or was in general use at the time but haven't come across anything yet. When I was in touch with a researcher who was looking at the Gill murder a long time back he had mentioned this red tape to me and sent me a copy of the official post mortem on Gill but I hadn't seen it in connection with any of the other cases before. I wouldn't want to cultivate another myth as Trow seems to have done with the rose tattoo and class of the victims! But just thought I'd point it out.

Newborn and infant murder and dismemberment for concealment were shockingly common and there are some cases of child murder and dismemberment after sexual attack, in the era. I think John Gill's murder may fall in to the last category.

Now the 'exotic' rose tattoo seems to be a fallacy, I wonder if the odds stack up more in favour of lower class women for the torso cases?
The doctors certainly made observations which pointed that way in the Rainham and Pinchin St cases and we know Elizabeth was an unfortunate. Only the Whitehall case seems to have been a more 'fashionable' woman in that a dress frame (bustle frame) was found with her remains, although the fabric of her dress was quite a cheap make.

I was also looking at the Tottenham cases again and there was some police investigation into an abortionist operating in the area as far as I can gather.

Hello Debra,

Regarding the Tottenham Torso. Mei Trow also refers to Dr Lloyd's opinion at the inquest in which he stated that he believed "from the shape of the delicate arms, hands and well-manicured nails, that the victim was a gentlewoman. The face was smooth and the hair long and fair." (Trow, 2011)

The main question for me would be: would a lower class woman of the period be likely to have "well-manicured nails."?

[Fisherman]

John G:

First of all there is absolutely no forensic evidence that any of the Torso victims were even murdered...

That is not entirely true, since there were blows to the temple of one of the victims (Battersea 1873), blows that were thought to be the cause of death.

And as Dr Biggs, the forensic pathologist points out, the MO is "vastly different" from that of JtR: see Marriott, 2013. These are dismemberment cases, which according to Dr Biggs are not uncommon, the purpose usually being to conceal a homicide-something JtR was unconcerned about.

Yes. The purpose of dismemberment is normally to conceal a homicide and to facilitate transport of the victim without detection. But in the torso case, we need not speculate that the killer was anxious to hide what he had done. Instead, he spent a lot of time and effort to DISPLAY his work, taking immense risks as he did so. So the notion that he tried to conceal things is something we should not speculate about here. If anything, he tried to conceal the identity of the victims, but the concealment factor goes no further than that. This was seemingly a killer who sought attention. It was not the other way around. Therefore, the two series do not differ in this context - quite the opposite. Both series ensured that there was full attention, making the series very related in that respect.

And, as I've noted before, the Torso perpetrator used dump sites, whereas JtR didn't.

That would have been ruled by the circumstances. We must assume that the torso killer had a place to dismember his victims, and unless he wanted to be found out on account of the smell, he simply MUST dump his bodies. The Ripper could hardly carry his victimīs bodies with him. So the difference here lies not in what the intentions were when it came to the handling of the bodies, but instead in how the surrounding circumstances ruled the outcome.

He also operated in a different geographical area to JtR-only one of the victims was found in Whitechapel.

To be fair, we only know that he scattered the remains in large parts of London. For all we know, all of the victims could have been picked up on Pinchin Street. Not that I think they were, but it goes to show how we canīt speak in generalizing terms about an "area of operation" that very much differed from the Ripperīs when it comes to the torso killer. If anything, I find it interesting that a victim was deliberately placed in the heart of the Ripper territory.

Of course, it is also very likely that the Torso perpetrator had access to transport as well as secure accommodation to dismember the victims-on fact, I've speculated that he may have had access to a boat. JtR was not a commuter killer,so probably didn't have access to transport. I also doubt he had access to secure accommodation.

A slight distinction: The Ripper KILLINGS were reasonably not commuter killings - as for the killer, if he was identical with the torso killer, then he was probably a commuter killer too. These two matters are - two matters. If we are to say that the Ripper could not have committed commuter killings, we would be dead wrong. And looking at things practically, if the Ripper was also the torso killer, then he may have killed out in the streets for shock value and thrill value (something you readily accept on behalf of the torso man), and then he could have performed his torso murders in a bolthole somewhere. If so, why would he not scatter those remains all over London, in order to throw the police off his trail?

My belief is that the Torso Murderer, if indeed he was a murderer, was a thrill seeker. That's why he took substantial and unnecessary risks. Evidence also suggests that he had a macabre sense of humour, and was effectively taunting the police, perhaps mocking their failure to catch him.

So a twin soul versus the Ripper in many respects...?

The fact that mutilation occurred with the Torso victims is clearly incidental. I mean, how could you dismember a body without mutilating it? Conversely, the mutilations in the JtR cases were clearly fundamental to the killer's signature.

The abdominal area was cut open and organs were missing in a number of cases. It goes without saying that this was not something you needed to do in order to dismember a body. But it was nevertheless performed.

Should we speculate that this was not fundamental to the torso killers signature?

There are major differences inbetween the two series. That should make us speculate that they may have been by different hands.

But there are also major likenesses! Same town, same time, same type of victims, same theatralic ingredients, same shock value, same 100 per cent certainty that the deeds would not go unnoticed, same opening of abdomens (down to the exact method in one case), same loss of organs.

We should not say that the two must have been one and the same. That would be ludicruous. But this discussion plays out against a background where it has been a taboo to even breath the possibility. Anybody who has suggested a connection has been pooh-poohed over the years, and much discussion has been vociferously drenched by naysayers. I feel the discussion MUST be had, since there IS a real chance that the two killers were identical. And if they were, then the differences have a lot to say about the type of killer we would be dealing with. Meaning that there is a path of research open to us that we should absolutely not close down.

[John G]

Hello Fisherman,

I would speculate that the placing of the Pinchin Street Torso was deliberate, in the sense that the perpetrator was taunting the police. Thus as I've noted, the body was placed by the same arches that Schwartz probably ran to on the night he witnessed an assault in Stride; she may have been killed in the anniversary of Chapman's murder; the word "Lipsi" was chalked on the railungs.