The Whitehall Mystery

[Debra A]

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.

There was one workhouse mortuary keeper prosecuted for doing this in the early 1880s, switching bodies and selling the odd one off to the medical school for dissection. Trevor has proposed in the past that the torso cases could be bodies discarded after dissection to avoid funeral costs but then it must be remembered that the workhouse death of a young woman would have a cause that would most likely be detected at autopsy, disease, infection etc. and no cause of death could be found in the cases discussed, plus, why don't we see more male, elderly. or child victims if they were discarded medical specimens?

[John G]

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.

Hello Fisherman,

I would speculate that the Torso killer was jealous of the unprecedented amount of publicity JtR's Whitechapel murders were receiving. That would explain why, in October 1888, he took the extraordinary risk of placing a torso in the foundations of the under-construction New Scotland Yard building.

Of course, even this act of bravado failed to attract anything like the degree of media attention, and public alarm, as the Whitechapel murders. Therefore, the following year he tries a more direct approach, I.e the Pinchin Street Torso. I believe that was probably intended as a pastiche of JtR's crimes the previous year, and more specifically it clearly alludes to Stride's murder and Schwartz's subsequent testimony.

[Debra A]

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?

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Hi Trevor, three of them are quite similar in the number of sections and where those sections were made in the 87-89 cases I think. .The trunks were all divided into smaller sections and not kept whole. The patella being left on one leg in three of the cases has always struck me too, as though that was something the person dissecting the bodies had a problem with in each case. Pinchin Street was different. Personally I don't feel there is much similarity with the other torso type cases that spanned the era either.

The trunk divided into 3 smaller sections would be much easier to dispose of wouldn't it? Less conspicuous too. I would guess it would also depend on what materials were available for wrappings or vessel to transport the parts too?

[Trevor Marriott]

There was one workhouse mortuary keeper prosecuted for doing this in the early 1880s, switching bodies and selling the odd one off to the medical school for dissection. Trevor has proposed in the past that the torso cases could be bodies discarded after dissection to avoid funeral costs but then it must be remembered that the workhouse death of a young woman would have a cause that would most likely be detected at autopsy, disease, infection etc. and no cause of death could be found in the cases discussed, plus, why don't we see more male, elderly. or child victims if they were discarded medical specimens?

A fully formed female specimen has so much going for it from a medical perspective, than a male specimen ?

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Fisherman]

Hello Fisherman,

I would speculate that the Torso killer was being jealous of the unprecedented amount of publicity JtR's Whitechapel murders were receiving. That would explain why, in October 1888, he took the extraordinary risk of placing a torso in the foundations of the under-construction New Scotland Yard building.

Of course, even this act of bravado failed to attract anything like the degree of media attention, and public alarm, as the Whitechapel murders. Therefore, the following year he tries a more direct approach, I.e the Pinchin Street Torso. I believe that was probably intended as a pastiche of JtR's crimes the previous year, and more specifically it clearly alludes to Stride's murder.

The torso killer had put his work "out there" long before the Scotland Yard dumping. So we can establish that there was a wish on his behalf to get noticed before Jack surfaced, and it is therefore not possible to knit the Scotland Yard torso to a wish for publicity knit to Jack.

Itīs not that we should nullify the suggestion as such, itīs just that it cannot be substantiated in any way.

The Pinchins Street torso a pastiche? If so, itīs not a very good one, is it? The only real reminder is the cut to the abdomen, and in that case, why did the killer not grab the uterus or some other organ? That would have been a much clearer indication of a correlation.

The clear allusion to the Stride murder evades me. There was never any clear case for Schwartz running to these railway arches, let alone to the specific torso arch; his story is not very obvious on this point. And the name Lipski was a very common slur, so it could well have been written on many a wall.

In the end, it all boils down to gut feeling, and my gut feeling does not agree with yours in this case. Any of us could be right, and both of us could be wrong...

[John G]

Hi Trevor, three of them are quite similar in the number of sections and where those sections were made in the 87-89 cases I think. .The trunks were all divided into smaller sections and not kept whole. The patella being left on one leg in three of the cases has always struck me too, as though that was something the person dissecting the bodies had a problem with in each case. Pinchin Street was different. Personally I don't feel there is much similarity with the other torso type cases that spanned the era either.

The trunk divided into 3 smaller sections would be much easier to dispose of wouldn't it? Less conspicuous too. I would guess it would also depend on what materials were available for wrappings or vessel to transport the parts too?

Hello Debra,

I would include the Tottenham case. The differences in the way the latter torsos were dismembered could be as a consequence of evolution of technique, I.e as the killer became more experienced. In fact, you could argue that this case is more worthy of inclusion than Rainham: a considerable, and wholly unnecessary, risk was taken in the choice of disposal for the Tottenham case; not so with the Rainham torso.

[Debra A]

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

Trow seems to have been less than thorough in his research from what's been posted here. I'll stick to original research and Rob's articles.

[John G]

The torso killer had put his work "out there" long before the Scotland Yard dumping. So we can establish that there was a wish on his behalf to get noticed before Jack surfaced, and it is therefore not possible to knit the Scotland Yard torso to a wish for publicity knit to Jack.

Itīs not that we should nullify the suggestion as such, itīs just that it cannot be substantiated in any way.

The Pinchins Street torso a pastiche? If so, itīs not a very good one, is it? The only real reminder is the cut to the abdomen, and in that case, why did the killer not grab the uterus or some other organ? That would have been a much clearer indication of a correlation.

The clear allusion to the Stride murder evades me. There was never any clear case for Schwartz running to these railway arches, let alone to the specific torso arch; his story is not very obvious on this point. And the name Lipski was a very common slur, so it could well have been written on many a wall.

In the end, it all boils down to gut feeling, and my gut feeling does not agree with yours in this case. Any of us could be right, and both of us could be wrong...

Hello Fisherman,

In respect of the allusion to Stride's murder, the Torso killer could only go by what he'd read in the press: Schwartz claimed to have run to some arches, possibly Pinchin Street, and he mentioned that BS man shouted out Lipski. A further allusion to the Whitechapel murders is the fact that the victim was possibly killed on the anniversary of Chapman's death. However, the Torso killer's macabre sense of humour is still evident: placing the body between two sleeping drunks.

Of course in respect of the pastiche, the killer had to be careful that the crime didn't have too marked a resemblance to the Whitechapel murders: after all the last thing he would have wanted is JtR being credited for his handiwork. Therefore, the mutilations resembled the Whitechapel murders but, as Swanson noted, he left the genitals alone: in respect of signature that also differentiates JtR (a possible lust murderer), from the Torso killer (a possible thrill seeker.)

[Debra A]

A fully formed female specimen has so much going for it from a medical perspective, than a male specimen ?

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

How so? A study of either sex would be valuable for a medical student? A Pregnant women would be a rare and valuable find but other than that I don't see there would be much difference.

[Trevor Marriott]

How so? A study of either sex would be valuable for a medical student? A Pregnant women would be a rare and valuable find but other than that I don't see there would be much difference.

But the female form has most of the male organs but a few which men dont have so hence females in more demand. Young children are not fully developed, so not so much use for medical research back then. That's my logical reasoning for what its worth.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[John G]

But the female form has most of the male organs but a few which men dont have so hence females in more demand. Young children are not fully developed, so not so much use for medical research back then. That's my logical reasoning for what its worth.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Hi Trevor,

Doesn't your forensic expert, Dr Biggs, state that body dismemberment is usually undertaken for the purpose of concealing a homicide?

[Fisherman]

Trow seems to have been less than thorough in his research from what's been posted here. I'll stick to original research and Rob's articles.

Wisely so, I believe. I have both Trows and Gordons torso books, and Gordons is - apart from the speculation part - by far the better. I fail to see, however, how you can have access to the original research and miss out on a severing of a body...?

[Fisherman]

Hello Fisherman,

In respect of the allusion to Stride's murder, the Torso killer could only go by what he'd read in the press: Schwartz claimed to have run to some arches, possibly Pinchin Street, and he mentioned that BS man shouted out Lipski. A further allusion to the Whitechapel murders is the fact that the victim was possibly killed on the anniversary of Chapman's death. However, the Torso killer's macabre sense of humour is still evident: placing the body between two sleeping drunks.

Of course in respect of the pastiche, the killer had to be careful that the crime didn't have too marked a resemblance to the Whitechapel murders: after all the last thing he would have wanted is JtR being credited for his handiwork. Therefore, the mutilations resembled the Whitechapel murders but, as Swanson noted, he left the genitals alone: in respect of signature that also differentiates JtR (a possible lust murderer), from the Torso killer (a possible thrill seeker.)

Some proponents of the Hutchinson theory say that he did not mention Lewis in order not to seem too obvious...

The idea that the torso killer would try and merge the types of killing into one, leaving a clear message that he was the killer while trying to steal the limelight from the Ripper by imitating him - to an extent but no more - is not very much to my taste, Iīm afraid.
By the way, the killer did not place the torso inbetween two sleeping drunks - I think these men slept in the arch next to the torso arch.

As for the killer scattering links to the Ripper murders, I am not all that impressed either. If he took care to kill his victim on the anniversary of the Chapman murder - then why did he use the Stride murder as "staging"?

The Pinchin Street torso is interesting, since it deviates from the other torso cases in a number of respects. As for me, I am vaccinated against the word "coincidence" from having dealt with Lechmere for a number of years. In my world, this is another "coincidence" relating to him. There are thousands of East End streets. The chance that the torso would - "coincidentally" - end up on a street on which Lechmere had lived and was well aquainted with is numerically very, very small. The odds that this torso - as the only one - would have a deliberately added cut to the stomach whereas none of the other torsos did, are kind of bad too. The chance that his mother would be living 150 yards away from the site? Freakishly small. The odds that she would be a catīs meat woman, being able to provide the exact types of tools that were used to dismember the body? Even worse.

If anything, if there was an element of imitation involved in that railway arch, Iīd say that my money is on the Ripper imitating the torso killer. Not the other way around.

As for whether the torso murders as a whole were the work of the Ripper, I am on the fence.
I am convinced that Charles Lechmere was the Ripper. I have very little doubt in that department. So when a torso victim ends up on a historical doorstep of his, and with the catīs meat business and his motherīs flat to add, I am naturally inclined to say that there may well be a connection. And if there is, then by extension, all the other torso murders are also of interest.
And - just by "coincidence" - Charles Lechmeres age fits a combined killer like a glove.

If he was not the torso killer and not the Ripper, one has to say that the string of coincidences and timings pointing to him are incredibly remarkable. Or to put it otherwise: beyond belief.

[John G]

Some proponents of the Hutchinson theory say that he did not mention Lewis in order not to seem too obvious...

The idea that the torso killer would try and merge the types of killing into one, leaving a clear message that he was the killer while trying to steal the limelight from the Ripper by imitating him, to an extent but no more, is not very much to my taste, Iīm afraid.
By the way, the killer did not place the torso inbetween two sleeping drunks - I think these men slept in the arch next to the torso arch.

As for the killer scattering links to the Ripper murders, I am not all that impressed either. If he took care to kill his victim on the anniversary of the Chapman murder - then why did he use the Stride murder as "staging"?

The Pinchin Street torso is interesting, since it deviates from the other torso cases in a number of respects. As for me, I am vaccinated against the word "coincidence" from having dealt with Lechmere for a number of years. In my world, this is another "coincidence" relating to him. There are thousands of East End streets. The chance that the torso would - "coincidentally" - end up on a street on which Lechmere had lived and was well aquainted with is numerically very, very small. The odds that this torso - as the only one - would have a deliberately added cut to the stomach whereas none of the other torsos did, are kind of bad too. The chance that his mother would be living 150 yards away from the site? Freakishly small. The odds that she would be a catīs meat woman, being able to provide the exact types of tools that were used to dismember the body? Even worse.

If anything, if there was an element of imitation involved in that railway arch, Iīd say that my money is on the Ripper imitating the torso killer. Not the other way around.

As for whether the torso murders as a whole were the work of the Ripper, I am on the fence.
I am convinced that Charles Lechmere was the Ripper. I have very little doubt in that department. So when a torso victim ends up on a historical doorstep of his, and with the catīs meat business and his motherīs flat to add, I am naturally inclined to say that there may well be a connection. And if there is, then by extension, all the other torso murders are also of interest.
And - just by "coincidence" - Charles Lechmeres age fits a combined killer like a glove.

If he was not the torso killer and not the Ripper, one has to say that the string of coincidences and timings pointing to him are incredibly remarkable. Or to put it otherwise: beyond belief.

Thanks for the Reply. Did Lechmere have access to any premises, where he could dismember bodies undisturbed? Do you think it possible that the Torso perpetrator had access to a boat? Of course, this would be an ideal place to dismember bodies, whilst remaining undisturbed. It would also explain why some of the body parts were thrown in the Thames and the choice of Liz Jackson as a victim: I believe she was living rough on the embankment. Might it also be the means by which he approached the New Scotland Yard building, which was also being built on the embankment.

[Abby Normal]

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.

Hi Debra
wasn't the Gill murder case involving a boy and the suspect was barrett a milkman or something?Also, if im not mistaken the boy had abdominal mutilations and organ removal similar to the ripper?