The Whitehall Mystery

[Fisherman]

What a stupid question.

Are you trying to prove a point ?

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Actually, Trevor, as long as you donīt know WHY I ask the question, you are in no position to judge whether it is stupid or not. And yes, I am trying to make a point or two.

So if you please...?

[Trevor Marriott]

It does not seem as though Trevor is willing to answer my question.

Pity, that.

If he had done so, I would be able to show him how one of the torso cases involves evidence clearly speaking of foul play.

I would also be able to point to in which manner the killer (for that he was) most probably approached his victim in this case.

... plus I would provide Trevor with another opportunity to shout "wild speculation".

One would have thought that should have been enough.

The Ripper Mystery as is The Torso is full of wild speculative theories. If you or anyone else wants to believe in their own theory then so be it.

The fact is that not all the Torso accounts were put before Dr Biggs he gave his professional opinions on the handful that were. His opinions proved to be inconclusive in determining murder or any other plausible explanation. So I am happy to stick with that.

But if you and others still want to think a serial killer was at work then keep thinking that. But this thread is becoming repetitive in the posts

I personally have not gone into Torsos found going back 20 years prior to those because it is ridiculous to think that they could all be connected and that the connection could be a serial killer when there are no definite connections to the ones which i have looked at.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Trevor Marriott]

Actually, Trevor, as long as you donīt know WHY I ask the question, you are in no position to judge whether it is stupid or not. And yes, I am trying to make a point or two.

So if you please...?

I know why you asked it because you are trying to be smart again, and i am not going to get embroiled with arguing with you.

[Fisherman]

The Ripper Mystery as is The Torso is full of wild speculative theories. If you or anyone else wants to believe in their own theory then so be it.

The fact is that not all the Torso accounts were put before Dr Biggs he gave his professional opinions on the handful that were. His opinions proved to be inconclusive in determining murder or any other plausible explanation. So I am happy to stick with that.

But if you and others still want to think a serial killer was at work then keep thinking that. But this thread is becoming repetitive in the posts

I personally have not gone into Torsos found going back 20 years prior to those because it is ridiculous to think that they could all be connected and that the connection could be a serial killer when there are no definite connections to the ones which i have looked at.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Thatīs all good and well - but it is not an answer to my question. Once you manage to deliver such an answer, I will take you along with me on an interesting journey, I promise.

[Fisherman]

I know why you asked it because you are trying to be smart again, and i am not going to get embroiled with arguing with you.

Of course, if you sense you are not up to it, then that is your choice. Still, you will go glip of something that should genuinely interest you, and that could provide a different angle to look on the torso murders from.
I trust you are not opposed to such a thing?

[Fisherman]

You will even get an opportunity to put your deductive powers as a former murder squad policeman to the test. Itīs all about reading the physical evidence.

Tempted?

[Trevor Marriott]

Of course, if you sense you are not up to it, then that is your choice. Still, you will go glip of something that should genuinely interest you, and that could provide a different angle to look on the torso murders from.
I trust you are not opposed to such a thing?

I have seen your different angle of looking at things with regards to Charles Cross. I doubt your mindset has changed now.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Fisherman]

I have seen your different angle of looking at things with regards to Charles Cross. I doubt your mindset has changed now.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

But this is not about Charles Lechmere, is it? As I say, it is about existing physical evidence, pointing very clearly in a specific direction. And it has nothing at all to do with Lechmere. Promise!

Come on, Trevor, have a go! You are supposed to be curious as a former policeman!!

[Debra A]

I am not proposing a lunatic I am applying a sensible approach to the fact that anything is possible and I will leave it at that

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

if you are proposing what asked you in post #187 (which you didn't answer)then he had to have been a lunatic killer of women!

[Fisherman]

if you are proposing what asked you in post #187 (which you didn't answer)then he had to have been a lunatic killer of women!

Thatīs two undelivered answers. Then again, I always say that a refusal to give an answer is an answer in itself.

[Debra A]

Thatīs two undelivered answers. Then again, I always say that a refusal to give an answer is an answer in itself.

Very true. But Trevor is never very good at giving answer to specific questions. he doesn't deal in specifics and that's the problem. I've also been down the clothing route with Trevor before and got nowhere.
Anyway, time to go.

[Fisherman]

Anyway, Trevor has got something going for him when he says that the question whether bodies meant for medical explorations are put on the slab clothed or unclothed is stupid.

In a sense, it is: we all know that bodies meant for medical purposes are put on the slab with no clothes on.

Which is why I would like to point to the inquest after the Pinchin Street victim. At it, inspector Charles Pinhorn spoke of the cloth wrapped over parts of the torso, originally thought to be two or three pieces of cloth:

The chemise was entire, although it first had the appearance of being in pieces, as it had been cut open from top to bottom. The armholes were cut right up to the neck.

[Abby Normal]

Near Bradford, in the last days of December 1888.

Thank you fish
The date is interesting as it falls in approx. the same time frame of the ripper murders, and Bradford is not that far from London.

Have you established any links between lech and Bradford?

[Abby Normal]

Anyway, Trevor has got something going for him when he says that the question whether bodies meant for medical explorations are put on the slab clothed or unclothed is stupid.

In a sense, it is: we all know that bodies meant for medical purposes are put on the slab with no clothes on.

Which is why I would like to point to the inquest after the Pinchin Street victim. At it, inspector Charles Pinhorn spoke of the cloth wrapped over parts of the torso, originally thought to be two or three pieces of cloth:

The chemise was entire, although it first had the appearance of being in pieces, as it had been cut open from top to bottom. The armholes were cut right up to the neck.

Hi fish
Trevor might not be interested in what your trying to get at, but I am. Please continue with what your getting at.

[Abby Normal]

Very true. But Trevor is never very good at giving answer to specific questions. he doesn't deal in specifics and that's the problem. I've also been down the clothing route with Trevor before and got nowhere.
Anyway, time to go.

Hi Debra
Thank you so much for pointing out to me which torso you thought was most similar to the ripper. And I agree, Jackson and Kelly similarities are striking.

Would you please advice which torsos you think are most similar to each other and could possibly be the work of the same man?

Thank you in advance!

Anyone else who wants to weigh in on this please do! : )