The Whitehall Mystery

[Fisherman]

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.

Which of the two killers would be more likely to try and taunt the police in this way? Why would the torso killer allude to the Ripper killings, if he was not Jack but responsible in this case? What exactly would the purpose be? To give away the thunder to another killer?

I can see how there are intriguing possibilitites built in, but I donīt think it pans out very well. A serialist like the torso killer, who seemed quite interested in having his work made public, would - at least to my mind - not want to ride on a wave caused by another killer.

[Debra A]

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."?

But as I mentioned before John, Elizabeth's hands were also described as being 'genteel' in appearance, despite the bitten nails and we know that was because she did no manual work in the last months of her life. I'm baffled how the 'delicate shape' of a persons arms and hands can betray class? The same goes for the slimness of the calves and ankles as were described as being an upper class trait in one of the cases too. Would a modern doctor claim someone's chunky ankles or fat wrists were a sure sign they were working class?
Mary Kelly supposedly had long, fair hair too.

Even if the Tottenham case proved to be a woman from a higher class, that still leaves Elizabeth, the Rainham case and Pinchin Street torso who don't seem to don't fit that category according to Hebbert and Bond's observations. Could the hardening on the finger combined with the discoloured and rough elbows in the Pinchin case be work related, maybe intense, repetitive work with the hands while sat at a table?

[Debra A]

[B]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.

Although, it has to be mentioned that the organs were only missing in the cases where the trunk and abdominal areas divided into more than one section (Elizabeth's torso itself was divided into 3 parts and Rainham and Whitehall were divided at the pelvis) so it could be argued that some of the organs were accidentally 'lost' during disposal, rather than specifically removed or targetted. A whole trunk would be much more difficult to dump without being spotted. The uterus of a heavily pregnant women would be the most prominent feature when opening the abdomen.

[martin wilson]

I thought this was interesting, and fishy.

Weekly Mail 28th January 1882.

EXTRAORDINARY OCCURRENCE AT A WORKHOUSE.

DISSECTING THE WRONG MAN.

At the meeting of the Sheffield board of Guardians on Wednesday a painful occurrence came up for discussion. It seems on Saturday last a young man named John Wood who was in the last stage of consumption was admitted to the workhouse and died a few minutes after admission. Wood had previously been in decent circumstances but had been out of work for some time and he and his wife were in lodgings.
As it was feared if he died in his lodgings the other lodgers might leave it was thought best to remove him to the workhouse, and that was the reason he was taken there just before his death.
The body was removed to the dead house and the wife arranged that the funeral should take place on Tuesday. Some relations from Manchester attended with her on that day and on going to the dead house they found that the coffin that bore his name and age had been screwed down.
There was some reluctance on the part of the officials to have the coffin unscrewed but on Mrs Wood insisting that it should be unscrewed in order that she might take a last look at her husband the lid was taken off.
She was horrified to find that the body was not that of her husband but an old man named Ellis, who was 75 years of age. A search was then made for the body amongst others but it could not be found. At length, according to the wife's statement it occurred to one of the officials that it might have been carted to the school of medicine. A messenger was consequently sent to that institution and Wood's body was found in the dissecting room and promptly returned. The wife and several other persons stated that all the hair had been shaved off the head and face and that there were eleven wounds on the neck.
This statement was denied by the Master and the school authorities. It was said that the tickets on the bodies in the workhouse had been intentionally removed and that Wood's body had been sent to the school of medicine instead of that of the man Ellis who had no friends to claim it. It was decided to adjourn the discussion for a week. In order that the matter might be fully investigated.

All the best.

[Fisherman]

Debra A: I'm baffled how the 'delicate shape' of a persons arms and hands can betray class?

A thick neck gave away a propensity for criminality during this era, Debra. For example. We are deep into the realms of criminal anthropology and such things, and so we should not be surprised.

Would a modern doctor claim someone's chunky ankles or fat wrists were a sure sign they were working class?

Decidedly not!

[Fisherman]

Although, it has to be mentioned that the organs were only missing in the cases where the trunk and abdominal areas divided into more than one section (Elizabeth's torso itself was divided into 3 parts and Rainham and Whitehall were divided at the pelvis) so it could be argued that some of the organs were accidentally 'lost' during disposal, rather than specifically removed or targetted. A whole trunk would be much more difficult to dump without being spotted. The uterus of a heavily pregnant women would be the most prominent feature when opening the abdomen.

True - but we are still left with a deep gash in the abdomen of the Pinchin Street torso, leading to the vagina, for example. The - possible - connection is there, but we are left with no certainty. And there was no organ missing from this body.
Was the Rainham torso really divided at the pelvis? Trow in his sketch has the legs cut off and the body divided up at the chest, over the breasts. May have gotten that wrong, though.

[Jon Guy]

Could the hardening on the finger combined with the discoloured and rough elbows in the Pinchin case be work related, maybe intense, repetitive work with the hands while sat at a table?

Hi Debs

Frances Coles had problems with her fingers through working at a bottle stopping business on the Minories (not to far away from Pinchin Street)

[Trevor Marriott]

I can see how there are intriguing possibilitites built in, but I donīt think it pans out very well. A serialist like the torso killer, who seemed quite interested in having his work made public, would - at least to my mind - not want to ride on a wave caused by another killer.

There you go again inferring that the The Torso Killer was a serial killer when it has not been proved that all the torsos found were the subject of murders.

If there was such a killer, and as you say he wanted to make the public know he could have left notes with the body parts on land, he could also have sent letters to the press, but none of that happened did it. So I suggest that all this talk about a killer wanting to do all of this is wild speculation and there are more simple and plausible explanations

You either don't fully read and digest what has been put before you or you simply choose to totally ignore the accepted facts, that in the majority of cases the deaths can only be classed as suspicious.

I get the feeling that you are trying to lay some of these deaths firmly at the door of Lechmere?

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Fisherman]

There you go again inferring that the The Torso Killer was a serial killer when it has not been proved that all the torsos found were the subject of murders.

If there was such a killer, and as you say he wanted to make the public know he could have left notes with the body parts on land, he could also have sent letters to the press, but none of that happened did it. So I suggest that all this talk about a killer wanting to do all of this is wild speculation and there are more simple and plausible explanations

You either don't fully read and digest what has been put before you or you simply choose to totally ignore the accepted facts, that in the majority of cases the deaths can only be classed as suspicious.

I get the feeling that you are trying to lay some of these deaths firmly at the door of Lechmere?

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Try and be a bit more civil and polite, Trevor, and I will answer your every question. Since I think you have misappreheneded things rather badly, it may be of use for your understanding of my stance.

[Debra A]

True - but we are still left with a deep gash in the abdomen of the Pinchin Street torso, leading to the vagina, for example. The - possible - connection is there, but we are left with no certainty. And there was no organ missing from this body.
Was the Rainham torso really divided at the pelvis? Trow in his sketch has the legs cut off and the body divided up at the chest, over the breasts. May have gotten that wrong, though.

Hebbert noted a section described as the pelvis from the 3rd lumbar vertebra, there was also a division of the thorax when I re-checked the notes I made:

Case I July 1887 human remains consisting of eight separate parts found in Thames and Regent's canal.
the parts were:
a) lower part of the thorax and the upper part of the abdomen, from the fifth dorsal vertebra to the third lumbar vertebra
b) the pelvis below the third lumbar vertebra
c) the right thigh including patella
d) the left thigh
e) both legs and feet, the left having patella attached
f) the arms from the shoulders to the fingers.

There was some rumour in the papers that ribs were missing in one case (I forget which now) but they were actually recovered.

[Debra A]

Hi Debs

Frances Coles had problems with her fingers through working at a bottle stopping business on the Minories (not to far away from Pinchin Street)

Thanks Jon! That's the kind of thing I had in mind but I didn't know that story about Frances Coles.

[Debra A]

D.ss woemnebra A: I'm baffled how the 'delicate shape' of a persons arms and hands can betray class?

A thick neck gave away a propensity for criminality during this era, Debra. For example. We are deep into the realms of criminal anthropology and such things, and so we should not be surprised.

Would a modern doctor claim someone's chunky ankles or fat wrists were a sure sign they were working class?

Decidedly not!

To be honest, Fisherman-I was more baffled how anyone could think the doctors outdated conclusions about class based on the shape and delicateness of their arms and hands could really be used as evidence that remains were from a higher class person.

[Fisherman]

Hebbert noted a section described as the pelvis from the 3rd lumbar vertebra, there was also a division of the thorax when I re-checked the notes I made:

Case I July 1887 human remains consisting of eight separate parts found in Thames and Regent's canal.
the parts were:
a) lower part of the thorax and the upper part of the abdomen, from the fifth dorsal vertebra to the third lumbar vertebra
b) the pelvis below the third lumbar vertebra
c) the right thigh including patella
d) the left thigh
e) both legs and feet, the left having patella attached
f) the arms from the shoulders to the fingers.

There was some rumour in the papers that ribs were missing in one case (I forget which now) but they were actually recovered.

Thanks for that - then Trow has missed out on the division by the abdomen in his book sketch.

[Trevor Marriott]

Hebbert noted a section described as the pelvis from the 3rd lumbar vertebra, there was also a division of the thorax when I re-checked the notes I made:

Case I July 1887 human remains consisting of eight separate parts found in Thames and Regent's canal.
the parts were:
a) lower part of the thorax and the upper part of the abdomen, from the fifth dorsal vertebra to the third lumbar vertebra
b) the pelvis below the third lumbar vertebra
c) the right thigh including patella
d) the left thigh
e) both legs and feet, the left having patella attached
f) the arms from the shoulders to the fingers.

There was some rumour in the papers that ribs were missing in one case (I forget which now) but they were actually recovered.

Hi Debs
Could these dismemberment wounds really be the work of a killer as is being suggested? If so he has gone to a lot of unnecessary work to dispose of his victim, when it might be expected that if mere disposal was the ultimate aim then I would have expected him to simply remove the head, arms and legs and dispose of them separately along with the trunk.

There is no consistency between these dismemberments and the others, which could point to a singular serial killer, there are many dissimilarities would you not agree?

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Fisherman]

To be honest, Fisherman-I was more baffled how anyone could think the doctors outdated conclusions about class based on the shape and delicateness of their arms and hands could really be used as evidence that remains were from a higher class person.

Yeah, I gathered as much - I noticed your smiley. I still made the remark, though, since there has been some sort of general belief that the British pulled through all of this nonsense unscathed.

They didnīt. I have been doing a bit of work on this matter, and it has been very interesting. Briefly, it seems that if Jack wanted to pull through on account of the police not wanting to believe that a "normal" full-bred Brit could be the killer, then 1888 was THE year to go for it.